Some Thoughts About Political Honesty, and the Pro-Amnesty Wing of the Republican Party

Let me express a few thoughts, which might at first seem unconnected. I'll connect them later.

1. If You Refuse to Argue Your Opinion, You Are Left With No Means of Arguing Except to Personally Demean Those Disagreeing with Your (Withheld) Opinion.

In the old days, the television news used to have a one-minute segment at the end of a local newscast where they'd have someone at the station announce the station's editorial position on a subject. They told you straight-up where they, as an institution, came down on an issue.

They dropped this practice. Under fire from conservatives for bias, they tried to obliterate every overt, honest expression of opinion on an issue. So they stopped announcing their official position. To hide, to disguise their actual position.

But they still wanted to get their opinion out there.

So they simply started smuggling it into their news coverage.

But that wasn't the worst of it. The worst was this:

If you're not going to admit, for example, that you disagree with the Tea Party on ideological grounds, and yet you still wish to undermine them, you have no choice left but to simply attack them on a personal level.

And this is even more biased than simply -- honestly, forthrightly -- stating your ideological position on a matter!

What, to you, is more offensive and ugly -- that the media disagrees ideologically with the Tea Party's commitment to reducing spending and government, or that, refusing to express their ideological objection honestly, they seek to paint every Tea Partier as racist and violent by carefully suggesting only the misspelled and ugly signs from a Tea Party rally? Strongly implying "Only ignorant, stupid racists could support this nonsense"?

If a liberal disagrees with me on an ideological issue, well, I don't love him for that. But I'm not angry. Ideological disputes are separated from the self, from the ego, by a little distance. (A little -- not a lot.)

Because they are somewhat impersonal, I can have an argument with a liberal and not have it become heated so long as neither stoops to making it personal and simply calling the other guy an asshole.

But the media's pretend-objectivity means they cannot have an honest dispute about an issue -- and yet they are still determined to get their editorial position out there.

So all they're left with is the worst, most biased, most provocative, most demeaning "political argument" in existence: "You're an asshole."

If they actually admitted their beliefs -- and honestly argued them -- they wouldn't have to resort to the "You're an asshole" non-argument argument.

Many in the GOP establishment do this for slightly different reasons. See, they're supposed to be in agreement with the Tea Party's core principles of reduced spending, reduced government, and greater individual freedom.

But, of course, they're not so committed to those things. Oh, as a general rule, they favor them-- but they're very quick to sell them out in favor of some other priority, which they won't admit is a greater priority, because they're pretending their highest priority is reducing spending, reducing government, and increasing individual freedom.

Thus, John McCain, rather than honestly objecting to the parts of the Tea Party movement he disagrees with, or honestly expressing his opinion that we need a bigger government than Tea Partiers think we need, resorts to personal attacks: They're Wacko-Birds. They're Hobbits.

Again: Which argument do you think rankles people more -- being treated like adults and being offered an ideological argument that opposes our own, or being treated like children and lunatics who need to be excluded from the debate entirely by deligtimization and dehumanization?

It would be better if the media were honest in its ideological priors, so it wouldn't have to resort to personal attacks.

It would be better if the GOP Establishment simply admitted it disagrees with the base, too, so it wouldn't have to constantly malign its own voters.

2. When People Lie About Their Opinions, Political Calamities Occur.

In the Todd Akin controversy, people I have a great deal of respect for -- like Dana Loesch -- were impassioned supporters of Todd Akin, and insisted he remain on the ballot, and encouraged him to remain on the ballot.

Why? It was obvious he was going to lose.

I didn't think Dana Loesch was a Wack-Bird or Idiot, so I wondered: How did this situation come about?

I wondered: Did I have something to do with it?

Because here's the deal: many of us in the GOP -- many more than who openly proclaim it -- are either pro-choice, or pro-choice with restrictions. We support some pro-life initiatives-- but only half-heartedly. It's not a high priority for us.

Yes, I support banning abortion in the third trimester, or even at the midway point.

But I actually was not in favor of demanding that abortion clinics' doctors have surgical privileges at nearby hospitals. That seemed to me pretty obviously just an attempt to throw up an irrelevant impediment to conducting abortions.

But did I squawk about that? No I didn't, for several reasons:

1. I generally support the mainstream conservative line, even if I actually disagree with it, out of tactical political coalition-retaining considerations -- that is, I must support your issues if I expect you to support my issues.

2. But also, let's face it, and let's not have me pretend I'm nothing but Generosity and Team Spirit -- I didn't squawk because I didn't feel like fighting and I didn't want to alienate readers.

Now some go-along-to-get-along is understandable, I think (If I may be so bold as to let myself off the hook).

But when it comes to a core principle -- something you will actually shout and holler about -- I think you owe it to people to tell them where you really stand.

For example: Among all Americans, only 17% support banning abortion in cases of rape.

Now, the Republican Party will have almost all of those folks in it. And yet, that still means the majority of the party is against banning abortion in cases of rape.

But do those of us who believe that actually say so clearly enough?

Do those of us who believe that -- the majority, obviously -- clearly and honestly communicate that to people like Dana Loesch who are very pro-life?

My opinion is that we do not. My opinion is that we take the hardcore/no exceptions position to be the "Real True Conservative Position," and we wind up falsely deferring to it, even though we disagree with it, and even though we will walk away from an election if pressed on it.

We don't want people to call us closet liberals. Everyone in this jackass party (or political parties in general) is always jockeying for that coveted Most Pure of The Purest crown, and we just don't want to admit that we're slightly more liberal on an issue than the most conservative leaning person on the issue.

So what do we do? We use the Yeah Yeah Demurral. We basically Yeah Yeah people we disagree with, letting them believe, wrongly, that we share their position.

And then this leads to a debacle like Todd Akin -- because two thirds of the party secretly objects strongly to banning abortion in cases of rape, But we've absolutely hidden that view from the rest of the party, so the rest of the party thinks, completely in error (and completely due to our silence), there is unanimity on this issue where there is not just a lack of unanimity but in fact a majority position against it.

And then, when this all comes to a head, many of us resort to making the weak, evasive argument "But that position isn't politically viable with the general public," which is just another Yeah Yeah Evasion, because our real position is That position isn't politically viable with me myself, and I'll vote against Akin if you force me into this dilemma."

Our attempts to avoid controversy -- to always pretend we agree -- leads to genuine electoral calamities when it is suddenly revealed the unanimity we've Yeah-Yeahed into illusory existence was all a big stupid lie.

It's better to tell the truth. It's better to debate these things. It's better to actually admit we disagree when we disagree.

It's better, in general, that Dana Loesch should know where people like me stand, so she can make political calculations with the real data set, not the pretend data-set I've Yeah-Yeahed her into believing exits. If she's going to lose half the party o this issue, she should know that, rather than all of us lying to her because we are pretending to have the Moar Conservative position.

3. The Establishment's Unwillingness to State, Forthrightly, It Is Pro-Amnesty and Against the Wall is What Gave Us Trump.

The Establishment and establishment-aligned commentators are guilty of the Yeah Yeah Evasion I spoke of above with respect to amnesty.

Oh, sure, in 2014, they'll run on a super-border-hawk national platform, and vow to oppose, unto their dying breath, Obama's executive amnesties.

And sure, they'll trot out a field of 17 candidates, fifteen of whom who have been coached to give the corporate/donor class evasive answer on the border, which is some pablum like "We want to regularize the system to make sure those coming in are doing so illegally. And we don't want a wall per se -- we envision instead something even better than a wall, a multi-layered defense-in-depth virtual wall which can even stop velociraptors!"

And they'll say that while not saying the also support doubling legal immigration levels and boosting H1Bs by 400%.

Oh, and of course the Establishment has been signalling its absolutely-insincere support for a border wall since 2006 -- when it authorized construction of a border wall, but never funded it.

Oh, and Establishment types seeking reelection will suddenly say this sort of thing as November approaches --

Now, the Establishment, and Establishment-aligned commentators, believe the wall to be racist, they believe enforcing the border to be racist, they believe deporting illegals -- any of them, except murderers -- to be racist.

But they sort of didn't say so for ten years, huh?

Now, the Trumpkins come along -- I'll use the Establishment's slur for them -- and the Trumpkins believe that it is standard GOP doctrine that we should have a border wall and be tough on border security, up to and including deportations.

They think there's broad support for this in the party. They don't think this position is controversial -- they think it's just a base plank of the platform.

Gee -- I wonder where they could have gotten that idea, Establishment, huh?

I guess those stupid Trumpkins did something crazy -- the believed the lies pouring out of your mouths every election eve.

So once again we have a political calamity brewing-- the Establishment types, the college educated set who has no fear of being displaced by a cheaper foreign worker, misled the white working class into thinking they agreed with them on immigration, while secretly -- silently -- holding the opinion that anything short of open borders was kinda-sorta (or definitely) racist.

They would walk away from any candidate running on what was allowed to sand in as basic vanilla conservative doctrine, as they're doing now.

As many of us did with Todd Akin -- refusing to admit we'd turn our backs on a candidate who espoused banning abortions even in cases of rape.

So, this position being secretly held, people didn't quite know how toxic the college-educated cohort/Establishment/corporate wing held it to be.

They didn't know. Because you never told them.

So here we are, with 20% of the party refusing to support the Republican nominee, largely because he holds a "racist" position that that same 20% was too cowardly to announce to be racist previously.

It would have been better, I contend, had this cohort forthrightly admitted its position, and stated how strongly committed to this position they were, rather than Yeah-Yeahing the base for ten years and only now, on the brink of a very consequential election, suddenly announcing the position they themselves have pretended to support for ten years is actually reminiscent of Adolf Hitler.

And who knows -- if your arguments in favor of amnesty are as potent as you think they are (and you must think they're potent, because, like Obama, you seem to think the only possible objection is racism and hatred), why not actually share them with the group?

You can't convince people of your position if you refuse to state what it is and the reasons for it.

Or, I guess, you can keep on doing what you're doing now -- pretending to be border hawks and then becoming very upset when people, correctly, see through the ruse.

4. Conclusion: Honesty and Free Debate of Ideas Trump Dishonesty and Suppression of Disagreement Every Single Time.

There is no "Moar Conservative" position, and arguing about it is fucking retarded.

I'm personally tired of arguments over policy diverging from philosophy (which is interesting) into insipid, childlike semantic battles about which policy should be tagged with the "Moar Conservative" brand-name.

I think this party needs to stop this god-damned hive-mind Let's All Pretend We're the Moast Conservative Of All Because Otherwise CelticSpear69 on Twitter Will Say I'm a Liberal cowardice.

I think we need to step up to the plate and tell other conservatives what we actually believe -- not just to avoid electoral calamity as we saw with Todd Akin, and as we now see with Donald Trump.

But so we can have an argument about the less-personal ideological point, instead of avoiding that actual, honest discussion, and have left nothing but slurs ("Unrealistic! Crazy! Sell-Out! Liberal! RINO!") to use in lieu of actual debate.

But I cannot have an argument about amnesty and immigration with someone who steadfastly refuses to admit they hold a position contrary to mine.

You know it's an interesting thing -- I've had discussions with lots of people I'd say are Establishment/corporate aligned, and never once has one asked me, "Why are you so against amnesty and untrammeled immigration?"

I have reasons: Pretty good ones, actually. I'd sure like to tell people what they are.

But oddly -- no one ever asks. They Yeah Yeah me, and, frankly, I assume they already have my reasons in their mind: It's because I'm racist. What else could it be?

Well, if you bothered asking, you might find out it has very little to do with race.

The same way mainstream conservative opposition to a growing government, a growing welfare state, and racial quotas is not rooted in racism, but in other ideas having nothing to do with racial animus.

But people know that about their own ideas -- they provide themselves with the best possible reasons and motives for their own ideas.

For other people, though -- for ideas they don't agree with -- they're pretty swift to assume the weakest possible reasons and worst possible motives. Aren't they?

So yeah, to reduce this bitter animus against the "racists" of the party (are you racist for favoring restrictions on welfare? Why? Are you a racist), maybe people who think people who disagree with them are "racist" should just ask: Say, do you have any good non-racist reasons for supporting the position you do?

One last point: After I realized that Yeah-Yeahing the pro-lifers caused the Todd Akin calamity, I started talking more openly about my divergent/nonstandard opinions. On abortion, on the nonexistence of God.

You know how heated those threats got?

Not heated at all. I had Yeah-Yeahed the social cons for years because I thought they would become unreasonably angry if I expressed my disagrement with their position.

Not an inch of it. In fact, those threads were some of the most interesting I can remember. Becase people were actually arguing about the issues themselves, rather than avoiding the issues by substituting put-downs and positions for intellectual debate.

And because we were talking about the issue, we didn't have to talk about each other's low character and likely sexual dalliances with close familial relations.

And maybe people just appreciated being talked to like an adult instead of being Yeah-Yeahed like a little child one is simply trying to control by telling him the right stories about Getting a Pony For His Birthday if he just goes along with my political platform.

Maybe adults like being addressed as adults -- maybe there is something inherently dignity-conferring and respectful about looking an educated man or woman in the eye and saying, "I disagree with you, but I think you're plenty mature enough to handle the revelation that I disagree with you."

Maybe the political class can learn from this -- people don't love honest disagreement -- we'd rather have honest agreement, obviously -- but what people actually hate, and will start burning things down over, is dishonest agreement, Yeah-Yeahing us to support your priorities while being secretly committed to squashing all of ours.

If people want to save the Party -- how about we start by actually being honest wit each other about our beliefs and priorities, instead of making false claims to manipulate people into supporting our faction and our agenda?

Posted by: Ace at 03:26 PM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 Brilliant!

(I'll read it later.)

Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 03:25 PM (jBuUi)

2 If people want to save the Party

That's one heck of a big "IF," Ace.

Personally, I have no interest in saving the GOP.

Let it burn.

We don't even need a substitute party.

Let the national voting demographic be

25% Democrats
75% unaffiliated independents.

I'd be OK with that.

Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 03:27 PM (jBuUi)

3 What, to you, is more offensive and ugly -- that the media disagrees ideologically with the Tea Party's commitment to reducing spending and government, or that, refusing to express their ideological objection honestly, they seek to paint every Tea Partier as racist and violent by carefully suggesting only the misspelled and ugly signs from a Tea Party rally? Strongly implying "Only ignorant, stupid racists could support this nonsense"?

Known colloquially as "Couricking"

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at August 11, 2016 03:28 PM (8ZskC)

4 Thanks, Ace.

Posted by: George Tirebiter at August 11, 2016 03:30 PM (/zyrl)

5 Yikes! long read.. I'll finish later.. but one comment..
..................
But when it comes to a core principle -- something you will actually shout and holler about -- I think you owe it to people to tell them where you really stand.
...................
This is the problem with a lot of folks on the right.. I too am pro-choice up to a point.. there should be a ban after 20 weeks, yeah.. but that's about it.

But if you say so, you are automatically kicked out of the club! No "TRUE CONSERVATIVE" would ever say that!

So, my 85% agreement on fiscal and other issues is not good enough? who says so? Who gave anyone the right to say so?

We simply disagree on some issues, and everyone has to be willing to have a coalition of like-minded people, because you will never get a coalition of same minded people in enough numbers to make a difference.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at August 11, 2016 03:31 PM (so+oy)

6 For about 8 years I've been working on a political manifesto spelling out my political philosophy -- one which I suspect would be shared by about 60% of the populace.

Of course, I never get around to finishing it.

This philosophy would NOT be "conservative," nor would it be labelled as such. Because the label itself is contaminated with too much baggage and slander.

To get rid of the baggage, we need a new name. And since we have a new name, might as well refine the philosophy itself to be more on-point, sleeker, more irrefutable, more self-evident.

So, I also have no interest in rescuing "conservatism." Let that burn as well.

Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 03:31 PM (jBuUi)

7 Nice, Ace. You're the best analyst of political psychology on the net.

You're cute too.

*blushes*

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at August 11, 2016 03:31 PM (8ZskC)

8 Whatever. We are still moar conservative than you and will show it by supporting Hillary lest Trump make the GOP less conservative.

Posted by: NRO at August 11, 2016 03:31 PM (g1MTt)

9 In short, one of the things that makes the declasse wing or wings of the party declasse is their honesty. In today's self-flattering upper middle class bien pensant sections of the party one has to lie about their positions as fast as they can just to stay in one place. Anybody who wants to be invited to the cool hangouts with the lefties has to lie at least twice as fast as that.

Posted by: Sporkatus at August 11, 2016 03:32 PM (eXSOZ)

10 What movie is this about again???

Posted by: lindafell-racist, redneck, sexist, bitter clinger, Moron in TEXIT! at August 11, 2016 03:33 PM (p8t+o)

11 I read the whole post and agree totally!! Well written!! And I'm not just yeah-yeahing!

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at August 11, 2016 03:33 PM (6bHpr)

12 If they actually admitted their beliefs -- and honestly argued them -- they wouldn't have to resort to the "You're an asshole" non-argument argument.

I think you overestimate the integrity and intellect of leftists. They are constantly bombarded by real world data that tells them that everything they think about the world is wrong and beyond stupid. That monumental frustration has to come out somewhere. Couple that frustration with their innate self-hate and general nihilism and you have a recipe for people who can't do anything but call people names (and restrict all of their movements and actions and send them to gulags and execute them and the like).

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 03:35 PM (zc3Db)

13 "The Party"is simply a vessel. It used to hold ideas. Now it holds money.

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at August 11, 2016 03:35 PM (SeD0w)

14 Meh, the Republican party stabbed me in the back a long time ago, Snarlin' Arlin at the Clinton Impeachment vote in the Senate and those two stupid bints from those postage stamp states in the NE come to mind immediately not to mention the one from AK that shives any conservative idea she hears.

Posted by: Gmac- 'all politics in this country now is dress-rehearsal for civil war' at August 11, 2016 03:36 PM (XCu/C)

15 So, bottom line, if you do like "Ghost Buster II" you are a sexist pig!

Posted by: Nip Sip at August 11, 2016 03:36 PM (F1iXz)

16 Relevant to Ace's discussion of Tod Akin and the ban on abortion even in cases of rape:

http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=1595

Why Sharron Angle’s rape/abortion position makes pro-choice me respect her more

Many many brutal truths. For example:

"We’re All Lying

I think both sides of the abortion debate are lying and have been lying since the argument first arose. Anyone who wants to forbid abortion “except in cases of rape or incest” is, frankly, full of crap. And here’s why:

If you truly are “pro-life” in that you believe abortion is murder because the unborn child is a full-fledged human being, then you wouldn’t so casually allow the child to be murdered simply based on its parent’s misbehavior.
...
Why then, if we are to accept the supposition that unborn children have full human rights, would we sentence a (pre-born) baby to death (abortion) simply because the baby’s father is a rapist? How does that make any more sense than the scenarios I described above?

Allowing a rape-and-incest exception to any abortion ban essentially means we are willing to punish the children for the sins of the father. And that’s not the way our society works."

Etc.

Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 03:36 PM (jBuUi)

17 When Andrew Breitbart offered $100,000 to anyone who could provide any evidence that John Lewis' smear of the Tea Party was true he offered the money in support this very argument, or part of it anyway. Demeaning a well meaning, fed-up voting bloc without ever engaging their arguments honestly was not unexpected from Democrats, at least to him, and Andrew was ready, prepared and already angry.

It took me more time, but I'm there now.

Posted by: MTF at August 11, 2016 03:37 PM (/m8T6)

18 Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 03:31 PM
***

How about the "American Party"?

Would make for great everything. "I left the Democrat Party for the American Party." "Vote American" (implying all others are not), "the American candidate will fix this ________ problem created by the others that have been in power" "Company X is a big American party supporter" etc.

Posted by: NRO at August 11, 2016 03:37 PM (g1MTt)

19 Nominated for best comment in a squeaky clean new thread:
What movie is this about again???

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at August 11, 2016 03:37 PM (SeD0w)

20 This was a great one, Ace.

Posted by: joe, living dangerously at August 11, 2016 03:37 PM (KUaJL)

21 Excellent article, ace.

I would disagree on one point, though, in the first section.

I have never seen a liberal, democrat, progressive ever argue a position using facts and evidence. It's always argued emotionally, through feelings and should-bes.

Posted by: BeckoningChasm at August 11, 2016 03:38 PM (AroJD)

22 Honesty.

Such a lonely word.

Posted by: Billy Joel at August 11, 2016 03:38 PM (c1srJ)

23 Woah, woah, woah, leave me out of this. I'm just on Twitter for @SwearTrek.

Posted by: CelticRing69 at August 11, 2016 03:38 PM (u0s1P)

24 Excellent post, Ace!

*I know this is about the GOP, but this goes double for the Democrats - because they are so much more radical than they pretend to be. Just look at the Obamacare lies vs. the obvious end-game of single-payer/socialized healthcare.

Posted by: Lizzy at August 11, 2016 03:40 PM (NOIQH)

25 Nice ace. One other point. As the Federal government becomes more of the GDP, politics becomes more of an economic problem.

That is, the more socialistic we become, the less decisions are made by private hands and the more that are made by politicians/bureaucrats.

This makes politics much more life and death than when the government didn't fck up everything.

Hence a new class of bought and made for government workers that will always vote for their self interest, aka, more government

Posted by: Nip Sip at August 11, 2016 03:40 PM (F1iXz)

26 I like the idea that abortion doctors actually be skilled in ob/gyn surgery. There are legitimate health reasons to teach this skill, even for pro lifers (for instance, the baby might have died already but the uterus hasn't expelled it).

I think the Scandinavians have this as law in fact.

Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at August 11, 2016 03:40 PM (GOL7u)

27 Politicians won't tell the truth because they think "the people" are stupid rubes who can't handle it.

I disagree with those who think "the people" are smart or capable. The trick, as I see it, is to embrace the idiocracy.

CS Lewis said it was better to be ruled by robber barons than busybodies. I say it is even better to be ruled by inbred simpletons.

Posted by: wooga at August 11, 2016 03:41 PM (sktuO)

28 Knocked it right out of the park, Ace.
Bravo.

Posted by: sock_rat_eez at August 11, 2016 03:41 PM (gUoN4)

29 repuke,demonrat, what's the difference? they can both kiss my conservative white male ass. bring back the whigs. these people all suck ass. i'm done with all these assholes.

Posted by: chavez the hugo at August 11, 2016 03:41 PM (KP5rU)

30 Pretty sure Ace is a wacko bird so why would i listen to anything that guy says?

Posted by: Suppressed Flasher at August 11, 2016 03:42 PM (X+nFp)

31 They're Hobbits.

Yup, a hobbits I will be. Hobbits love mushrooms (mmmm good), Hobbits love running around in their bare wooly feet (check), Hobbits love having parties of only invited guests numbering 144 (check). Mostly Hobbits love adventures, great big ones that go there and back to find not dragons nor the cracks of someones asses. No we go on adventures to find the SMOD to wipe the ever growing stupidity of man. Then we can go back to living in the Shire and eating mushrooms and smoking our pipeweed.

Posted by: the morigu at August 11, 2016 03:42 PM (Bjy3Q)

32 This would never make it on BOR's show because it can't fit into a 15 second sound bite .... as true as it is.

Posted by: E.T. at August 11, 2016 03:42 PM (c+7Ko)

33 Yeah, I remember the times I tried to argue that our current immigration regime was de facto amnesty and that deporting 6 % of our population was a terrible idea economically.

Not only did I get my ass ripped from every direction, nobody could decide what amnesty even means. They were all quite sure any change to the current de facto amnesty was amnesty.

Honest debate of issues without emotion and name-calling might be possible with some issues here. Immigration, Rubio, crossbows are not those issues.

Posted by: spongeworthy at August 11, 2016 03:42 PM (mrfTe)

34 Personally, I have no interest in saving the GOP.

Let it burn.

We don't even need a substitute party.

Let the national voting demographic be

25% Democrats
75% unaffiliated independents.

I'd be OK with that.
Posted by: zombie
------------------
Funny. I was just thinking this exactly.
I just walked in from the mailbox, and I have a very official looking letter from the RNC. Begging to return their "Party Affiliation Voter Registration Card" along with my donation.

I've been a registered voter since I turned 18 and never miss an election. Even dog catcher. I have never been affiliated with any political party, and certainly won't start with this sorry bunch.

I am tempted to just write in sharpie across the letter - Fuck you, Reince. You'll get my vote and my money when you stop shitting on conservative, constitution loving Americans - and mail it right back.

Posted by: Chi at August 11, 2016 03:42 PM (o4KXN)

35 Let it burn. A steak.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at August 11, 2016 03:42 PM (IqV8l)

36 And then we take a look at the 2016 Democratic Party ...

Sh*t, they can't even imagine having an argument on "principles". Clinton's "muscle" persons defenestrated the entire DNC senior leadership within a week of the Philly Convention. A debacle that the MSM refuses to cover in any depth.

Bernie winds up with enough do-re-mi to buy a third house worth $600,000 after selling out all those starry-eyed idealists kids. Kids who had dreams of moving out of their parents' basements.

What's Hillary's idea of "Making America Great Again?

Posted by: mrp at August 11, 2016 03:43 PM (JBggj)

37 Brilliant ACE, just brilliant !!

Of course I still want to see the absolute wanton destruction of the Establishment. We give the House in 2010 and the Senate in 2015 to get rid of Obamacare and use the power of the purse to stop funding this madness and what have they done?

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!!!

It's not they do not have a spine they just want to keep going along to get along and to hell with the constituents.

Posted by: SCUBA DUDE at August 11, 2016 03:43 PM (Oq/TM)

38 Sidenote: While I've also enjoyed your posts/discussion on abortion, I am so relieved that this election cycle (so far) has not be ALL about the social issue - abortion, SSM, trans-bathroom accommodations, etc.

The MSM/Left *always* uses these wedge issues to distract from the more pressing issues, issues that a POTUS can actually work w/Congress to implement like immigration, national security, and federal regulations that inhibit economic growth.

Posted by: Lizzy at August 11, 2016 03:44 PM (NOIQH)

39 I agree. For example, many conservatives are not gun owners or lovers. We may have nuanced positions on this issue, but nuance is not permitted when name-calling is the favored form of discourse. Same is true of minimum wage and low-tax absolutism. It is not necessarily "conservative" to take an absolutist view on any of these issues. In fact the case can be made, if we really do revere Burke as much as we say we do, that the true conservative view is the synthetic one. Synthesis is the product of discourse. Absolutism is the product of negation.

Posted by: Caliban at August 11, 2016 03:44 PM (DrC22)

40 Wow long post.

What I got was basically the cheeseburger party was being run by secret vegans who are now upset that the base wants to vote for a fry cook.

Posted by: @votermom at August 11, 2016 03:44 PM (7lVbc)

41
I like the idea that abortion doctors actually be skilled in ob/gyn surgery.

Why not have a midwife do it?

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at August 11, 2016 03:44 PM (IqV8l)

42 The real truth behind the yeah yeah coalition is if we all started telling the truth about our opinions the party would collapse.

This country is not set up for parlimentary govt which coalition parties require.

5% of this group and 6% of that one can not win a majority in the Electoral College.

Posted by: Suppressed Flasher at August 11, 2016 03:45 PM (X+nFp)

43 Isn't it possible that the ad hominems are just the refuge of people who know they can't win the argument, but still want to defend their own selfish self-interest?

Posted by: Mr. Peebles at August 11, 2016 03:45 PM (g6yUI)

44 A little ot .... The French government is urging citizens to let migrants into their homes .... wonder if Hollande will go first...

Posted by: E.T. at August 11, 2016 03:45 PM (c+7Ko)

45 @2: "If people want to save the Party

That's one heck of a big "IF," Ace.

Personally, I have no interest in saving the GOP.

Let it burn."

Beyond that, the party has to want to save itself - it doesn't; there are just people who want to retain power, prestige, and the opportunity to skim funds out of others' pockets instead of working for a living.

At this point, it isn't really a coherent group anymore, and there aren't really any issues that are sufficient to rally everyone back onto common ground.

Posted by: FaCubeItches at August 11, 2016 03:46 PM (rznWS)

46 Ace and friends,
I am an ex-dem. I don't think you understand the overwhelming majority support there is, across the political spectrum, for border security FIRST.
The wall is a euphemism for border security. People think of it in terms of fairness. We don't want to hear the words "common sense" or "comprehensive" immigration reform No more deals. The people come first. We have a beautiful example with Simpson Mizzoli, amnesty with no border security, and we absolutely refuse.
This is what the NeverTrumpers want and they don't have the courage to say so they tell the country they have higher morals an principles.

Posted by: flowerbelle at August 11, 2016 03:46 PM (KZdWP)

47 Is this the book we are supposed to read for the book club discussion?

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at August 11, 2016 03:46 PM (uYSAz)

48 Well spake, Ace.

Posted by: jakeman at August 11, 2016 03:46 PM (yKkl0)

49 "Politicians won't tell the truth because they think "the people" are stupid rubes who can't handle it."

Usually, they are right about this.
Most people are stupid, half are below average.
They DO decide elections, though.

Posted by: navybrat at August 11, 2016 03:46 PM (w7KSn)

50 I agree with all your major points about debating, honesty etc.

However, one counter I would like to bring up is that the establishment, in my mind, has rooted interests in keeping things dishonest and stifling debate.

Take illegal immigration. The facts just aren't on the establishments side. They CAN'T have an honest debate because:

1. They'd lose.
2. The public outcry would be intense if all the nasty parts of illegal immigration ever made the nightly news.
3. The establishment would reveal their position to be that of the liberals. (Which in and of itself is not a deathknell to them, but when it's wrapped in with all their other liberal positions, well, people may begin to have some suspicions and wonder why am I in this particular party.)

Posted by: What's a Seawolf? at August 11, 2016 03:46 PM (cPMmb)

51 and what have they done?

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!!!

Well, fully-funding Planned Parenthood doesn't really deserve to be called "nothing."

Posted by: Paul Ryan at August 11, 2016 03:46 PM (8ZskC)

52 "...believe that it is standard GOP doctrine that we should have a border wall and be tough on border security, up to and including deportations.

They think there's broad support for this in the party. They don't think this position is controversial -- they think it's just a base plank of the platform."

2008 was when I realized that because I actually believed in the R party platform *I* was the RINO.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 11, 2016 03:47 PM (GDulk)

53 We hate the Left when they lie and the Left hate us when we tell the truth. I forgot who said that.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at August 11, 2016 03:47 PM (uYSAz)

54 >>>This philosophy would NOT be "conservative," nor would it be labelled as such. Because the label itself is contaminated with too much baggage and slander.

I've always l thought being a Franklanite would be cool. Into good beer, good women..and France.

Posted by: Taylork at August 11, 2016 03:47 PM (UCLTe)

55 Never did get into the Yeah, Yeah, Yeahs.

Posted by: garrett at August 11, 2016 03:48 PM (c1srJ)

56 Ace - this is brilliantly said and brilliantly written. I offer only the following rejoinder to some of your conclusions...

Maybe adults like being addressed as adults -- said no Democrat Primary Voter, ever. Yeah, I know you're primarily addressing fellow-travelers here, I'm only trying to point-out these may not be universally held sentiments.

Maybe the political class can learn from this -- they won't. That would mean they'd have to actually, you know, engage with The Great Unwashed(tm). Much easier to just pat us on the head and go back to their G'town cocktail parties.

If people want to save the Party -- just a guess, but I'm figuring the people who would benefit the most from this suggestion really couldn't care less about "saving" anything (the party, country, government, etc.) so long as they got to keep their light-work jobs and gated-community homes.

All that aside, like I said - brilliant.

Posted by: DocJ at August 11, 2016 03:48 PM (NYS7S)

57 >>What I got was basically the cheeseburger party was being run by secret vegans who are now upset that the base wants to vote for a fry cook.
Posted by: @votermom at August 11, 2016 03:44 PM (7lVbc)

Nicely parsed, votermom.

Posted by: jakeman at August 11, 2016 03:49 PM (yKkl0)

58 40: jethro bodine is running for president? finally, some common sense is injected into this election. i'm in!

Posted by: chavez the hugo at August 11, 2016 03:49 PM (KP5rU)

59 So much to say in response to this but I'll try to bullet point for clarity

* I agree with the overall argument

* your Atkins example is incredibly flawed and here's why:

- Atkins' sin wasn't opposing abortion because of rape. That's a pretty standard political stance held by many mainstream politicians. Perry, Abbott ect
- His sin was arguing stupidly. No one, no where agreed with the idiotic statement that women's bodies could micro target rapist sperm. That's what killed him. Stupidity.

* As for requiring doctors to meet basic health requirements, you clearly aren't the one hearing the 911 calls from abortion clinics.
-I've had a d&c from a missed miscarriage. I had my OB, an anesthesiologist, two OB nurses and a nurse anesthesit. It was performed in an ambulatory surgical center. Why? Because blindly shoving sharp instruments into the uterine cavity is dangerous as fuck. Especially when the woman is pregnant. You can bleed out in a heartbeat. Women do bleed out. All the time. It's not ho, hum I'm having a little procedure.

Most abortionists are not OBGYNs and most clinics don't even fit a gurney through the hallways. If you support legalized abortion, that's it's reality.

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 03:49 PM (AI/U6)

60 Ted Akin's problems were a little bigger than just being pro-choice. And I disagree with you about the surgical thing - I want women getting abortions to have the best care because it's actually a bit more involved than getting mole removed - but I definitely would rather people be honest about their positions.

You can't argue with nonsense like 'you're racist'. There is literally no argument you can make at that point. I will think about the rest, because you may be on to something, but I'm not entirely convinced these non-arguments are not simply being put forward because they stop thought.

Posted by: Lea at August 11, 2016 03:49 PM (lIU4e)

61 Maybe the Left has already pointed out a new party name for us by labelling the Gadsden Flag rayciss.
We could be the Don't Tread on Me party.

Posted by: @votermom at August 11, 2016 03:49 PM (7lVbc)

62
Yeah, yeah.
Moar!

(actually, great post. you should recite the whole thing on a podcast)

Posted by: ArthurK at August 11, 2016 03:49 PM (h53OH)

63 >>Isn't it possible that the ad hominems are just the refuge of people who
know they can't win the argument, but still want to defend their own
selfish self-interest?

Ad hominem attacks are used to **end** debate. If you declare your opponent an "unperson" - a racist/bigot/misogynist/homophobe/whatever - then his opinions have no value.

How many times has the Left/MSM said "people who think X are haters, and therefore, we can comfortably eject them from the discussion; Haters are not allowed free speech". Pretty much standard policy at facebook, twitter, etc.

Posted by: Lizzy at August 11, 2016 03:49 PM (NOIQH)

64 I also have absolutely no interest in saving any particular political party. "Political Party" now has no more real meaning than does a vocal allegiance to your favorite sporting team. Yay our team boo your team.

Political parties are nothing more than substitutes for thinking. A lot of "Republicans" have during this election cycle come to this realization, I think. Their "team" is not "theirs" at all.

It is probably too much to ask that they retain this wisdom going into the future.

Would that the cheerleaders for the other team become similarly disillusioned. Perhaps the candidacy of Clinton/Media 2016 will do it, but I suspect not. Many people do not WANT to think.

Posted by: filbert at August 11, 2016 03:49 PM (s5o+q)

65 I am tempted to just write in sharpie across the letter - Fuck you, Reince. You'll get my vote and my money when you stop shitting on conservative, constitution loving Americans - and mail it right back.

I did essentially that:
Filled out their questionnaire about issues priorities, then on the back page, (Can we count on $XXXX donation?) I wrote QUIT NOMINATING RINOS!
I'm sure it went into file #13, but who cares. The Uniparty is real, they are working toward the same goal: Secure retirement and a Dacha in the woods.

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at August 11, 2016 03:50 PM (SeD0w)

66 What I got was basically the cheeseburger party was being run by secret vegans who are now upset that the base wants to vote for a fry cook.

Posted by: @votermom at August 11, 2016 03:44 PM (7lVbc)

And blame the base foe not somehow just knowing that vegan was the way to go.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 11, 2016 03:50 PM (GDulk)

67 >>Knocked it right out of the park, Ace.

The only Park this would fit into is Yellowstone.

Posted by: garrett at August 11, 2016 03:50 PM (c1srJ)

68 "The Party"is simply a vessel. It used to hold ideas. Now it holds money.
Posted by: Brave Sir Robin

This is what separates the so-called grass roots of the political parties (both R & D) from the people leading them. The everyday people think their parties stand for something.

The leadership and public mouthpieces that show up on talking head shows on the TV know it's about money and power. Ideas don't really matter to them in any fundamental way.
Reality is now like the movie "Network", where Howard Beal was "mad as hell" and not going to take it anymore, then they co-opted him, then he revolted, then his ratings dropped, then they killed him.

People have chosen sides, and many for the money, and not for any ideals or principles. Laughably, Bernie Sanders probably got paid off by Clinton, Inc. to endorse her and continue to live out his silly life (and be paid off), or continue to be a crazy guy pain in the ass, and maybe get offed in some peculiar or spectacular way.

A lot of people on the Right have chosen to oppose Trump, and I think a lot of it is money. They've been bribed.

And what is a conservative anymore? In my own limited mind, conservatism is dead as a political philosophy or body of ideas, in America. Big government that EVERYBODY wants in some form or another, has killed it. Roosevelt - Wilson politics of the last 100 years have done it. We have bribed ourselves away from our basic beliefs for security and a government payoff.
Social security, Medicare, big defense spending, interest rate deduction on your house, subsidized mortgages, national highway system, and on, and on, and on.

Everybody wants their rice bowl filled by the government.

Posted by: Bossy Conservative....outlaw in America at August 11, 2016 03:50 PM (S6Pax)

69 >Most abortionists are not OBGYNs and most clinics don't even fit a gurney through the hallways. If you support legalized abortion, that's it's reality.
Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 03:49 PM (AI/U6)

Also all of this.

Posted by: Lea at August 11, 2016 03:50 PM (lIU4e)

70 If people want to save the Party -- how about we start by actually being honest wit each other about our beliefs and priorities, instead of making false claims to manipulate people into supporting our faction and our agenda?

That would be great because our system can't survive, if every political promise comes with a Big Wink.

However-

most of the Republicans of the national stage and several in states would straight up lose their jobs.

Look at someone like John Cornyn from Texas.

If the dude really came out and said what he stood for -

he'd be out on his ass three minutes later.

All I can say is Politics must be the greatest job in the world cuz none of the a-holes can conceive of life outside of gov't.

Most of us have at one time or another hopped from job to job, but these guys cling on like grim death.

Since they make the laws, I don't see how we are going to be able to make Politics less attractive so that people will move in and out.

Posted by: naturalfake at August 11, 2016 03:51 PM (0cMkb)

71 This is also often implied now on proposals that reduce government spending. The Establishment has started to connote that is racist, because it will disproportionately effect the beneficiaries.

That's a lie and illogical of course. But calling people racists, whether true or not is becoming their sine qua non.

Posted by: Marcus T at August 11, 2016 03:51 PM (MktOj)

72 "Is this the book we are supposed to read for the book club discussion? "

Shit. I've been reading "Thresher in the Rye."

And it sucks.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 11, 2016 03:51 PM (STtg4)

73 Outlawing abortion creates criminals where they needn't be and where the law has no business going.

If society accepts the possibility of abortion, then it will work hard to avoid the reality. We see that today in many demographics in America. I don't know the actual facts but I'd bet money most abortions by number occur to poor women. And Planned Parenthood, we all know, was explicitly created to abort African American babies, because Margaret Sanger wanted to use eugenics in the same way Hitler did.

Establishing strong social taboos on unprotected out-of-wedlock sex and educating people on the consequences of unprotected sex, and especially concentrating on educating people who are poor, is the only solution. Make public policy clear that parents have responsibilities for their own lives and for the safety, education and well-being of their offspring (and that no government agency will come save your ass), and you will have fewer problem pregnancies.

Posted by: MTF at August 11, 2016 03:51 PM (/m8T6)

74
For me, the problem isn't that some elected GOPers and pundits have left-leaning views on 15% of the issues. Fine. We can agree to disagree there. The problem I have is WHY ARE YOU FUCKERS PUTTING 95% OF YOUR ENERGY INTO PUSHING THE 15% OF VIEWS THAT YOUR BASE DISAGREES WITH????

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at August 11, 2016 03:51 PM (xxSK3)

75 the morigu@31 -
Yeah, back when that senile pinhead who was Sarah Palin's running mate, whatever his creepy-ass name was, called me a hobbit, I sort of embraced that.
He thought it was an insult, but there are a lot of worse things to be in this world.
Hobbits are industrious, straightforward, honest, tough, self-reliant, brave, .... which are all bad things to our self-appointed betters.

Posted by: sock_rat_eez at August 11, 2016 03:51 PM (gUoN4)

76 No, seriously, nice post. I would add another thing. Some of the Tea Party-types were, um, how do I say this nicely, horrible fucking candidates (spoiler, I don't), including the one who had to say on TV that she wasn't a witch. Which actually makes sense (the terrible candidate-ness, not her alleged lack of magickal powers), because most all the people good at candidate-ing were already part of the Establishment. So of course amateurs gonna amateur.

So we had this weird thing where we tried to support people for their positions, even if they were bad at running. Turns out that those are two separate skill sets. Which we knew from Presidential races, but still, it was pretty stark.

So therefore such as, the Establishment guy who won was even more Eastablishmenty because he just trounced some upstart Tea Party rando.

Like if Jeb! had beaten Trump, he would've doubled down on amnesty and PC-ness, because he would have won with that. If Trump hadn't made illegal immigration an issue, it wouldn't have been an issue. Maybe a side thing.

I hope this-all makes sense. If not I can poorly explain in a different way later.

Posted by: Lance McCormick at August 11, 2016 03:51 PM (u0s1P)

77 Hey, let's look out for American workers, that's my 2 cents.

Posted by: Max Power at August 11, 2016 03:51 PM (q177U)

78 Yeah, I remember the times I tried to argue that our current immigration regime was de facto amnesty and that deporting 6 % of our population was a terrible idea economically.

Unenforced law is not amnesty since those violating it can still be held liable in the future. It can be said to be a temporary amnesty but that's as far as you can go with it.

Not only did I get my ass ripped from every direction, nobody could decide what amnesty even means. They were all quite sure any change to the current de facto amnesty was amnesty.

Posted by: spongeworthy at August 11, 2016 03:42 PM (mrfTe)

What people call "amnesty" with illegals is certainly NOT amnesty. Amnesty is not punishing one for violations and clearing them. It does not include allowing one to retain his ill-gotten gains.

If someone steals a car then amnesty is, essentially, pardoning that thief for the grand theft, but it does not include letting him keep the car. When someone breaks into your house amnesty involves pardoning him the breaking and entering charges but it does not involve forcing the homeowner to let him continue living in the home and, further, forcing the homeowner to put the invader on the deed of the property. That is so far beyond "amnesty" that it boggles the mind, but that is what people are disingenuously calling "amnesty" for the illegal invaders.

Amnesty for illegals would be to just deport them and clear the record of their having breached our border and stayed here. That would be amnesty. But what the Vichy GOP and the dems want to do is let the illegals keep their ill-gotten gains (to stay here and work - or collect welfare) and to give them even more than the illegals ever thought about, to give them citizenship (put them on the deed of the USA). That isn't amnesty, that's aiding and abetting ... giving aid and comfort to an invasion. That's treason.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 03:51 PM (zc3Db)

79
Thing of it is, I don't even think the GOP-e wants to have any debate/discussion with the base because we are no longer their base. Their base consists of billionaire crony corporatists and the Chamber of Commerce. They are there to ensure the government institutes laws and policies that line their pockets and crush their competition, as well as make sure that no one else can succeed. They are also there to run interference for the Democrat Socialists who will destroy America for ideological reasons, accrue unchecked power and line their pockets in the process.

The time for debate with the GOP is over. It was over long ago, probably as far back as the aftermath of 2010 when Boehner proclaimed Obamacare the law of the land.

The time has come for a "revolution" insofar as forming some sort of real political force, party or whatever, to challenge the Establishment and decapitate politically the Leviathan.

Any suggestions?

PS - Ace, posts like this are what keep me coming back here every day.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 03:52 PM (9P3OG)

80 >>> Conclusion: Honesty and Free Debate of Ideas Trump Dishonesty and Suppression of Disagreement Every Single Time.
....

Completely, 100% agree. This can't be reiterated enough.

One of my biggest pet peeves: Person A puts forth a view. Persons B- Z rush in to label that view then attempt to discredit person a a "no true Scotsman".

Fuck the labels shit. I don't vote for the GOP. I don't consider myself a Republican. In some ways, I am not even a Conservative. As ace illustrated, neither is anyone else.

The labels game is bullshit and always has been. Look at the left: it's not 'terrorism', it's man cause disasters or workplace violence, or American anti-gay sentiment... therefore, anyone alleging racism is actually a closet anarchist who is a threat to the U.S. Goverment, civil order, racist, sexist, islamophobia, and homophobic.

Remember when invading foriegn countries with the sole intent of overthrowing an elected leader was morally wrong, illegal, and one of those evil BushMcHitler policies? Yup, now we have kinetic military actions instead of invasions. Take that Gaddaffi. Now Libya is worse that Iraq and our people died... but no one did anything wrong. The only issue is all that American Anti Muslim sentiment and YouTube.

Fuck the labels. If you can't debate me honestly and openly on facts and express your beliefs without labels, no true Scotsman attacks, and other bullshit, go fuck yourself. You are the problem that you're so committed to stamping out with your copied and pasted Twitter quotes.

Posted by: Damiano at August 11, 2016 03:52 PM (71OEY)

81 Ace, this post is terrific. It really is. Thank you for writing it. It needed to be written.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 03:52 PM (5115x)

82 I follow no party philosophy. I follow what I believe is right and logical. The Republican / Conservative wing more closely aligns with my beliefs. When it doesn't I don't go along to get along.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at August 11, 2016 03:52 PM (uYSAz)

83 In before Grump928(C)!

Posted by: The Scorpion at August 11, 2016 03:52 PM (zzUT1)

84 Can the Establishment honestly argue their positions? Their position seems to be "We're better than you, you're our inferiors. Shut up and get in line." I could be off base, but that is what it boils down to as far as I can tell.

Posted by: Prince Ludwig the #Problematic at August 11, 2016 03:53 PM (07Q15)

85 Honestly, I am beginning to believe if Trump does not win the Republican Party is finished.

There was already a high level of divisiveness. But so many people have shown their true stripes and will never be trusted again by a large amount of the members.

Posted by: Marcus T at August 11, 2016 03:53 PM (MktOj)

86 So immigration I suspect to be the inverse of rape abortion in the republican party (I suspect something like 80% support of the former, 20% for the latter) what happens in that case? Shouldn't the 20% compromise with the 80% as far as platform?

Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 03:53 PM (t06LC)

87 Oh Ace. Ace... Ace... Ace.

If I told the inbred retards what I really thought, then I wouldn't get elected and re-elected to do my do-nothing job. And quite frankly, I like it. It pays well, and I'm not just talking about the salary. You want me to try and get a job in the Private Sector? Screw that, as Bill Murray said in "Ghostbusters": "They expect results".

Posted by: Johnn "Yes I'll build the God damn wall" McCain at August 11, 2016 03:54 PM (6n332)

88 Great positioning Ace! They just keep changing the rules on immigration, it does not make any more sense to follow the process. The Wall & Border Patrol make good nightly news though.

Posted by: MARIO V ALBANO at August 11, 2016 03:54 PM (Ri1GH)

89 Great post Ace. So I noticed you mentioned Dana Loesch quite a bit. Does this mean she will be a guest on your podcast? Because I think it would make for a fascinating discussion. Especially if it's along the lines of this this post.

Posted by: Serenity Now! at August 11, 2016 03:55 PM (BDZWU)

90 Posted by: spongeworthy at August 11, 2016 03:42 PM (mrfTe)

I will attest to that.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at August 11, 2016 03:55 PM (uYSAz)

91 OT- I just got a fund raising letter from Phucking Paul Ryan in the mail.

There is no way on God's Green Earth I will write him a check. Hopefully my angry note on the outside of the envelope, returned at his expense, will make that clear.

Posted by: MTF at August 11, 2016 03:55 PM (/m8T6)

92 "40: jethro bodine is running for president? finally, some common sense is injected into this election. i'm in!"

I'd run so hard to vote for Jethro Bodine. Up-tick in IQ, cognizance.............damn sure an American.

Hell of an upgrade.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 11, 2016 03:55 PM (STtg4)

93 "If people want to save the Party -- how about we start by actually being honest with each other about our beliefs and priorities"

Historical digression:

There's a small but vocal Christian socon bloc within the Commiefornia GOP who have always been very honest about their beliefs and priorities. They're anti-abortion maximalists to basically a Ted Cruz degree. No abortion *evar* under any circumstances. Rape? No. Incest? No. Dead fetus? No.

In the 1990s, after CA having had several successful and popular Republican governors starting in the 1980s, good-government, balanced-budget governors who were not obsessed with pro-life issues, this small socon bloc determinedly mobilized in the primaries and got us Dan Lungren, one of their own, as a gubernatorial nominee.

People like me said to this bunch, um, have you seen the polling? The CA electorate simply won't elect an anti-abortion purist like Lungren. This will blow up everything. And instead of having for Governor a Republican moderate who is 5/10 on a socon anti-abortion purity scale, there will be a liberal Democrat who is 2/10 or even 1/10. Is that really an advancement? A win? Would that be desirable?

And the response was: _yes, well, you see, we don't care_.

The socons said they were fully prepared to lose over and over again, total losses, disastrous losses, wipeout losses, so long as the losses were firm demonstrations of unvarying moral principle.

Control of the party got wrested back after Lungren was destroyed at the polls, and the CA GOP started to run serious abortion squishes like Whitman and Fiorina instead, but the damage was long-term and irreversible. A shit-ton of otherwise persuadable soccer moms concluded that Republicans were the party of theocratic fanaticism and switched their registration to Democratic, where they have stayed.

So, no, just being "honest" with each other about what the various party factions may want is not a magic recipe for success. Not so long as some factions are prepared to (a) nail their colors to the mast and then (b) sink the ship. Which they will do. Openly. Honestly. Not hiding a thing about their intent.

Posted by: torquewrench at August 11, 2016 03:55 PM (noWW6)

94
And, not shockingly at all, when McStains and Mitt and Dole and all the rest were shoved down our throats and we we told to suck it up, get in line and vote we more or less did so.

Now that Trump, to whatever extent he really is anti-establishment, is the nominee, it's the McStains, Mitts and all the rest are screaming "I'll vote Hilary first before I vote for Trump,"

Frankly, they cannot go fuck themselves any harder than I already wish they would for that insult.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 03:56 PM (9P3OG)

95 Part of your approach, Ace, will require honest politicians that don't take advantage of anger in the party base, promising all kinds of things - in this case all manner of opposition to Obama and his liberal agenda - when either they don't really oppose him to that degree, or have little or no ability to go about voicing or putting their opposition into practice given the lying liars that run the party in Washington.

Posted by: deadrody at August 11, 2016 03:56 PM (W15tP)

96 For me, the problem isn't that some elected GOPers and pundits have left-leaning views on 15% of the issues. Fine. We can agree to disagree there. The problem I have is WHY ARE YOU FUCKERS PUTTING 95% OF YOUR ENERGY INTO PUSHING THE 15% OF VIEWS THAT YOUR BASE DISAGREES WITH????

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at August 11, 2016 03:51 PM (xxSK3)

If the Bush '04, Obama '08 and '12 stand for any proposition, I think its damn the torpedoes, keep your base happy at all costs

Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 03:56 PM (t06LC)

97 I lost my book ( more on this next book thread)
But seems Ace has found me another one, by the author Ace.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 03:56 PM (bksJQ)

98 I think the traditional republican base would okay with honest disagreements and arguments and would react positively -- trying to understand their "opponent's" point of view and analyzing their arguments for soundness.

However, liberals in the media and elsewhere do not react this way to disagreements and counter arguments. Because of the way they define justice and fairness, which is different from the way conservative-minded folks define them, they perceive opposition and counter arguments as dishonest, evil and selfish and they will not react with an open mind or be interested in debate. If you believe the person you are arguing with is evil, you wouldn't have an open mind about what they are saying either.

Conservatives view people who disagree as being ignorant or uninformed or inexperienced -- all situations that can be remedied by education and information. Liberals view people who disagree as being evil-doers who should be punished.

At least that's what I learned from reading Thomas Sowell books. JM2C

Posted by: Mozam at August 11, 2016 03:56 PM (A5oSi)

99 For example: Among all Americans, only 17% support banning abortion in cases of rape.

Count me among the 17%.

But here's the thing - simply passing a law banning abortion will not stop abortion in a country where we can't even pass legislation protecting the born-alive survivors in all but a small handful of states.

And so, we will continue to sacrifice 3500-souls to Baal, daily, until the end comes.

Posted by: DocJ at August 11, 2016 03:56 PM (NYS7S)

100 Ace, great post. I agree with most of your end conclusion.

But:

I do not believe a sufficient level of trust remains with and between the factions of the anti-Prog coalition for it to continue as a single Party, or perhaps even as a coalition.

It's already falling apart as we watch, with ~~#Republicans4Hillary~~ #NeverTrump as the prime example.

And so we have the most predictable and avoidable realignment since...well, since the last one.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, down with Eph 6:12-13 at August 11, 2016 03:57 PM (9krrF)

101 Yeah, yeah, a very nice post, Ace. (Really!)
I agree with you.

And, to get completely serious, I read:

"and simply calling the other guy an asshole."

as

"calling the other GAY an asshole"

Now back to regularly scheduled programming.....while I go back to read the comments.

Posted by: Ian Galt at August 11, 2016 03:57 PM (8iiMU)

102 I don't think the GOP elites enjoy slapping us around - they do it for our own good.

If we would just shut the fuck up and do what we're told, they wouldn't have to "correct" us as much.

I'm sure it hurts them to have to beat us around the face and head just to make a point.

We should learn to listen better.

Posted by: jwest at August 11, 2016 03:57 PM (Zs4uk)

103 "What I got was basically the cheeseburger party was being run by secret vegans who are now upset that the base wants to vote for a fry cook."

Thanks, I needed a good laugh !

Posted by: sock_rat_eez at August 11, 2016 03:57 PM (gUoN4)

104 Honesty and Free Debate of Ideas Trump Dishonesty and Suppression of Disagreement Every Single Time
...
I know you are speaking to the "party" as a whole. But I think this concept also needs to be applied on an individual basis.
As in, be honest with yourself and stop suppressing the fact that you know the GOP is full of shit.

Posted by: ajmojo at August 11, 2016 03:57 PM (1H9ox)

105 "WHY ARE YOU FUCKERS PUTTING 95% OF YOUR ENERGY INTO PUSHING THE 15% OF VIEWS THAT YOUR BASE DISAGREES WITH???? "

Because the GOP is just a bunch of liberals who live in red states so they slap on a cowboy hat and a R.

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 03:57 PM (AI/U6)

106 Thanks Ace, you caused me to lurch into a sudden realization of what "principles" mean when thrown around by the #nevertrump crowd.

I didn't know what the "principles" were, since to me the core conservative principle is that it is opposed to progressivism; conserve vs "progress" (regress, actually, but wth).

I couldn't figure out what they were talking about and I ESPECIALLY couldn't figure out what they were talking about when the standard was Hillary Clinton.

Now, I get it. When they say "principles" they mean the "silent" opinions that they didn't share to avoid argument, ie abortion in some cases, amnesty, open borders, big government, blah blah.

Is there any hope in getting the establishment first crowd to actually tell us what they've been faking on? Because we know what they haven't acted on and that's what got us Trump because the punish the GoPe crowd thought they weren't being lied to in 12 and 14. The nevertrump crowd now wants to punish the punishers. This gets us Hillary, but apparently "establishment" is more impt than Hillary because they agree on the basics?

Do I have that right?

Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 03:57 PM (eSQgj)

107 I don't think the GOP establishment really disagrees with us so much as they just get worn down by the media/beltway industrial complex. It's one thing to brush off being called a racist on twitter or blogs. It's another to be called that to your face on TV and at cocktail parties. So, they try to split the baby, and then a guy like Trump comes along and fills the void.

Posted by: crrr6 (hotair refugee) at August 11, 2016 03:57 PM (VLfxt)

108
Time to feed Los Gatos de Sefton.

BBS.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 03:58 PM (9P3OG)

109 Not to virtue signal, but this post deserves it:

*Up-Twinkles*

Posted by: garrett at August 11, 2016 03:58 PM (c1srJ)

110 Well Mr. O'Spades (if that's really your name),

Since you have all the answers, would you kindly fvcking explain how in the hell we're supposed to honestly tell Middle America that we no longer wish to allow them the right of self-rule ? And furthermore, since Middle America simply refuses to acknowledge all the good we do for them, how do we explain that we've decided to simply dilute them with a few million immigrants ? We figure fifty million to be about the right number.

Because honestly ... this Good Cop / Bad Cop game we play is getting pretty damned old.

Sincerely,

Posted by: The Political Elite at August 11, 2016 03:58 PM (AJwk0)

111 To declare an opinion is to invite attack on your opinion. If they refuse to let you know where they stand you cannot attack them. It is simple cowardice. People do not generally want to be known as a "bad person" so if they disagree with you, but can hide that they disagree with you, they will. Just so you cannot call them bad people.

Posted by: Deathknyte at August 11, 2016 03:58 PM (UEOCz)

112 "so, we will continue to sacrifice 3500-souls to Baal, daily, until the end comes."

I've no doubt we are currently facing God's judgement on the matter.

Hint: it gets worse.

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 03:59 PM (AI/U6)

113
Most of the free trade and immigration policies have benefited multi national business and finance so one should not be surprised by eiltes support of these policies. The major benefit to the masses have been the availability of cheap products made in Asia. Elites and upper middle class enjoy cheaper domestic help like maids, nannies, cooks , and gardeners who are often illegal/ legal immigrants. Current policies are a big plus for corprate America . The rest of us should be happy buying 99 cent socks at Walmart.

Posted by: Lucy at August 11, 2016 03:59 PM (nRWWi)

114 79 107 I don't think the GOP establishment really disagrees with us so much as they just get worn down by the media/beltway industrial complex. It's one thing to brush off being called a racist on twitter or blogs. It's another to be called that to your face on TV and at cocktail parties. So, they try to split the baby, and then a guy like Trump comes along and fills the void.
Posted by: crrr6 (hotair refugee) at August 11, 2016 03:57 PM (VLfxt)

See me at #79.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 03:59 PM (9P3OG)

115 Read the entire post before commenting. Well done, Ace. Well done.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at August 11, 2016 04:00 PM (1ZOkK)

116 If PP got what they wanted, we wouldn't have been able to see one of the all time great gymnast this Olympics. Born to a drug addicted homeless mother whose father abandoned her . That's PP's target demographic .

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at August 11, 2016 04:00 PM (uYSAz)

117 105 "WHY ARE YOU FUCKERS PUTTING 95% OF YOUR ENERGY INTO PUSHING THE 15% OF VIEWS THAT YOUR BASE DISAGREES WITH???? "

Turns out that in "establishment Republican", "establishment" is the important or operative word. Oh, and "principles" whatever they mean by that. I still don't know.

Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 04:00 PM (eSQgj)

118 What movie is this about again???

Posted by: lindafell-racist, redneck, sexist, bitter clinger, Moron in TEXIT! at August 11, 2016 03:33 PM (p8t+o)

----
The Rise and Fall of the Republican Party.

Posted by: Darth Randall at August 11, 2016 04:00 PM (6n332)

119 Well said, Sir, Very well said!!!

Posted by: Susan Lee at August 11, 2016 04:00 PM (6y54V)

120 As I have witnessed while growing older, honesty is not rewarded. There is a large $$$$ incintive, power incintive, and status incintive to be dishonest. Those that are dishonest seem to get rewarded over and over again.

Add the immigration and amnesty issue in the mix, and well you get the idea.

I was raised to be honest because it is the right thing to do. It makes me physically ill to see people acting in a dishonest manner and being enabled and held to a different standard where laws and ethics or shame or guilt does not apply.

I've sadly learned now that being dishonest is ok because everybody does it everywhere. I have a large problem with that line of thinking in this country.

Posted by: Cactus of Liberty at August 11, 2016 04:01 PM (p6cXT)

121 Yeah, yeah, a very nice post, Ace. (Really!)
I agree with you.

And, to get completely serious, I read:

"and simply calling the other guy an asshole."

as

"calling the other GAY an asshole"
...
I'll send you some pictures to help clear things up.

Posted by: Hope Soloholio at August 11, 2016 04:01 PM (1H9ox)

122 >>Read the entire post before commenting.

Sure thing.

Right after I finish that great American Novel.

Posted by: garrett at August 11, 2016 04:01 PM (c1srJ)

123 "I don't think the GOP establishment really disagrees with us so much as
they just get worn down by the media/beltway industrial complex."

Meh. I think they "believe" whatever they think it takes to get elected and FUNDED.

Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 04:01 PM (eSQgj)

124 What's really is bothering the country and AND ALONE TRUMP HAS MADE THEM ISSUES are constant foreign wars while we have needs at home, the hollowing out of the economy with outsourcing of jobs, the uncontrolled flood of illegal/ legal immigration for cheap labour that's lead to 20 years of stagnate wages, people with vastly different values and who are not interested in assimilating into America. Uncontrolled legal and illegal immigration and the strain it is putting on school, hospital and all public services, the absolute subservience of government to corporate interests rather than the rights and needs of the people.

Both parties are complicit in all those things, and it's taken this long for them to get fired up about the economic rape that ensued after Clinton did NAFTA. You wonder why support for TPPA and TTIP is under 20%? And why to get it passed both parties had to agree to fast track it? We have an utterly corrupt governing body now that's looking after its own and not the governed, and the governed are finally waking up to that fact.

Posted by: Tom at August 11, 2016 04:01 PM (nRWWi)

125 107
I don't think the GOP establishment really disagrees with us so much as
they just get worn down by the media/beltway industrial complex. It's
one thing to brush off being called a racist on twitter or blogs. It's
another to be called that to your face on TV and at cocktail parties.
So, they try to split the baby, and then a guy like Trump comes along
and fills the void.

Posted by: crrr6 (hotair refugee) at August 11, 2016 03:57 PM (VLfxt)

I think there's a good amount of this going on as well. Over time I think exactly what you stated added to the allure of power has turned the GOP elites into big government liberals.

Posted by: What's a Seawolf? at August 11, 2016 04:01 PM (cPMmb)

126 I don't take credit for any of this. All of this has been said by many much smarter people than I am.

But what I've said, and what I'm saying is that we first thought it somewhat amusing, and then we acknowledged that it is what people in certain professions do (lawyers and politicians) and then it just began self promulgating. I'm old enough to remember when people actually went to the internet because it was a place to get generally accurate information, ratings and opinions. Now, only idiots believe any goddamned thing at all on the internet.

We've not only come to accept, but we have allowed ourselves to expect that we are being lied to and not be upset in any way by it.

Look at what has happened to "traditional values". They've become evil. Equal rights? Hillary is the quintessential example of how equal rights is just a bullshit term. If a Republican, man or woman, were to have done a tenth of what Hillary has done, they would have been exiled from the country. This isn't about equal rights and it isn't even about rights, the same way Black Lives Matter isn't about lives mattering or equal rights for blacks. And they most certainly have nothing to do with equality.

These arguments have to do with the primacy of one set of ideas and ideals over all others. Leftism is winning because it puts elites in power over non-elites and leftists see themselves as all being elites because the ideals they hold are the ideals of elites. The stupid bastards won't realize they aren't anymore elite than the people they think they are elite over until the real elites start herding them off to wherever the non-elites get herded off to in this iteration of leftist utopia.

This is what the willful toleration of lies leads to, I think.

Someone asked me in another comment I made on this subject: What is truth?

I believe that we know what the truth is. We also know what the truth isn't.

Some smart guy (Kierkegaard), once said that there are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true, and the other is to refuse to believe what is true.

That's really where we live now.

Posted by: Mr Macca Bean at August 11, 2016 04:01 PM (4ng05)

127 To declare an opinion is to invite attack on your opinion.

Posted by: Deathknyte at August 11, 2016 03:58 PM (UEOCz)

That's what I saw from the party when Palin was stumping. They *had* to shut her up before voters got the idea that the DOPe had any intention of actually following through on their platform.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 11, 2016 04:02 PM (GDulk)

128 One of the things I'm really tired of is the "Oh I'm actually in favor of reforming the immigration problem and ending amnesty" claims by some but once you start throwing out ideas they start shrieking.

You want to put a halt to muslims coming into the country because we've been having problems with them want to knock over buildings and kill people for the last 16 years? 'Irrational fear!'

You want to work on a solution to stop the illegals crossing the border? 'You are ignoring all the people that are visa overstays!'

You want to start talking about deporting people? 'You want men in tactical gear knocking in doors and rounding people up!'

Suggesting the possibility of using the military to help in border enforcement? 'You want snipers shooting every woman and child that touches US soil!'

When they do this its more of an insult than just calling someone an idiot.

Posted by: buzzion at August 11, 2016 04:02 PM (z/Ubi)

129 I've no doubt we are currently facing God's judgement on the matter.

Hint: it gets worse.

Posted by: Lauren

Until repentance, penance, and contrition are shown.

Honestly this is why I'm more or less in the camp that it's time for a divorce...my lines are just a bit different from most.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, down with Eph 6:12-13 at August 11, 2016 04:02 PM (9krrF)

130 This dovetails perfectly with another thing Ace had written a little while ago that says when a party is big and diverse and different people have different priorities on the various issues, the party can't consistently prioritize some of those issues over others. When that happens, the minority within the party will become progressively more "extreme" in the types of candidates that they prefer in the primaries because the party in general isn't prioritizing their particular issues. So it makes a lot of sense that when a guy like Trump comes along and says "I'm going to build a wall and make mexico pay for it" that people who have all along really wanted border security are going to strongly prefer this person because they've spent 20 years having their needs being put on the back burner (at best).

Posted by: joe, living dangerously at August 11, 2016 04:03 PM (KUaJL)

131 Sorry, ace, truth is harsh and cruel.

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 04:03 PM (fn3+8)

132 93 And the response was: _yes, well, you see, we don't care_.
===========================

I think the GOPe hears this a lot. They think they're the rational part of the party, consequently. To get elected takes a dose of realism as to how far the party can push indie/moderate voters, as you point out, and the GOPe has interpreted that to mean they have to abandon all principals entirely. Of course, they are very wrong. In fact, as Reagan demonstrated so ably, a clear ideology is exactly the way to get elected. But even Reagan limited his ideology to foreign policy and the economy. He never went there on abortion.

Posted by: MTF at August 11, 2016 04:03 PM (/m8T6)

133 Not so long as some factions are prepared to (a) nail their colors to the mast and then (b) sink the ship. Which they will do. Openly. Honestly. Not hiding a thing about their intent.
Posted by: torquewrench

And now, every conservative faction or idea is being marginalized the same way. It worked with Abortion opposition/ pro-life, and the Democrat Media Complex has learned the propaganda lesson. This is why what some people have envisioned as "conservative" is now a dead letter in America.
Fear will be created about everything. When Trump loses in November, the Uniparty will gloat and use fear to prevent any kind of popular grass roots uprising again. Hillary wants to stack the Supreme Court to legislate against certain kinds of money coming into politics, and both parties see that as enhancing their control.

Posted by: Bossy Conservative....outlaw in America at August 11, 2016 04:04 PM (S6Pax)

134
La la la la la
La la la la la
La la la la la la la la la la la.

Dootn do do do dooooo....

**four octaves up

Oooooo-ooooo-oo----o---o---o--o--o--ooooo.

No one else can make me feel the colours that you bring.
Stay with me while we grow old.
We will live each day in spring time.

Yeah.... I like Minnie Ripperton. Sue me.

Happier thoughts than the GOPe trying dry hump us in the butt all the time.

Posted by: fixerupper at August 11, 2016 04:04 PM (8XRCm)

135 You know who was an asshole?

Polemarchus.

Posted by: Thrasymachus at August 11, 2016 04:04 PM (c1srJ)

136 Good points and well-put.

Or, the GOP could be like the Democrats and not care about any principles and just seek power for its own sake, to reward our friends and punish our enemies. They unify around that.

Either extreme--(1) open debate working toward understanding and unity through compromise across all issues, or (2) power for the sake of power, could be viable.

The middle ground that you describe the GOP as having been, is NOT viable in the long run because it does not lead to unity, it leads to misunderstanding and discord.

Posted by: mhj at August 11, 2016 04:04 PM (FZdvr)

137 I think I see the flaw in your plan.

It depends on politicians being honest.

Posted by: Luke at August 11, 2016 04:04 PM (JItWQ)

138 Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 03:59 PM (AI/U6)

I just finished reading the Days of Noah trilogy. Pretty good stuff.

Posted by: Country Singer at August 11, 2016 04:05 PM (uiwCw)

139 Here I am talking of parties. I came down here for a party. What happens? Nothing. Not even ice cream. The gods look down and laugh. This would be a better world for children, if the parents had to eat the spinach.

Posted by: Capt. Spaulding during a "Strange Interlude" monologue at August 11, 2016 04:05 PM (g6yUI)

140 I agree wholeheartedly with this piece, with one caveat. There are many positions on which the GOP is dishonest with its voters. Many times, the voters themselves want to be deceived.

Take our entitlements for example. They are bankrupt and unsustainable. I don't think that anyone really argues otherwise anymore. We claim to want to reduce the debt and the deficit.

But try -- just try -- to mention anything about cutting anyone's benefits, and you'll reap a holy shitstorm of people who will come out of the woodwork to declaim against that position, because they purportedly "earned" their benefits. These people have been lied to for decades -- by both the Democrats and the GOP -- and they are so used to the lie, they do not really want the truth.

All the "establishment" people who care at all about the budget know that there is no way to get to a balanced budget without cutting entitlement spending. They also know that politically, cutting entitlement spending is not possible. So they claim to be for a balanced budget and a smaller government, and sell the people the lie that they can have those things while still having the benefits "that they are entitled to."

People do not want to have an honest conversation about issues where factually it will help them gore their own ox. They will protect their ox -- with lies and distortion if need be -- and the consequences be damned.

Posted by: Revenant at August 11, 2016 04:05 PM (3DSAh)

141 116 If PP got what they wanted, we wouldn't have been able to see one of the all time great gymnast this Olympics. Born to a drug addicted homeless mother whose father abandoned her . That's PP's target demographic .
Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at August 11, 2016 04:00 PM (uYSAz)

Who? I skip over the background stories...

Posted by: @votermom at August 11, 2016 04:05 PM (7lVbc)

142 That was very thought-provoking... great job ace!!

Even the couple of typos had value!

Now if only that mindset would take hold in Washington.....

Posted by: Dirty Randy at August 11, 2016 04:05 PM (jjaLl)

143 I think the 'turn it up to 11' tactic started with the left.
That and the politics of incrementalism almost requires one to stake out a position way out on the borderline and and stick there.

Consequently, the default is to peg the needle on everything.

Posted by: Roland [OMITTED] at August 11, 2016 04:06 PM (QM5S2)

144 I would have been first just now but I had to scroll down to the comment box.

Posted by: andycanuck at August 11, 2016 04:06 PM (LdMbv)

145
Meanwhile...

The DNC media is telling LIV's that Trump is crazy to claim obama and clinton are the "founders" of ISIS.

Why?

Because it's true.

Posted by: M Magoo's at August 11, 2016 04:06 PM (Xs7AG)

146 You can't reason with Consequentialists.

They simply won't abide it.

Posted by: garrett at August 11, 2016 04:06 PM (c1srJ)

147 Who? I skip over the background stories...

Posted by: @votermom at August 11, 2016 04:05 PM (7lVbc)

Simone Biles. Taken from her mother to foster care. Adopted and raised by her grandparents (mother's father).

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 04:07 PM (zc3Db)

148 1. Having a sister in law who works in a hospital accounting dept., a brother who is a radiologist, numerous other associations with medical doctors, they all say it is common practice for an abortion with complications to end up in the emergency room without any warning. If the abortion Dr. does not have admitting privileges, there is no responsibility (or way, for that matter) to provide services based on medical history. It is dicey for an ER dr. to pickup an unknown with complications and provide services.

2. Most common medical procedures in the U.S. : 3 million cataract procedures, 1.3 million C-sections, 1.05 joint replacements, 1 million circumcisions, 0.7 million abortions annually. Forbes says 24% are paid for by taxpayers for what is unequivocally an elective, medically unnecessary procedure in 99.99% of cases.

Posted by: P Mike at August 11, 2016 04:07 PM (B5xd7)

149 Bravo Ace.

This is one of the reasons I left RedState. The stench of smug just was too much for me anymore. And most of the mods have substituted insult for argument. Especially Neal, he couldn't argue his way out of a paper bag. The commenters are worse, each one trying outdo the other to show their gimp-master mods how TruConervative they are.

Posted by: Memories at August 11, 2016 04:07 PM (mwcEF)

150 " I think I see the flaw in your plan.

It depends on politicians being honest."

Boy, are we fooked.

Posted by: Ricardo Kill at August 11, 2016 04:07 PM (STtg4)

151 Who? I skip over the background stories...

Simone Briles

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 04:07 PM (fn3+8)

152 I refuse to argue immigration on "amnesty: yes or no?" grounds. The argument is about 1) border security and 2) providing job opportunities to citizens.

I am in favor of both. Democrats are against border security and couldn't care less about jobs. The Progressives especially want to import voters and are happy to accept crime, disease, unemployment and terror to get those voters.

Posted by: MTF at August 11, 2016 04:07 PM (/m8T6)

153 Stupid local station news break that I just saw "Hillary Clinton Gives Speech" "Trump Remarks About ISIS"

Posted by: steevy at August 11, 2016 04:08 PM (fA75F)

154 See me at #79.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 03:59 PM (9P3OG)

No, I consider the Chamber of Commerce as part of the media/industrial complex. GOPe isn't completely stupid. The Chamber doesn't have 65 million voters. The GOP political class tried to keep both their donors and their voters happy and finally were forced to choose.

Posted by: crrr6 (hotair refugee) at August 11, 2016 04:08 PM (VLfxt)

155 Do those of us who believe that [..the majority of the party is against banning abortion in cases of rape.] -- the majority, obviously -- clearly and honestly communicate that to people like Dana Loesch who are very pro-life?

My opinion is that we do not. My opinion is that we take the hardcore/no exceptions position to be the "Real True Conservative Position," and we wind up falsely deferring to it, even though we disagree with it.-

My opinion is we take a hard a line as possible because we know the pubbies will diminish, water- down, dilute, reduce, or eliminate whatever position they concede to us.

Posted by: gNewt....panhandlers never seem to not have their hands out ~ at August 11, 2016 04:08 PM (IJxUH)

156 >>> Honestly, I am beginning to believe if Trump does not win the Republican Party is finished.
......

Honestly, I think that Trump winning the nomination is proof positive that the Republican Party is finished.

And no, that has nothing to do with #NeverTrump. I am throatpunching the next person who tries to stick that label on me.

Look at the primaries. We had 16 or whatever people who showed up doing the usual 'go along, get along, don't offend anyone, PC' tripe that these jackasses trot out every 4 years. They split 60% of the vote. Trump- to his CREDIT- ran on "Fuck all those guys, and fuck PC in particular". He got 40%.

Then- feature, not a bug- the primaries functioned like a republic and NOT a democracy. The 16 whittled themselves away, the majority lost, and the last man standing had the same 40% or less support he started with.

There's your GOP. The 60% milquetoast appeasement party lost. What's left? Someone who bears no resemblance to a Republican. In general, I think that's a good thing. Democracy sucks. The little guys won. The GOP is flailing through death throws as we speak and I am glad to see it.

The cost? ... The minority won. Congratulations. You now have a 3rd party running under the old label. The question is, does this version represent your beliefs any more accurately than the old version?

Posted by: Damiano at August 11, 2016 04:08 PM (71OEY)

157 2. Most common medical procedures in the U.S. : 3 million cataract procedures, 1.3 million C-sections, 1.05 joint replacements, 1 million circumcisions, 0.7 million abortions annually. Forbes says 24% are paid for by taxpayers for what is unequivocally an elective, medically unnecessary procedure in 99.99% of cases.

Posted by: P Mike at August 11, 2016 04:07 PM (B5xd7)

You forgot the 3.62 million unnecessary foot amputations to fund doctors' ferraris.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 04:08 PM (zc3Db)

158 Loaded words. Even when someone doesn't directly call you an asshole, they will use loaded words.

Racist.
Baby killer.
Immigrant hate-monger.
Knuckle dragger.
Zealot.
Mouth breather.
Dope head.

Once the discussion devolves to that level, I tend to find something better to do with my time. Nor am I immune either; I use muzzie and commie to drip my disdain/disgust at these ideologies.

Anyhow, at least consider how your use of loaded words can cause people to turn away from any consideration of your positions.

Well spoken, ace.

Posted by: GnuBreed at August 11, 2016 04:09 PM (gyKtp)

159 Simone Biles. That was Big12 football talking there.

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 04:09 PM (fn3+8)

160 And if we really want to debate issues honestly and quit the name-calling and pigeonholing, the knee-jerk dismissal of every objection from those who are only reluctantly bailing water on the Trump-tanic, it'd help to entertain the notion that snobbery has little to do with this.

Asking people to use their goddamned heads next time is not an elitist position. They got their nominee, I'll vote for him out of the most cynical motivation. Stop acting like I need to pat these dumbshits on the back for doing such a "great job, Corky". They fucked up, and saying it doesn't make me an elitist. It makes me honest.

Posted by: spongeworthy at August 11, 2016 04:09 PM (mrfTe)

161 "As I have witnessed while growing older, honesty is not rewarded. There is a large $$$$ incintive, power incintive, and status incintive to be dishonest. Those that are dishonest seem to get rewarded over and over again."

A few days ago, I wrote about this topic and got my ass flamed pretty good.
But I still agree with the premise. People that are particularly not troubled by ethics do surprisingly well in business, politics, etc.

Posted by: navybrat at August 11, 2016 04:09 PM (w7KSn)

162 Ace - I have a good idea of my iq, good idea where I sit financially in respect to the rest of the nation, good idea of my ability to formulate letters into words, words into sentences, sentences into paragraphs.

I remember a high school English teacher telling me I had a gift. I poo-poohed. But it kinda felt nice.

So I hope you 'kinda feel nice' when I tell you you have a gift. Well beyond anything I could say about the political arena. I think I spot an exploration into psychology, where I spent many a year. Because the two topics are joined at the hip.

I hope inevitably it brings rewards.

Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 04:10 PM (ZnIt3)

163 >>136 Or, the GOP could be like the Democrats and not care about any
principles and just seek power for its own sake, to reward our friends
and punish our enemies. They unify around that. Posted by: mhj at August 11, 2016 04:04 PM (FZdvr)

This, if only briefly. A decade or so of hearing da lamentations of der vimmin would probably put us all in the pink. I know I could go for some pointless political vengeance, just to clear the bile...

Posted by: General Zod at August 11, 2016 04:10 PM (Bdeb0)

164 each one trying outdo the other to show their gimp-master mods

You try living in that crate in the leather suit 24/7/365.25. You live for the call "Being out The Gimp!"

Posted by: The Gimp at August 11, 2016 04:10 PM (zzUT1)

165 Being = Bring

Posted by: The Gimp at August 11, 2016 04:11 PM (zzUT1)

166 The question is, does this version represent your beliefs any more accurately than the old version?

Posted by: Damiano at August 11, 2016 04:08 PM (71OEY)

There is the rub. In some ways, yeah. Trump does represent me better than the Chamber of Commerce crowd.
In some ways, no. No he doesn't.

I think that we got away from having a consensus within the party (what a platform is supposed to be) and got into a true con arms race.

Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 04:11 PM (t06LC)

167
One thing that can go a long way: TERM LIMITS.

Including judges.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 04:12 PM (9P3OG)

168 And Planned Parenthood, we all know, was explicitly created to abort African American babies, because Margaret Sanger wanted to use eugenics in the same way Hitler did.

Posted by: MTF

That's not completely precise.

Sanger wanted to get abortion legalized so that any and all "substandard" babies could be killed before birth. This included:

-- Mentally insufficient babies ("the retarded")
-- Physically deformed babies ("cripples")
-- The babies of immigrants (because they "contaminated" the "white race.")
-- The babies of insane mothers (due to the assumption that insanity is strictly genetic)
-- The babies of poor or unwed mothers
-- And also, of course, black babies, not simply out of racist attitudes, but because black mothers fit into so many of the categories above. But yes, also because of racism as well.

Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 04:12 PM (jBuUi)

169 Superlative essay, Ace! I would say you hit it out of the park but that seems so... inadequate. So, it is beyond "hit it out of the park" -- Yay!-Yay! if you will. *bows to Ace*

And this is so-so-so-so true: "what people actually hate, and will start burning things down over, is dishonest agreement, Yeah-Yeahing us to support your priorities while being secretly committed to squashing all of ours."

I've been jumping up and down and screaming since at least 2004 and your essay has brought all of the reasons for my frustration into a nice little package. I have friends with whom I do not agree on some things, but we can at least discuss it without erupting into ad hominem attacks. And we move on to other subjects and remain friends. Yeah-Yeahing is the death of adulthood and a barrier to true friendship. And a danger to our nation and all it stands for.

Posted by: Legally Sufficient at August 11, 2016 04:13 PM (tbKrr)

170 Shorter Ace:

Oh what a tangled web we weave,
when first we practice to deceive.

Seriously. Good noggin scratching writing.

How's come those purty folks on TV don't write or talk like this ?

Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 04:13 PM (JTwsP)

171 You are making it more complicated than it needs to be.

It's all about the M-O-N-E-Y.

There is a direct correlation between their job security/cash payments and the decibel level and intensity of their shrieking,"Burn the Racist."

If their masters suddenly wanted closed borders they'd be screeching a different tune.

Posted by: #NeverHillary at August 11, 2016 04:13 PM (AS1dt)

172 I'll send you some pictures to help clear things up.

Posted by: Hope Soloholio at August 11, 2016 04:01 PM (1H9ox)

No!
I'm still trying to unsee them from last night.Curiosity killed the pussycat, and all that.

Posted by: Ian Galt at August 11, 2016 04:14 PM (8iiMU)

173 Some old truisms come to mind...(nowhere near accurate to the originals, but this is how I remember them and you'll get the drift)

The goal of a politician, once in office, is not to serve his constituents, it is to remain in power.

Politics is easier to understand once you realize liberals think all conservatives are evil and conservatives think all liberals are stupid.

It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled.

Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first

Politics is a strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage.

The Democrats are the party that says government can make you richer, smarter, taller, and get the weeds out of your lawn. Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work, and then get elected and prove it.

Posted by: ajmojo at August 11, 2016 04:15 PM (1H9ox)

174 I do not believe a sufficient level of trust remains with and between the factions of the anti-Prog coalition for it to continue as a single Party, or perhaps even as a coalition.

It's already falling apart as we watch, with #Republicans4Hillary #NeverTrump as the prime example.

And so we have the most predictable and avoidable realignment since...well, since the last one.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, down with Eph 6:12-13 at August 11, 2016 03:57 PM (9krrF)

Basically, I agree with this.

You can only be lied to so many times.

Strangely enough, the only way to save the Republican Party, is for Trump to get elected and then the Republican Party getting behind him 100% to push his agenda.

If his agenda fails because of it's own problems, and not poison pilled or whatever-

then they can say...See? We were right. Here's what we want and why we want it. And, most important, how it will benefit you.(this is called politics)

But, nope.

They're GOPe/NeverTrumps are going to piss and moan and try to lose the election for Trump. And if Trump somehow wins, they've already promised to oppose him all down the line.

So...in essence...even if Trump wins then GOPe/NeverTrump cadre will fight for Hillary!'s agenda(cuz who will be their support/allies but Democrats?)

The realignment is guaranteed,

No matter what happens.

The GOPe have murdered their own party and don't even realize it.

Posted by: naturalfake at August 11, 2016 04:15 PM (0cMkb)

175 I hope inevitably it brings rewards.

Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 04:10 PM (ZnIt3)

If you would stop blowing sunshine up his ass, he might come to the realization that a Fairy Godmother isn't going to appear and hand him a fat check because he writes so purdy.

On that day, he'll begin to think about ways to make this website pay.

And then people will fear him.

Posted by: jwest at August 11, 2016 04:15 PM (Zs4uk)

176 This post gave my brain a boner.

Posted by: Dr Spank at August 11, 2016 04:15 PM (AJnbY)

177 So, Ace, we all agree, GOPe is full of shit and Trump is the obvious Angry Enema for both Bush Inc and Clinton Inc. As Will Smith says, once we cleanse our system of the these two turds we can then turn to adult conversation and debate. But how do we handle the Professional Turds who control Manhattan Media and majored in identity politics?

Posted by: Puddin Head at August 11, 2016 04:16 PM (oDCMR)

178 Good post Ace

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 04:16 PM (bksJQ)

179 Shorter Ace: let's all start addressing the elephants in the room?

*badum-cha*

Posted by: LizLem at August 11, 2016 04:16 PM (hvf9s)

180 154 See me at #79.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 03:59 PM (9P3OG)

No, I consider the Chamber of Commerce as part of the media/industrial complex. GOPe isn't completely stupid. The Chamber doesn't have 65 million voters. The GOP political class tried to keep both their donors and their voters happy and finally were forced to choose.
Posted by: crrr6 (hotair refugee) at August 11, 2016 04:08 PM (VLfxt)

They don't need 65 million voters because they have $650 billion DOLLARS.

They can buy whatever legislation they need to keep them in the black while swearing fealty to the fascists who will then regulate any and all competition out of existence. This is what the insurance industry did with Obama. "Ooh, you're going to guarantee us hundreds of millions of customers? We're on board!"

Again, the GOP is merely a wing of the Democrats. They are there to run interference and insure that constitutional conservative candidates are crushed, even if they are nominated.

QED.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 04:16 PM (9P3OG)

181
Take our entitlements for example. They are bankrupt and unsustainable.

Fix it with a lock box.
And make the rich pay their fair share.

Posted by: Al Gore Clinton at August 11, 2016 04:16 PM (IqV8l)

182 Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 03:36 PM (jBuUi)

That was a great post, zombie

Posted by: @votermom at August 11, 2016 04:16 PM (7lVbc)

183 Simone Biles, yeah, that pistol was on Sanger's list.

Posted by: gNewt....panhandlers never seem to not have their hands out ~ at August 11, 2016 04:16 PM (IJxUH)

184 START UNDRESSSING ELEPHANTNS IN THE ROOM?

Posted by: Al Sharpton at August 11, 2016 04:17 PM (RwwCT)

185 Dennis Praeger or Hugh Hewitt or somebody like that says when interviewing . . . "you don't have to agree with me, in fact, I prefer guests who disagree because disagreement is more clarifying for the listener.

Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 04:17 PM (JTwsP)

186 176 This post gave my brain a boner.
Posted by: Dr Spank at August 11, 2016 04:15 PM (AJnbY)

Brain boner. Hmm. Nice little saying/euphemism. Me steal!

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 04:17 PM (9P3OG)

187 People talk shit about Trump because they feel that Trump winning was a fluke. That Trump winning was because idiots (unlike themselves) voted for Trump because they were deceived or self-deceived.

News Flash: Trump won because people were sick of being deceived. And that isn't even close to being self-deceived.

Posted by: Mr Macca Bean at August 11, 2016 04:18 PM (4ng05)

188 185 Dennis Praeger or Hugh Hewitt or somebody like that says when interviewing . . . "you don't have to agree with me, in fact, I prefer guests who disagree because disagreement is more clarifying for the listener.

Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 04:17 PM (JTwsP)

Flip side of the coin for the SJW cancer on campus.

"You are not of the body! You will be absorbed!"

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 04:18 PM (9P3OG)

189 This isn't really about abortion, but since it was mentioned, I'll go ahead and give you guys the answer to ending abortion and a few other issues that have been bugging conservatives. You can, in one initiative stop many abortions, and after a time break the Democrat hold on black voters, and heal the racial issues we are faced with every day. You interested?

Instead of protesting outside Planned Parent hood with signs, stand outside with money. Buy every little black baby that was going to be aborted. Then place them in white conservative households, to be raised in a conservative manner, and after 20 or 30 years it will begin to bear fruit at the polling booth. You think the Democrats have an advantage because they get to teach your kids, then leap frog ahead of them and intercept their strongest demographic at the cradle.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 04:18 PM (aiB0J)

190 Throat punch?

Someone call the Secret Service

Posted by: Nevergiveup at August 11, 2016 04:18 PM (zp+j1)

191
If you would stop blowing sunshine up his ass, he might come to the realization that a Fairy Godmother isn't going to appear and hand him a fat check because he writes so purdy.
On that day, he'll begin to think about ways to make this website pay.
And then people will fear him.
Posted by: jwest

Maybe one of those free nuclear reactors.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at August 11, 2016 04:19 PM (IqV8l)

192 OK, let me address my points as the come up
1. I kind of remember the opinions stuff at the end of the news but I thought the main issue was the fairness doctrine where they had to give equal access to both sides. I was not aware Conservatives objected.
Reagan ended the fairness doctrine. So i doubt that the stated reason for this covert switch had anything to do with the Conservatives.

Mostly though, I think this is lazy thinking -- Forcing people not to be overt is not what caused them to be covert. It is not like they had internal quotas opinion they had to get out each day. The NYT has their overt opinion pages, and their overt op-ed pages, and their overt news analysis inches, and they still manage to get their distoreted progressive view into every fucking paragraph.

...

Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at August 11, 2016 04:19 PM (LWu6U)

193 Asking people to use their goddamned heads next time is not an elitist position. They got their nominee, I'll vote for him out of the most cynical motivation. Stop acting like I need to pat these dumbshits on the back for doing such a "great job, Corky". They fucked up, and saying it doesn't make me an elitist. It makes me honest.

See, this illustrates part of what got us here. I've said before never to mistake a difference in values for stupidity. In point of fact support of Trump, for many of his supporters, is actually an absolutely rational act--once you account for their values and desires. They see Trump as their best chance for what they want and they support him accordingly. Whether the information they do this on is accurate or not is another matter, which gets really complicated given the increasing unreliability of sources, but it's not because "they screwed up".

Posted by: Brother Cavil, down with Eph 6:12-13 at August 11, 2016 04:19 PM (9krrF)

194 The Republican Establishment is rapidly becoming just like the Democrats.

Democrats believe that there are no such things as opinions. There are things that are true and things that are not true.

The things that are true, of course, are the things they believe. The things that are not true are what their opponents believe.

To them, arguing against one of their beliefs is like arguing against 2 + 2 = 4. To them, it's impossible to hold a different view. Which is why Democrats get all emotional and crazy if you question their views. To them, it's denying reality.

The Republican leadership has now come to the same stance. They shouldn't have to argue for amnesty, amnesty is demonstrably the true path that must be followed. Why are these crazy people not listening? Why do they insist the facts are wrong?

I don't think anything will fix this attitude. It indicates a frozen brain.

Posted by: BeckoningChasm at August 11, 2016 04:20 PM (AroJD)

195 heh. Johnny McMaverick is one of us.

Never gets old.

Posted by: Fritz at August 11, 2016 04:20 PM (2Mnv1)

196 Buy every little black baby that was going to be aborted. Then place them in white conservative households, to be raised in a conservative manner, and after 20 or 30 years it will begin to bear fruit at the polling booth. You think the Democrats have an advantage because they get to teach your kids, then leap frog ahead of them and intercept their strongest demographic at the cradle.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 04:18 PM (aiB0J)

Do you see a problem here? Let me help.

Buy every little black baby

Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 04:20 PM (t06LC)

197
The GOPe have murdered their own party and don't even realize it.

Posted by: naturalfake at August 11, 2016 04:15 PM (0cMkb)

I suspect a large number of them realize it perfectly well. They simply don't care, because they're parasites. Tapeworms.

The big question is, how long will it take for the final GOP gotterdammerung? They're betting that they'll have plenty of time to cash in/play power games before the Party implodes.

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at August 11, 2016 04:20 PM (xxSK3)

198 The TruConservative crowd is just modern Calvinists, looking for heretics so they can burn them.

Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 04:21 PM (eSQgj)

199 Maybe one of those free nuclear reactors.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at August 11, 2016 04:19 PM (IqV8l)

Maybe not free, but a hell of lot cheaper than the windmills, solar panels and "smart grid" the left is planning.

Pick your socialist poison.

Posted by: jwest at August 11, 2016 04:21 PM (Zs4uk)

200
Buy every little black baby that was going to be aborted.

Buying black people in the public square?
What could go wrong?

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at August 11, 2016 04:21 PM (IqV8l)

201
AND . . . over at Puffington, Trump in a statistical dead heat with the statistically brain-dead Oma Panzersuit. He leads 41%-40% in Iowa.

So there's that.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 04:21 PM (9P3OG)

202 Frankly , in general I think the GOP is truthful on where they stand and for that exact reason it's always an uphill battle to be politically successful.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at August 11, 2016 04:22 PM (uYSAz)

203 looking for heretics so they can burn them.

We have to burn something with those Falcon 9 rockets.

Posted by: yesterday's post today at August 11, 2016 04:22 PM (2WoCi)

204 Thank you Ace.
Honestly it is this type of piece that is the reason I love the blog and read it religiously (well this and kittens, puppies, Prince tributes and guys that do funny photoshop changes). I'm so tired of politics and political blogs these days just regurgitating their crap. eg. I don't do Hot Gas anymore, except Jazz. I long for Allah to go back to Walking Dead grumble posts because I can't deal with his ever increasing misery DO loop. Ugh. You're the best.

Posted by: Brad at August 11, 2016 04:22 PM (arypP)

205 182 Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 03:36 PM (jBuUi)

That was a great post, zombie
Posted by: @votermom

Aw, shucks. Thanks!

Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 04:22 PM (jBuUi)

206 @193

You're absolutely correct. Trump supporters aren't dumb, that's condescending. They probably correctly calculated that he was the perhaps only way to get movement on the issues they cared about, and which have only been getting lip service from the other candidates.

Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 04:22 PM (t06LC)

207 Thanks! I can add Simone Biles to my example of Steve Jobs in the category of famous people who were almost aborted.

Posted by: @votermom at August 11, 2016 04:23 PM (7lVbc)

208 Meh. I think they "believe" whatever they think it takes to get elected and FUNDED.
Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 04:01 PM (eSQgj)

Exactly. That's called splitting the baby - otherwise known as the Gang of Eight. Amnesty for the donors, enforcement gestures to the base and a few days of praise from the liberal media before they resume calling you a racist.

Posted by: Crrr6 (hotair refugee) at August 11, 2016 04:23 PM (s9KBB)

209 "Everyone is ignorant, only on different subjects"
will rogers, and others

Trump testified about slowness in the building industry, and how tax incentives favored stock market bubbles. Both parties of the committee praised him and hung on every word.

Today it is fashionable even for reluctant conservative supporters to preface any support with "yes he is ignorant and ... add any other choice insult"

I think he is smart, and he didn't just say the right thing on border control, he managed to make it the driving force of his campaign, and turn it into a real national debate. Same with trade.

But Trump may be ignorant on theoretical discussions amongst "smart" neocon type bloggers that over two decades built a church on their confiscated "conservative property". Trump in some ways is Buchanan, without all the ability to get into those philosophical debates.

But border control, less immigration, more factories, are America First issues, and few Americans are down with the globalist vision, if they knew what it really was.

100M did not vote and essentially thing DC is a corrupt cartel. They are correct and may come out and vote, even though they never debated on National Review about "free trade" saving the world.

Yet the 100M are correct, and Trump is their pied piper, hopefully. And he is not ashamed of America First ... irrelevant academic inadequacies be damned.

In my old theology days we'd call it "arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin". A pedantic worthless debate that divides and accomplishes nothing. "The First Church of the Navelites" is a real thing (needed a whole new church based on whether Adam had a navel), and so are the NeverTrumpers that want a new world, after Hillary nukes this one. (nukes, by any number of alternative pathways)

Posted by: illiniwek at August 11, 2016 04:23 PM (l6e0e)

210 Do you see a problem here? Let me help.

Buy every little black baby
....
Okay, let's make it better. "Subsidize the adoption process of and provide material support for the mother of" every little black baby.

Posted by: ajmojo at August 11, 2016 04:25 PM (1H9ox)

211 You want to work on a solution to stop the illegals crossing the border?
'You are ignoring all the people that are visa overstays!'

You know, buzzion, the insults cut both ways...

- Build a wall to stop the illegal invasion!
- Well you know, most illegals are the result of visa overstays that the wall wouldn't do anything about...
- SHUT UP YOU FILTHY GLOBALIST TRAITOR

That is what a conversation on the issue of immigration is like nowadays

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 04:25 PM (5115x)

212 "Instead of protesting outside Planned Parent hood with signs, stand outside with money. Buy every little black baby that was going to be aborted. "

Yeah. That doesn't work.

I sidewalk counseled for years. My friend is a social worker. She held up a sign that read

"I'm a social worker. I can help find you:

Medical Care

Housing

Baby supplies

Education grants"

Do you know how many people stopped? 1 out of 20. Maybe.

None of whom, to my knowledge, considered placing for adoption. It's actually much easier to convince a woman to parent that to place for adoption. Usually you hear "oh I could never do that!" as theyre walking in to kill the same child.

The prolife movement isn't entirely honest about abortion minded women either. Again 1/20 may be the pressured/ scared women we talk about.

The rest know full well what they're doing. And they don't care and nothing could change their minds.

I see women driving into the clinics in BMWs. It's not the money. It's the cold, dead heart.

Still, you go out there to save that 1. And it's worth it. But it's soul crushing.

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 04:25 PM (AI/U6)

213
Buy every little black baby

Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 04:20 PM (t06LC)

Why is that a problem? Why do imagine a sign with a grotesque photo is acceptable, but money isn't? You wouldn't save a baby from abortion for the cash in your wallet? You are cruel.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 04:25 PM (aiB0J)

214 202 Frankly , in general I think the GOP is truthful on where they stand and for that exact reason it's always an uphill battle to be politically successful.
Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at August 11, 2016 04:22 PM (uYSAz)

And what exactly does the GOP stand for?

Secure borders? Fiscal responsibility? Reducing the size and scope of the bureaucracy? Defunding PP? Wiping out Obamacare and Dodd-Fagg?

Since January of 1989, the GOP has abandoned everything even remotely conservative and stands for we can be a better Uncle Sugar than the Democrats can, and we're not racists!

It is dead to me as a political party. We're on our own.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 04:25 PM (9P3OG)

215 News Flash: Trump won because people were sick of being deceived. And that isn't even close to being self-deceived.
Posted by: Mr Macca Bean

I voted for Trump in the primary, and I will vote for him in the General. I have sent him money, and I will send him more money.
He is going to lose. I know that. But it is the only way I can fight back, and to let those who will screw us know that I and others are going to keep fighting back. My name is not important, but just knowing that we are out there, and willing to put our lives and money in the breech is.
I am not quitting just because we are losing, and will probably continue to lose.
Part of life as a human being and perhaps a flawed but believing Christian is to acknowledge the long, slow defeat of everything that you think is right and true in this life. We will all pretty much end up old, weak, and feeble.
But today, I am still willing to find a way to fight back.

Posted by: Bossy Conservative....outlaw in America at August 11, 2016 04:25 PM (S6Pax)

216 Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 04:18 PM (aiB0J)

Your solution is both nauseating in it's assumptions (and push for purchasing human beings) and condescending to the many pro-life families that *have* adopted. The image of pro-life people screaming in bewildered young women's faces is a complete fabrication by PP (they just recently hired actors to do exactly that) because leftist/Statists *always* project their own psychopathy onto their opponents.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 11, 2016 04:26 PM (GDulk)

217 If you would stop blowing sunshine up his ass, he might come to the realization that a Fairy Godmother isn't going to appear and hand him a fat check because he writes so purdy.�On that day, he'll begin to think about ways to make this website pay.�And then people will fear him.�Posted by: jwest at August 11, 2016 04:15 PM (Zs4uk)

Alright. We got Hillary Clinton and the FCC around the corner, with 100 pages of new regulations ready to implement come January. We have software programmers who have worked out the details of authentication down to the last detail -- in other words, you're not getting on the 'net unless you can vouch for being an identifiable human being. Anonymous nic at Ace? Not gonna happen. They threaten us all.

I'm not trying to blow smoke, just a 'gentle (totally non-gay) hand job' to Ace. Pointing down. Cause pointing up is totally gay.

Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 04:26 PM (ZnIt3)

218 Yo!

Posted by: Yo! at August 11, 2016 04:26 PM (GwIKd)

219 Ace, one of the rhetorical problems with having a clear political philosophy -- and I think conservatism is one -- is that the goal posts never move. And one has to be quite conversant with the nuts and bolts of that philosophy to argue it clearly.

Current liberalism on the other hand is a mess of feelings and punch lines that would be difficult to support with any coherent political philosophy...so they don't! But that makes it so easy to argue using buzzwords and Twitter comments and the soft, anti-intellectual blather that makes many of us around here go nuts and have strokes.

And it works, so they do it.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at August 11, 2016 04:26 PM (Zu3d9)

220 I read the content which is why I'm in the 200's

Posted by: BacktoGA at August 11, 2016 04:26 PM (/22Vh)

221 2. What holds back McCain from voicing his opinion is not fear of conservatives, it is fear of voters and PAC's. I am not sure how to change this since we want politicians to fear voters, and controlling the money is only a bad idea. The problem is that there are two sets of money - the establishment money guided by the Construction guys, Restaurateurs, Lobbyists, big bussiness, etc. that want more cheap labor.

And there are the people who are fed up with the crime, cost, change, and corruption. I do not care if Mayor Bloomberg has to mow his own fucking lawn with a hatchet, that is not a reason to open the borders.

No, the problem with McCain is that he is an imbecile, and that he has no principals other than pro-military. Maybe the rood cause there is the 17th amendment issue.

This is just blaming the tea party for trying to influence the elections with votes and money instead of lying back and thinking of Bloomberg's lawn.

Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at August 11, 2016 04:26 PM (LWu6U)

222 Exactly. That's called splitting the baby - otherwise known as the Gang of Eight. Amnesty for the donors, enforcement gestures to the base and a few days of praise from the liberal media before they resume calling you a racist.Posted by: Crrr6 (hotair refugee) at August 11, 2016 04:23 PM (s9KBB)

So we burnt Rubio over the gang of 8 which got us Trump who will get us Hillary. Now, full amnesty and open borders with no restraints.

Lousy f-ing plan

Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 04:26 PM (eSQgj)

223 Dennis Prager always alway always tells guests he prefers clarity over agreement.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 04:26 PM (bksJQ)

224 . "you don't have to agree with me, in fact, I prefer guests who
disagree because disagreement is more clarifying for the listener.

Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 04:17 PM (JTwsP)

I think it is Prager.

He prefers, "clarity over agreement".

Posted by: Ian Galt at August 11, 2016 04:26 PM (8iiMU)

225 Those that are dishonest seem to get rewarded over and over again."

I was just having this conversation. It's a sequential thing: People who are dishonest about simply $$, typically just end up getting caught. theft, blue collar crime etc. The mistake they made was not gaining enough power first. With institutional/political power, you can cover for yourself, or just push underlings into the bus lane.
See also: "The Clinton Playbook."

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at August 11, 2016 04:26 PM (SeD0w)

226 I have definite opinions about most every issue, political, cultural, economic and moral.
I don't usually get into expressing them too much, so maybe I'm just a coward.
Or maybe it's because I've found that discussions are really just people talking past each other, not really listening to the other guy, and certainly not taking the time and effort to think about what the other guy is saying.
My opinions on lots of matters have changed over time, but never on the spur of the moment.

Social Media, and the Internet generally, does not encourage thoughtfulness, and reflection.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 04:26 PM (d6TTt)

227 >>And Planned Parenthood, we all know, was explicitly created to abort African American babies, because Margaret Sanger wanted to use eugenics in the same way Hitler did.

Wasn't it Sanger who inspired Hitler?
Seriously, thought I read he admired her work, wanted to implement her ideas with his Action T4 program....

Posted by: Lizzy at August 11, 2016 04:27 PM (NOIQH)

228 Support for Amnesty by the Vichy Republicans is now out in full force. I believe that this is a major reason why you have establishment R's denouncing Trump because of his 'temperament', 'lack of experience', 'brash!', etc. Follow the money and the political paybacks.

Posted by: Cheri at August 11, 2016 04:27 PM (oiNtH)

229 (blue collar -->WHITE collar)

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at August 11, 2016 04:27 PM (SeD0w)

230 "News Flash: Trump won because people were sick of being deceived. And that isn't even close to being self-deceived. "

Yeah and the linking of Akin to Trump is also more than dishonest. The two have nothing in common.

Akin wasn't pilloried by most on our side because of his stance on Abortion it was because of the bizarre comments about raped women won't get pregnant or something strange. He just came off as a weirdo.

And this Trump has already lost - shit is shit.

Tons of mopers and losers here.

Trump is tied with Crooked Hillary in the polls. She's spent over 50 million in advertisements and Trump has spent 0 and they are tied.

Trump will win a landslide.

Get over it.

Posted by: #NeverHillary at August 11, 2016 04:28 PM (AS1dt)

231 "They see Trump as their best chance for what they want..."

Yeah, okay. But what if what they want is stupid?

And how do you account for the fact that the #NeverTrumpers are being pilloried daily for electing Hillary when we had 15 other candidates who'd likely be beating her like a rented mule?

Why's it okay to kick the shit out of #NeverTrumpers for giving us Hillary but we have to pretend the ones who gave us the guy who's about sure to lose--and always was--pulled off some master stroke?

Posted by: spongeworthy at August 11, 2016 04:28 PM (mrfTe)

232 Buy every little black baby that was going to be aborted.

Ugh.

On the one hand, the idea that these kids would be better off raised in a loving, functional family, even if not their own, has definite merit. I've considered the idea that these six-kids-by-five-men "mothers" aren't fit to have custody.

But.

Having the state step in? Yeah, how is that not asking for disaster...

I'm not even getting into the idea of "buying" people or seeking to break up families and all the really, really nasty echoes that has.

Just leave that idea on the junkpile. Find a better way.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, down with Eph 6:12-13 at August 11, 2016 04:28 PM (9krrF)

233 "Why do imagine a sign with a grotesque photo is acceptable, but money isn't? You wouldn't save a baby from abortion for the cash in your wallet? You are cruel. "

Oh ok so you're a troll.

That's not what happens outside of clinics. At all. You're conflating protesting with sidewalk counseling.

We already offer help.

Most women tell us to fuck off.

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 04:28 PM (AI/U6)

234 The DNC media is telling LIV's that Trump is crazy to claim obama and clinton are the "founders" of ISIS.

I seem to remember them blaming Reagan for 'creating' al Qaeda.

Posted by: Mr. Peebles at August 11, 2016 04:28 PM (PjWy4)

235 227 >>And Planned Parenthood, we all know, was explicitly created to abort African American babies, because Margaret Sanger wanted to use eugenics in the same way Hitler did.

Wasn't it Sanger who inspired Hitler?
Seriously, thought I read he admired her work, wanted to implement her ideas with his Action T4 program....
Posted by: Lizzy at August 11, 2016 04:27 PM (NOIQH)

The Nazi doctors most definitely. They sang her (no pun) praises in their correspondence.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 04:28 PM (9P3OG)

236 I'm curious to see how many arrows get shot at me for this.

I am 100% for building a wall, then launching every man, woman and child over it with a catapult who is here illegally...

...then, I 100% support lifting all employment related restrictions on business. Hire whomever the fuck you want to and I could care less where they come from.

Why? Simple. No one is entitled to shit, much less a job. I don't give a fuck about "protecting American jobs". Why? Because wages should be determined by the value of what you produce,not bullshit made up DOL statistics and COLA nonsense. What you earn has absolutely no correlation with what you need to pay for the idiotic level of unfunded debt you ran up. You get paid the value of what you produce, not what your university guidance councilor said.

I've been involved with starting, owning, running, or restructuring over 2 dozen small businesses over the last 10 years. Some of them have employee people from Mexico and not all of them have been legal (not my doing... I am stuck with whatever I walk into when doing restructures).

Here's what I get from Joe American:
Me: Joe, I need you to go behind the building and clean up the pile of trash back there.
Joe: You better pay me extra. That's not in my job description. Find someone else. That's not worth my time. I'm calling my union rep. And what about my raise? How am I supposed to pay for my child support, car payment at 220% interest due to my shit credit, and my 100k in student loan debt on the shit you pay me! Don't you know I have 2 masters degrees! You want me to clean up trash? Fuck you! I quit! You'll be hearing from my attorney for violating my work rights, asshole!

Me: Hector. I need you to go clean up the trash. Joe quit.

Hector: Si. No problemo, se�or.

If Hector doesn't work there, then I clean up the trash and dozen other things I can do and others can't doesn't get done that day while Joe and Jane American sit around on Facebook bitching about how stupid their job is, what and asshole I am, and looking for bro-lawyer advice to sue me for something.

Posted by: Damiano at August 11, 2016 04:28 PM (71OEY)

237 The image of pro-life
people screaming in bewildered young women's faces is a complete
fabrication by PP (they just recently hired actors to do exactly that)
because leftist/Statists *always* project their own psychopathy onto
their opponents.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 11, 2016 04:26 PM (GDulk)

It is and it isn't a fabrication. I've seen the protesters outside PP, since there is one close to my place of employment. They are there, but being conservative, they are generally too nice to get in their face. That's a progressive projection. Now instead of signs try money, if you're really serious.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 04:28 PM (aiB0J)

238 So we burnt Rubio over the gang of 8 which got us Trump who will get us Hillary. Now, full amnesty and open borders with no restraints.

Lousy f-ing plan

Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 04:26 PM (eSQgj)

But you would have gotten that with Rubio. With republican support.

Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 04:28 PM (t06LC)

239 Good read.

But 90% of the country has zero interest in debating the merits of any policy on philosophical grounds.

It is much easier to use tribal affiliation to determine what position you are "supposed" to hold -- but I don't think most people are Yeah-Yeah'ing through that, I think they are embracing most of their tribe's beliefs because it is a shortcut that allows them to spend less time thinking. As soon as the tribe adopts them they'll start parroting them, and then rationalize the arguments later if they aren't handed to them in a Facebook meme. The only beliefs that people are Yeah-Yeah'ing are the ones where there is a huge and *personal* cognitive dissonance. Maybe you know somebody who had an abortion and some part of you knows it's not that clear cut a decision, or you work in a business field that employs illegal aliens or relies on their labor and it could affect your own income, or you say all the progressive things about transgenders but get squeamish about sending your own daughter to the woods with the MTF transsexual leading the Girl Scout troop.

But unless tribal orthodoxy is about to personally slap you or your bottom line in the face, it is simply MUCH easier to unthinkingly adopt it and get back to keeping up with those Kardashians than it is to think about what you believe and why. Calling the alternative position "evil" is even better if your goal is intellectual laziness. And that is the goal for 90% of us. Until they cross the line into our personal fortunes, our politics and beliefs are there primarily to enhance our self-esteem and give us a sense of belonging, and little more.

Posted by: cjw at August 11, 2016 04:28 PM (onydf)

240 This was an incredible post Ace.

It dovetails with your observation that we are being divided as a country into two factions. The faction where the rule of law applies and the faction where the rule of law does not apply.

Posted by: Cactus of Liberty at August 11, 2016 04:28 PM (p6cXT)

241
[ X] more snark please

Posted by: Yo! at August 11, 2016 04:29 PM (GwIKd)

242 I thought Ace left the GOP ?

Posted by: ting hung lo at August 11, 2016 04:29 PM (xZc4z)

243 Re: #93

The socons said they were fully prepared to lose
over and over again, total losses, disastrous losses, wipeout losses,
so long as the losses were firm demonstrations of unvarying moral
principle.

Control of the party got wrested back after Lungren
was destroyed at the polls, and the CA GOP started to run serious
abortion squishes like Whitman and Fiorina instead, but the damage was
long-term and irreversible. A shit-ton of otherwise persuadable soccer
moms concluded that Republicans were the party of theocratic fanaticism
and switched their registration to Democratic, where they have stayed.

Posted by: torquewrench at August 11, 2016 03:55 PM (noWW6)
///
With most of my family from CA and having lived here all but 4 years since 1985, that is spot on. Lungren flat-out turned the CA GOP into the Washington Generals. The CA GOP is essentially useless. I practice property rights law in S.F. (i.e., the Ellis Act). You know how S.F. property owners protect property rights in S.F.? They lobby *Dems* from formerly Republican areas (and campaign contributions don't hurt). Prop owners don't lobby Republicans; there's no point anymore.

Posted by: SFGoth at August 11, 2016 04:29 PM (dZ756)

244 What proof is there that any of the other 15 supposedly better candidates would be doing better?

Posted by: steevy at August 11, 2016 04:29 PM (fA75F)

245 The dialog Ace is talking used to actually happen -- when the candidates were picked at the convention by party members. It was a far better system. Informed party members from all 50 states would get together and fight it out and find a compromise candidate. Obviously (I think), for instance, an open borders candidate would have no broad support.

Now all the power party is centered in DC, obviously. Didn't use to be the case. It was distributed.

The primary system is a disaster. Forget about Trump -- we had John McCain and Mike Huckabee (!) fighting it out in 2008. Disaster.

How about this: each state has elections for the delegates, and then the delegates go to the convention, damn near bludgeon each other to death, but arrive at a compromise candidate.

Posted by: Maxwell at August 11, 2016 04:29 PM (n6tqt)

246 Wasn't it Sanger who inspired Hitler?

I think they were both "informed" by eugenics. Darwin's "Origin of Species" has a strong socio/bio engineering conclusion to it as well, IIRC.

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at August 11, 2016 04:30 PM (SeD0w)

247 Okay, let's make it better. "Subsidize the adoption process of and provide material support for the mother of" every little black baby.

Add in "remove the ridiculous barriers to adoption of black children by non-black families" and you're somewhere good.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, down with Eph 6:12-13 at August 11, 2016 04:30 PM (9krrF)

248
I understand the underlying thought behind the grotesque statement of "buying black babies."

In essence, the Moron is saying "save black babies" from the fate consigned them by the Democrat Socialists since 1965.

That said, it would be better to wipe out the last vestiges of The Great Society/War on Poverty, reclaim academia and the media and stop the genocide of one more generation of American blacks.

That is a battle worth fighting. Publicly, loudly and proudly.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 04:31 PM (9P3OG)

249 I like the idea that abortion doctors actually be skilled in ob/gyn surgery. There are legitimate health reasons to teach this skill, even for pro lifers (for instance, the baby might have died already but the uterus hasn't expelled it). I think the Scandinavians have this as law in fact. Posted by: Boulder terlit hobo at August 11, 2016 03:40 PM (GOL7u)

A friend of mine is dating a guy that lost his first wife in a miscarriage. Wife went septic after the miscarriage and did not realize until was too late her body was basically poisoning her to death. Died shortly after it was finally diagnosed.

The problem is modern medicine deceives us into thinking we are invincible beings. In the colonial era the number one killer of women was having a baby. Now we can schedule deliveries and abortions like they are as simple as getting our teeth cleaned. The creating and killing of new life has little respect in our modern society, to our detriment.

I supported the Texas law, and still do, because the Kermit Gosnells of the abortion world are out there and need to be kept in check. But also, because you simply never know what will happen. I completely understand why people saw the law as using that as a pretense to shutter clinics, like Ace does. There are arguments to be made for that. But that does not mean there were not sound, medical reasons for the law to be created.

Posted by: LizLem at August 11, 2016 04:31 PM (hvf9s)

250 Still, you go out there to save that 1. And it's worth it. But it's soul crushing.
Posted by: Lauren

God bless you lady. You have the heart of a lion. You are truly God's good servant here on Earth.

He knows His own.

There are so many things in this life that are soul-crushing, but what you and others do reminds me that not everyone walks in darkness.

Posted by: Bossy Conservative....outlaw in America at August 11, 2016 04:31 PM (S6Pax)

251 "Okay, let's make it better. "Subsidize the adoption process of and provide material support for the mother of" every little black baby.
"

We already fucking do that.

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 04:31 PM (AI/U6)

252 Still, you go out there to save that 1. And it's worth it. But it's soul crushing.

Posted by: Lauren

That is why I would love to see a law passed that women considering abortion must see a sonogram first to make an informed decision. This has been brought up before and PP and politicians fight this tooth and nail. When a woman sees a sonogram of the child she may abort, it changes a lot of minds.

I doubt that it will ever happen.

Posted by: Cheri at August 11, 2016 04:32 PM (oiNtH)

253 Excellent. Well done, sir.

Less a movie review than a editorial that should be submitted to NRO. Maybe they will take it to heart and do some soul searching.

It may come back with "Rejected, You Poopiehead" in red crayon but you did due diligence.

Posted by: Headless Body of Agnew at August 11, 2016 04:32 PM (FtrY1)

254
Posted by: Damiano at August 11, 2016 04:28 PM (71OEY)
For what it's worth, I think your plan is sensible. I cannot say I agree with it fulsomely but I think it has merit. I do think there should be some privilege of citizenship when it comes to being first in line for seeking employment for a domestic job. But I also do not think that employers should be explicitly mandated to hire domestic workers.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 04:32 PM (5115x)

255 246 Wasn't it Sanger who inspired Hitler?

I think they were both "informed" by eugenics. Darwin's "Origin of Species" has a strong socio/bio engineering conclusion to it as well, IIRC.
Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at August 11, 2016 04:30 PM (SeD0w)

I think it was a relative of Darwin who said that eugenics was a complete bastardization of what Darwin believed. Nothing at all to do with his theory of evolution, but that it was hijacked for nefarious purposes.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 04:32 PM (9P3OG)

256 The reigning logic bouncing around the internet is to elect Hillary,
then impeach her, figuring President Kaine shouldn't be so bad. There
isn't even the prospect of enough to do the same with Trump.

Posted by: Islamic Rage Boy at August 11, 2016 04:32 PM (e8kgV)

257 Okay, let's make it better. "Subsidize the
adoption process of and provide material support for the mother of"
every little black baby.

Add in "remove the ridiculous barriers to adoption of black children by non-black families" and you're somewhere good.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, down with Eph 6:12-13 at August 11, 2016 04:30 PM (9krrF)

Who said anything about subsidy. You're money. A privately funded charity.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 04:32 PM (aiB0J)

258 Having followed Trump since around 1985, I still can't believe he is the GOP nominee. I don't think the people who voted for him are dumb in the slightest but I do believe they made a conscious choice to ignore every warning sign and negative that was right in front of them in the hopes that what he's selling now is the real deal.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at August 11, 2016 04:33 PM (uYSAz)

259 >>>They don't need 65 million voters because they have $650 billion DOLLARS.

They can buy whatever legislation they need to keep them in the black while swearing fealty to the fascists who will then regulate any and all competition out of existence. This is what the insurance industry did with Obama. "Ooh, you're going to guarantee us hundreds of millions of customers? We're on board!"

Again, the GOP is merely a wing of the Democrats. They are there to run interference and insure that constitutional conservative candidates are crushed, even if they are nominated.

QED.
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 04:16 PM (9P3OG)

Then why do some of them run with an R if they can run as a D with no political downside? Why get caught between your voters and donors when you can have both?

Come on. I'm as cynical as they come, but this isn't any more complicated than the conservative minded beltway class getting corrupted by corporate cronies and bullied into submission by the media industrial complex.

QED, indeed.

Posted by: Crrr6 (hotair refugee) at August 11, 2016 04:33 PM (s9KBB)

260 And how do you account for the fact that the #NeverTrumpers are being pilloried daily for electing Hillary when we had 15 other candidates who'd likely be beating her like a rented mule?

Because he's the nominee.

Getting stuck in the past and desiring above all else to punish the Trumpsters instead of DEFEATING Hillary is why the #nevertrump has soured everyone. The part where bashing the Trumpsters is past. It helps us not at all, in fact it harms the fight against Hillary.

I have much more animus against the progs than the deluded Trumpkins.

One is evil, one is dumb. I'll take dumb over evil anytime.

Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 04:33 PM (eSQgj)

261 What proof is there that any of the other 15 supposedly better candidates would be doing better?
Posted by: steevy at August 11, 2016 04:29 PM (fA75F)

Who knows steevy? The guy I really wanted got eliminated early, hardly got going, so the whole process for me was "settling" anyway. My guy was critiqued and found wanting by lots of Conservatives.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 04:33 PM (d6TTt)

262
Posted by: cjw at August 11, 2016 04:28 PM (onydf)
There is so much truth in your statement, it is sad.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 04:34 PM (5115x)

263 246 Wasn't it Sanger who inspired Hitler?

Darwin had nature so the selection, Sanger and Hilter would have man do the selecting.

Posted by: Islamic Rage Boy at August 11, 2016 04:34 PM (e8kgV)

264 "You're money. A privately funded charity. "

Which already fucking exist. And have for 40 years.

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 04:34 PM (AI/U6)

265 What proof is there that any of the other 15 supposedly better candidates would be doing better?
...
I've got binders full of polls that prove it!!!!

Posted by: Mitromneee at August 11, 2016 04:35 PM (1H9ox)

266 The people come first. We have a beautiful example with Simpson Mizzoli, amnesty with no border security, and we absolutely refuse.
This is what the NeverTrumpers want and they don't have the courage to say so they tell the country they have higher morals an principles.
Posted by: flowerbelle at August 11, 2016 03:46 PM (KZdWP)

And that they are not h8ters like the folks who want border security. To me, with ISIS running amok, secure borders only make sense, but, then I am not a multi-billion dollar chicken bidness that needs illegal labor for my slaughering and processing of chickens.

Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes Ima going long on popcorn and butter futures!! at August 11, 2016 04:35 PM (kXoT0)

267 Posted by: Damiano at August 11, 2016 04:28 PM (71OEY)

Works for me.

I don't give a shit who you hire, what you pay them, or what kind of job security you provide.

As long as they have obeyed our immigrations laws and are here legally? It's not my business.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at August 11, 2016 04:35 PM (Zu3d9)

268 Who knows steevy? The guy I really wanted got eliminated early, hardly got going, so the whole process for me was "settling" anyway. My guy was critiqued and found wanting by lots of Conservatives.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 04:33 PM (d6TTt)

Walker?

Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 04:36 PM (t06LC)

269 but I do believe they made a conscious choice to ignore every warning
sign and negative that was right in front of them in the hopes that what
he's selling now is the real deal.

ding ding ding

A great many of them want a savior and they are willing to overlook the savior's faults if it means that they think they really will be saved. This can be seen by the actions of Donald that they excuse, that they would never excuse of Hillary, or even of Jeb!.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 04:36 PM (5115x)

270 256
The reigning logic bouncing around the internet is to elect Hillary,

then impeach her, figuring President Kaine shouldn't be so bad. There

isn't even the prospect of enough to do the same with Trump.

Posted by: Islamic Rage Boy at August 11, 2016 04:32 PM (e8kgV)

I think the Haggard Queen has a high probability of croaking. I think these rumors of her being ill are credible.

Posted by: Ian Galt at August 11, 2016 04:36 PM (8iiMU)

271 I explained the 2nd Amendment to my 13 year old this afternoon.

He was visibly uncomfortable.

Heh.

Posted by: Mr. Peebles at August 11, 2016 04:36 PM (PjWy4)

272 Also, there really isn't a republican party. Its a uniparty with a choregraphed dance for the rubes.

Meanwhile, they dilute the ability of middle class to influence politics and policy, until there is no real middle class. Just those to whom the government listens and responds (1%) and those whom depend on the government and are not in position to make waves (everybody else by 2020).

Road to Serfdom - we've been on it since 1960s and the off ramp is in sight. (Are we there yet Dad?!!!)

Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 04:36 PM (JTwsP)

273 One thing your missive missed Ace - and that is to force the result you want, an order free society, you first have to have a majority party. GOPe is not that party. In the words of Jonah Goldberg, it is a well funded narrow lane of the GOP. It hated Reagan and now deifies him, but never practiced Reaganism. Trump has taken the first steps to creating a majority party by listening and acting on what the base and Independents were literally screaming about. Build a real majority party (not one based on unforced Dem errors) and Manhattan Media will tread softly.

Posted by: Puddin Head at August 11, 2016 04:36 PM (oDCMR)

274 LOL, before I read this book let me just give my opinion on the amnesty BS in general. The RNCe tells us we must do this to win over the hispanic vote. That is absolute BS and they know it. They are doing it for two major blocks. They want amnesty and open borders which insures even more amnesty for one major reason.

Just like the previous rounds of open borders and amnesty they want it for their real constituency, big business, including big farm. You can even look back to the first big influx in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Wages took a huge nosedive after those mass migrations from Europe. That is what they want now, even as wages are already low due to Obamaconamy.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 04:37 PM (mpXpK)

275 16 people ran for the Republican Nomination ( or there abouts)
1 was a conservative that no one seemed to like personally?
1 was DR?

13 were Establishment Republicans who split the vote and allowed Trump to pretty much go wire to wire.

And it was the Trump Voters that are at fault?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at August 11, 2016 04:37 PM (zp+j1)

276
Which already fucking exist. And have for 40 years.

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 04:34 PM (AI/U6)

so there is a charity that stands at the door to every PP offering money and support through the pregnancy if the girl will give up the baby for adoption? I haven't heard of that group, but it might exist.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 04:37 PM (aiB0J)

277
A great many of them want a savior and they are willing to overlook the savior's faults if it means that they think they really will be saved. This can be seen by the actions of Donald that they excuse, that they would never excuse of Hillary, or even of Jeb!.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 04:36 PM (5115x)

Maybe. I didn't vote for him, but at some point you gotta fight with the army you have, not the one you want.

Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 04:37 PM (t06LC)

278 "And how do you account for the fact that the #NeverTrumpers are being pilloried daily for electing Hillary when we had 15 other candidates who'd likely be beating her like a rented mule? "

Don't you guys ever get tired of this lie? If they were so good why didn't they win the nomination?

It's like fans of a team that never even made it to the playoffs fantasizing about how their team would winning the Super Bowl right now.

Posted by: #NeverHillary at August 11, 2016 04:37 PM (AS1dt)

279 Crap. This looks quite an opus, Ace. I wish I wasn't busy so I could read it and comment and read comments. From what I skimmed through, I think I probably agree with you fully. At least, I have some good reading to look forward to later on my downtime.

You should take the rest of the day off. Thank you for writing for us and sharing your blog with us.

Posted by: L, Elle at August 11, 2016 04:37 PM (6IPEM)

280 >>That is why I would love to see a law passed that women considering abortion must see a sonogram first to make an informed decision. This has been brought up before and PP and politicians fight this tooth and nail. When a woman sees a sonogram of the child she may abort, it changes a lot of minds.
I doubt that it will ever happen.
Posted by: Cheri at August 11, 2016 04:32 PM (oiNtH)

I feel like if anything kills abortion, it will be this. Not necessarily showing all women before an abortion, because you're right that gets fought because of reasons.

Better to show kids in health class. What a baby looks like at different stages of development. Tie it in with sex ed. It makes sense anyway.

Posted by: Lea at August 11, 2016 04:38 PM (lIU4e)

281 Walker?
Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 04:36 PM (t06LC)

Nah, although he was choice #2. My guy was Bobby Jindal, but he was just unacceptable it seems. He got away from Thunderdome.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 04:38 PM (d6TTt)

282 Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 04:32 PM (aiB0J)

There are many such all over the nation. Rules by government officials against adopting outside of racial boundaries are a major part of the problem so your solution won't work until either the black community steps up or admits that (as a whole) they never will. Not everything in the world is controlled by white conservatives (and I kind of wonder about your apparent assumption that it is).

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 11, 2016 04:38 PM (GDulk)

283 Posted by: Lauren
-------------------
God bless you lady. You have the heart of a lion. You are truly God's good servant here on Earth.

He knows His own.

There are so many things in this life that are soul-crushing, but what you and others do reminds me that not everyone walks in darkness.
Posted by: Bossy Conservative....outlaw in America
-------------------

^ I'll second that. ^
Very well stated.

Posted by: Chi at August 11, 2016 04:38 PM (o4KXN)

284 Thing of it is, I don't even think the GOP-e wants to have any debate/discussion with the base because we are no longer their base.
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at August 11, 2016 03:52 PM (9P3OG)

This is the key point. It's true for the Dems, too. The true believers are Bernie Bros, and they got tossed aside for Hillary and her gov't-financial-industrial complex.

We have outsourced our destinies to the professional politicians, whose #1 goal of getting reelected necessitates that they deceive at least some of us.

Until the people decide that they want to exercise their power and take control of their government, nothing will changed.

A convention of the states might be a good place to start.

Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at August 11, 2016 04:39 PM (laMCB)

285 "But I actually was not in favor of demanding that abortion clinics' doctors have surgical privileges at nearby hospitals."

I thought it was admitting privileges, not surgical privileges. I think there's a difference.

Posted by: Gungrabby McGrabberson at August 11, 2016 04:39 PM (2X7pN)

286 3. I a pro-life. 100%. I think abortion is murder. After seeing enough kids born and develop, I do not see how anyone can say otherwise. the LBGASDF lobby agrees - we are "born that way," and it happens at conceptions. Science tells us that.

My complication is that I think there is a transition where at some point it is 100% up to the mother. Parents are responsible for their children, and before the gov. steps in there has to be a compelling reason. There also has to be practical considerations. It is not practical for the gov. to monitor pregnant women. So I say at 12 weeks or so the mother has had enough chance to "fall down the stairs," or accidentally take too many of those pills, and the gov. has to start protecting the baby.

But this is a complicated position. It involves a philosophical understanding of the meaning and purpose of law, It requires an admission that while I think abortion is murder, I think mothers have a limited right to murder their babies (!), It requires rejection of the religious laws, and the libertine opinions, and the medical lobby, and the all the fucking absolutists among us. Most people are absolutists in one way or another - it is an easy way to think.

Standing at the opponents end zone and saying your goal is the other end of the field is OK. Worry about stopping at the 5 or 10 yard line when you get there.

Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at August 11, 2016 04:39 PM (LWu6U)

287 I can have an argument with a liberal and not have it become heated so long as neither stoops to making it personal and simply calling the other guy an asshole.

With all due respect, there was a time when this made sense. Unfortunately, those days have passed.

Back in that time, we were all in rough agreement on the direction the nation should go. Not any more.

Left and Right have two separate views of national direction that are completely incompatible with each other. The Left is destroying the America we know and love. Period.

Plus, they've been calling us names, waging war against us on the Right and treating us like shit for forever now. I'm totally ok now with swearing at them, mocking them, humiliating them, whatever.

Whatever it takes to get them to crawl back into whatever liberal shithole they crawled out of. I just don't care anymore. They are dead to me.

Posted by: Country Boy at August 11, 2016 04:39 PM (QTy02)

288 But you would have gotten that with Rubio. With republican support.Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 04:28 PM (t06LC)

I know that's what the heresy hunters like to think. Trying to stop the executive orders by making a "deal" is not allowing fully open borders, full amnesty, and immediate citizenship plus importation of millions of "syrians." But hey, apparently Hillary is somehow a better choice on amnesty?

I'm not going to get into an argument about who is a better person Marco Rubio or Hillary Clinton. I think the answer to that is pretty obvious.

Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 04:39 PM (eSQgj)

289 The parties are like Coke and Pepsi.

Both parties co-exist. Neither tries to eliminate the other.

But both exist to make sure 7-Up doesn't get more than 5% market share.

Posted by: Mr. Peebles at August 11, 2016 04:39 PM (PjWy4)

290 Crush your enemies. See them driven before you. Hear the lamentations of their women.

Posted by: Donan the Trumparian at August 11, 2016 04:40 PM (1H9ox)

291 Darwin's "Origin of Species" has a strong socio/bio engineering conclusion to it as well, IIRC.

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at August 11, 2016 04:30 PM (SeD0w)

Not the one I read. He expressed a strong religious attitude, but that's pretty much it.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at August 11, 2016 04:40 PM (Zu3d9)

292 Ace

What proof do you have that the establishment has been against the wall?

I seem to recall the Senate wrote a bill that said the wall had to be built, but there was a 10 year path to legalization in it, so you advocated for the House to never pick it up, which they did so.

That was the only type of bill that had a hope to pass a Democrat President. Are you saying that the Establishment does not want to build a wall based on the evidence from 2006, over a decade ago?

Posted by: Stone at August 11, 2016 04:40 PM (qRV1m)

293 C'mon, people, there is a guaranteed lock-solid way to absolutely END the abortion debate forever by simply engaging the following bit of street theater.

This would take some real dedicated socially conservative protesters, willing to sacrifice their names and reputations, to make it work -- but the left has thousands of such people at any given moment willing to "take one for the team." The right's problem is that no one really has the balls, or the brains, to really devote themselves to this. So it's their own fault.

But anyway, in case any social conservatives are interested, here is how you could achieve total victory on the abortion issue in a very short amount of time:

Get together at least 100 (but more is better) anti-abortion activists for a training session.

Divide them into two groups:

One group will train to act as "normal" conservative Christian anti-abortion protesters. But with one twist: They will practice being as aggressive and assholish as possible. Get good at being in-your-face jerks. And learn how to make poor arguments.

The other group will train to be pro-abortion activists. But with the most breathtaking twist ever: They will pose as White Supremacists who are out there defending the abortion clinic from the Christians!

The faux White Supremacists will all hold up signs with quotes from Margaret Sanger and other early 20th-century progressive eugenicists stating that we need legal abortion to lessen the black population.

The White Supremacists need to be even more aggressive, bordering on violent, than the Christians.

And have the White Supremacist team train to make really really good and cogent pro-abortion arguments, but tinged with insane racist justifications sprinkled in.

Notify the media ahead of time.

Film the shit out of the confrontations. Let it get out of control.

Repeat this at Planned Parenthoods all over the country.

Remember, the people on Team White Supremacist will have their lives and their reputations ruined forever. So this really takes dedication. While is why no one will ever do it, because they are pussies who don't really believe in their cause.

The whole point is that the actions will tar, successfully and truthfully, the pro-abortion side with the "racism" label, from which they will not be able to escape.

Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 04:40 PM (jBuUi)

294 A great many of them want a savior and they are
willing to overlook the savior's faults if it means that they think they
really will be saved. This can be seen by the actions of Donald that
they excuse, that they would never excuse of Hillary, or even of Jeb!.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 04:36 PM (5115x)
Or it could mean that you failed to offer an alternative that was believable regarding their primary issue, and since there was no alternative what was there to lose? You keep overlooking that point. Perhaps it's because you were satisfied with the field, but failed to see where the Trumpkins might not be, and it appears you still have that set of blinders on.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 04:40 PM (aiB0J)

295 @281

Jindal is a good guy, I just don't know he was ready for the big show. VP, sure. Really wonky.

In a perverse way I wish Mittens was the nominee this year.

Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 04:40 PM (t06LC)

296 Social Media, and the Internet generally, does not encourage thoughtfulness, and reflection.
Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 04:26 PM

And in this corner, weighing in at 5,732 words plus, the AoSHQ Book Thrrrrreeeeeeeeeead!!!

It must be because of the pants requirement. And OregonMuse and all the contributors. But mostly the pants.

Therefore, let us require all Social Media and Internet users to wear pants.

Posted by: Duncanthrax at August 11, 2016 04:40 PM (zzUT1)

297 "there is a charity that stands at the door to every PP offering money and support through the pregnancy if the girl will give up the baby for adoption? I haven't heard of that group, but it might exist. "

Not explicitly for adoption but for continuing the pregnancy. Yes

Sidewalk Advocates for Life

Carenet

Every crisis pregnancy center (counselors go out to PP and refer to the centers)

Every maternity home

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 04:40 PM (AI/U6)

298 As for eugenics and Planned Non-Parenthood, every time there is a pro-life article on Facebook, a little article by snopes.com pops up to say that Margaret Sanger was not a eugenicist and that she did not want black babies killed.

Propaganda, how do it work.

Hey, all you Black Americans worried about reparations for slavery you never experienced, how come you are OK with Black babies being chopped up and sold for profit. If that doesn't make the Mother a slave and the baby a cash crop, then what does?

Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes Ima going long on popcorn and butter futures!! at August 11, 2016 04:41 PM (kXoT0)

299 >>>>So we burnt Rubio over the gang of 8 which got us Trump who will get us Hillary. Now, full amnesty and open borders with no restraints.

Lousy f-ing plan
Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 04:26 PM (eSQgj)

Got news for ya, mate: unless we get immigration under control (ie, halted), Rubio would be the last Republican president you'd see until the party started nominating Mark Kirks and Dede Scozzafavas. Is that what you want? There's a reason Republicans don't win statewide in California anymore. I'm interested in winning more than one election.

Posted by: Crrr6 (hotair refugee) at August 11, 2016 04:41 PM (s9KBB)

300 >>"You're money. A privately funded charity. "
Which already fucking exist. And have for 40 years.
Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 04:34 PM (AI/U6)

Nobody wants to hear it. Adoption and support for mothers has been a part of the pro life movement always.

That's not the missing piece that's lacking for people like my friend told me about in college who had I think three abortions? She had money. She obviously could have figured out birth control if she cared to. This was easier.

Posted by: Lea at August 11, 2016 04:41 PM (lIU4e)

301 219 Ace, one of the rhetorical problems with having a clear political philosophy -- and I think conservatism is one -- is that the goal posts never move. And one has to be quite conversant with the nuts and bolts of that philosophy to argue it clearly.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at August 11, 2016 04:26 PM (Zu3d9)

Conservatism is harder to articulate and less sexy than liberalism because it is a synthesis. It is existent valuations and arrangements. Reagan and Thatcher did well because they spent decades thinking about what they believed had value and how to articulate this value. This is what was missing from the recent Republican primary season.

Posted by: Caliban at August 11, 2016 04:41 PM (DrC22)

302 All I got from this is that Ace is in favor of murdering rape babies, as is apparently a majority of "my" party.

Posted by: Thresher at August 11, 2016 04:42 PM (3ygzd)

303 While is why = Which is why

Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 04:42 PM (jBuUi)

304 Posted by: Gungrabby McGrabberson at August 11, 2016 04:39 PM (2X7pN)

There is. Big difference.

However, even though I won't get into the abortion debate at the risk of my calling people names really quickly off the bat, that is the one thing that may have been too far. If a woman is bleeding out, sepsis, etc., the ER doctor can admit her or the hospitalist as necessary.

Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 04:42 PM (eSQgj)

305 Trump has taken the first steps to creating a majority party by listening and acting on what the base and Independents were literally screaming about. Build a real majority party (not one based on unforced Dem errors) and Manhattan Media will tread softly.
Posted by: Puddin Head

This is a fundamental ground-based truth. All the talk about "TruCons" is so much eye-wash. Conservatism as a political movement is DEAD. Someday, something like it may be revived, but until then we have either the Globalists who would profit by selling us all into serfdom, or the Nationalists, who still believe in something of American Exceptionalism.

Posted by: Bossy Conservative....outlaw in America at August 11, 2016 04:42 PM (S6Pax)

306 287
I can have an argument with a liberal and not have it become heated so
long as neither stoops to making it personal and simply calling the
other guy an asshole.

With all due respect, there was a time when this made sense. Unfortunately, those days have passed.

Back in that time, we were all in rough agreement on the direction the nation should go. Not any more.

Left and Right have two separate views of national direction that
are completely incompatible with each other. The Left is destroying the
America we know and love. Period.

Plus, they've been calling us names, waging war against us on the
Right and treating us like shit for forever now. I'm totally ok now with
swearing at them, mocking them, humiliating them, whatever.

Whatever it takes to get them to crawl back into whatever liberal
shithole they crawled out of. I just don't care anymore. They are dead
to me.

Posted by: Country Boy at August 11, 2016 04:39 PM (QTy02)

As much as I agree with what Ace and a lot of other posters have said, this is also my general view as well.Somewhat fueled by the fact that only through humor, humiliation and memes will we (and our ideals) be able to reach the younger generations.

Posted by: What's a Seawolf? at August 11, 2016 04:42 PM (cPMmb)

307 "Remember, the people on Team White Supremacist will have their lives and their reputations ruined forever. So this really takes dedication. While is why no one will ever do it, because they are pussies who don't really believe in their cause. "

Project Veritas already did that. They called PP asking of their money could go to abort black babies. PP happily agreed.

*crickets*

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 04:43 PM (AI/U6)

308 The thing is these asshole republicans / conservatives have no idea how bad it will get with a left wing Supreme Court.

Just on environmental laws, by this next year we will have a Cape and Trade system and don't be surprised if they ban fracking or use of coal because " Climate Change " culture healthcare as a right , Obamacare is sinking they will use that as excuse to nationalize healthcare. The left has a hard on for banning guns ... and they can not wait to take that on. Citizenship, look how the 4 left judges voted for Obama's amnesty, even though it allowed the illegals to collect social security. Citizenship will be meanless, except for taxation, which will increase across the board.

God people have no idea how much the country will change once the left wing culture has all the controls for the laws that govern us. There will be no more " oh that's just in California" we will all have to life under California laws .

Posted by: Sam at August 11, 2016 04:43 PM (nRWWi)

309 4. To change the wall paper in my bathroom in CA, I have to hire three engineers, an architect firm, get permits, and pay an inspector to sit in his car listening to the ball game all day.

Down the street there is a family of illegals that shit behind the dumpster in the Rite-Aid across the street because their garage does not have a toilet.

Fuck the abortion clinics. If my hairdresser needs a licence and 25 hours of CE every year, then these assholes need surgical privileges. I am sick of the preferred class being protected from the regulatory state.

Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at August 11, 2016 04:43 PM (LWu6U)

310 286 Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at August 11, 2016 04:39 PM (LWu6U)

^^ THIS. Very well said!

Posted by: Ian Galt at August 11, 2016 04:43 PM (8iiMU)

311 I explained the 2nd Amendment to my 13 year old this afternoon.

He was visibly uncomfortable.

Heh.
...
Oh my god!!! Why would you assasinate your 13 year old??!?!?!

Posted by: ajmojo at August 11, 2016 04:43 PM (1H9ox)

312 Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 04:32 PM (5115x)

I completely agree. Heck, it's common sense.

Simple example: I have a building with trash behind it. The trash needs to be removed. I can:
1) stop running my business for the day and do it, losing 100% of whatever I produce that day, or
2) hire someone to do it:
2a) who lives down the street, or
2b) hire someone from another country and wait for his/ her boat to arrive

The question is cost. If the guy/gal down the street is demanding a full time job that pays a living wage sufficient to support his/ her 6 illegitimate kids, full benefits, union membership, full funded retirement, COLA adjustments, free child care, paid vacation, sick time, PTO, and comp time and is going to show up late, not to the work, quit, then look for reasons to sue me... I am going to do it myself or wait for the boat, depending on the cost involved with waiting.

People are-correctly- upset with the exponential rise in costs of living. I agree. The solution is not driving up wages artificially. If my building with the trash behind it is an apartment complex... guess who will pay for all the cost I listed above if I am legally prevented from getting the trash removed for a reasonable price?

Posted by: Damiano at August 11, 2016 04:44 PM (71OEY)

313 There are many such all over the nation. Rules by
government officials against adopting outside of racial boundaries are a
major part of the problem so your solution won't work until either the
black community steps up or admits that (as a whole) they never will.
Not everything in the world is controlled by white conservatives (and I
kind of wonder about your apparent assumption that it is).

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 11, 2016 04:38 PM (GDulk)

There would of course be court cases, and you might lose, but are you an Americant or an American?

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 04:44 PM (aiB0J)

314 Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 04:38 PM (d6TTt)

I feel the same way. Trump was at the bottom of my "not never" list but everyone else I was willing to vote for (5 people) all dropped out. They quit, so I will vote for the guy that was at least on my list.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 11, 2016 04:44 PM (GDulk)

315 But, of course, they're not so committed to those things. Oh, as a
general rule, they favor them but they're very quick to sell them out
in favor of some other priority, which they won't admit is a greater
priority, because they're pretending their highest priority is reducing
spending, reducing government, and increasing individual freedom.

Their real priority and constituency is big buisness, which includes big farm, which is why they want open borders and amnesty even though it will kill them as a Party.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 04:44 PM (mpXpK)

316
I'm not going to get into an argument about who is a better person Marco Rubio or Hillary Clinton. I think the answer to that is pretty obvious.

Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 04:39 PM (eSQgj)

No doubt, but Marco's "deal" would have stopped the illegal and illegitimate executive orders (which could be challenged politically and in court) by giving the democrats, and coincidentally Marco, what they wanted (ie amnesty) while blessing the entire process with legitimacy. So. Fuck that. So to speak. Better off leaving Pen and Phone do his illegal crap.

Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 04:44 PM (t06LC)

317
Nah, although he was choice #2. My guy was Bobby Jindal, but he was just unacceptable it seems. He got away from Thunderdome.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 04:38 PM (d6TTt)

Jindal's big problem is that he is literally a pencil-necked geek.

He just doesn't have the look of a leader.

I'd say both he and Cruz (tends toward tubby soft boy looks)-

need to spend the next 4 years hitting the gym hard to get a sort of visual alpha thing going.

There's a reason the Dims tout every single one of their male Prez candidates as the sexiest guy evah!!!.

Posted by: naturalfake at August 11, 2016 04:44 PM (0cMkb)

318 >>>I think conservatism is one -- is that the goal posts never move

You wanted a state ban on SSM.
You'd have settled for national DOMA.
You'll be lucky if you escape the impending forced sodomy.

Posted by: wooga at August 11, 2016 04:44 PM (sktuO)

319 298 As for eugenics and Planned Non-Parenthood, every time there is a pro-life article on Facebook, a little article by snopes.com pops up to say that Margaret Sanger was not a eugenicist and that she did not want black babies killed.

Propaganda, how do it work.

Posted by: Sherry McEvil

Ahem:

http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=1953

Margaret Sanger quotes about race and eugenics

Game over.

Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 04:44 PM (jBuUi)

320 >>In a perverse way I wish Mittens was the nominee this year.

ORCA II - Binders Filled with Boogaloo!

Posted by: garrett at August 11, 2016 04:45 PM (c1srJ)

321 In a perverse way I wish Mittens was the nominee this year.
Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 04:40 PM (t06LC)

Yeah, I was hoping at least for an adult. Someone like Clint Eastwood who commands enough cultural respect to cut through the BS.

Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at August 11, 2016 04:45 PM (laMCB)

322 Ace,

In reference to your enjoying the actual debating of issues and discussing them like adults, I would love to hear you do an interview with Judge Andrew Napolitano. The man loves to argue using the Natural Law and other philosophical stuff, I think it would be great. Also, I should mention how much I miss THE Podcast; I miss it a lot.

James G

Posted by: jamesg042 at August 11, 2016 04:45 PM (qZFcu)

323 216 Your solution is both nauseating in it's assumptions (and push for purchasing human beings)

Posted by: Polliwog

Nauseating. A loaded word.

Let's take a different topic, the shortage of human organs for transplants. Now, science may one day solve this problem by growing them in the lab, but there is a known solution to the shortage today -- Allow people to sell their organs for profit. Hoping for altruism is never gonna fill the hole. Profit motive will. The same holds true for blood shortages.

Would there be abuses, lies about quality, evil? Yep. Would those abuses exceed the benefits? I think not. And I'll note I'm not on any transplant list.

Did this argument nauseate you?

Posted by: GnuBreed at August 11, 2016 04:46 PM (gyKtp)

324 >>> 246 Wasn't it Sanger who inspired Hitler?

There is a chilling scene in Dinesh's new movie of Margaret Sanger having the KKK sit behind her at one of her meetings. So creepy.

The left threw a hissy fit over this film; I find the rotten tomato reviews hilarious. They are so unwilling to be intellectually curious about history, and so sure they are correct, that to portray anything but the thin sliver of Correct Thought they believe is a damnable offense. Moore is dropping truth bombs in his films but Dinesh drops propaganda. Hurray for Dinesh for exposing them.

Posted by: LizLem at August 11, 2016 04:46 PM (hvf9s)

325 >>need to spend the next 4 years hitting the gym hard to get a sort of visual alpha thing going.

I Squat well above my weight.

Posted by: Hillary Clinton at August 11, 2016 04:46 PM (c1srJ)

326 The GOP's destruction has been a constantly expressed goal here.

You got your wish. It's fractured and based on the comments here now it ain't getting fixed any time soon.

The obvious result of destroying the GOP is Democrats dominating national elections through the foreseeable future.

This is the path Republicans have chosen. Willfully and with premeditation.

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 04:46 PM (fn3+8)

327 Yeah, yeah

Posted by: Uncle Rick at August 11, 2016 04:46 PM (Roa7k)

328 And how do you account for the fact that the #NeverTrumpers are being pilloried daily for electing Hillary when we had 15 other candidates who'd likely be beating her like a rented mule?

Flagrant foul - Arguing a counterfactual - 15 yard penalty, repeat the down.

Seriously, whenever this was argued against the GOPe candidates before this got laughed out of the room, and you expect it to be considered a respectable argument now the shoe's on the other foot?

Hypocrisy. It's a dealkiller.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, down with Eph 6:12-13 at August 11, 2016 04:47 PM (9krrF)

329 We need a to debunk snopes

Posted by: @votermom at August 11, 2016 04:47 PM (7lVbc)

330 I think the question of abortion and its relationship to the GOP requires honesty if we are going to come to terms on how it fits within the parties core principles.

Abortion was made leagal through the supreme courts roe v wade descison removing the question of legality from democratic and political consideration, through further rulings they have established it as an absolute right and have taken compete jurisdiction of methods, modes and permissible attenuations of its practice.

So in order to have any control or say with regards to abortion a constitutional amendment would be needed or several SCOTUS descisons would have to be issued reversing prior decisions, neither of which is realistic ever going to happen within the next several decades of at all.

So if anyone in GOP tells you that anything can be done with regards abortion they are lieing.

The only avenue I see to curtailing the practice of abortion is to move back viability of the fetus, which is a question of scientific and medical development.

So what to do about the question of abortion and its contentious nature in GOP politics?

Posted by: Kreplach at August 11, 2016 04:47 PM (yJej4)

331 So I'm not a shitweasle then?

Posted by: Goomba at August 11, 2016 04:47 PM (cjdxs)

332 8 Whatever. We are still moar conservative than you and will show it by supporting Hillary lest Trump make the GOP less conservative.
Posted by: NRO at August 11, 2016 03:31 PM (g1MTt)

Back in the day Bernie opposed unlimited immigration and "free trade" deals because they would destroy blue collar wages. Ross Perot was right about NAFTA. Social issues have been used ver well by the uniparty. But hey, the Dow and S&P are way up, so the economy is awesome!

Posted by: Bernette at August 11, 2016 04:47 PM (3LwCF)

333 I should mention how much I miss THE Podcast; I miss it a lot.

James G

Posted by: jamesg042 at August 11, 2016 04:45 PM (qZFcu)

Yeah I was actually thinking about that too. Where is Drew at anyway?

Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 04:47 PM (t06LC)

334 I made several posts here awhile back relevant to this that basically say that "Conservatism" is fractured and no longer a viable political movement.

I'm sympathetic to SoCons but they've continually misplayed their position and made it difficult to have in a viable national political coalition. When I wrote something like what Ace wrote above some here called me a baby killer. They missed another opportunity with the PP videos recently by not shifting the debate from "when does life begin" to "when does infanticide begin."

If you think Cruz would be doing better than Trump right now, you're deluded, respectfully, as Hillary would be hanging him on abortion. Same would have happened with Rubio, except that people might think Rubio potentially flexible on everything.

The Paul Ryan wing no longer give a rat's ass about your typical American as Big Business Chamber of Commerce wants Free Trade / Open Borders, and are now aligned with elements of Big Gov and increasingly with the Cultural Left.

"Constitutional Conservatism" sounds nice, but other than informing how you pick judges, does nothing to tell you how to actually run the Federal government we now have.

Posted by: Ignoramus at August 11, 2016 04:48 PM (r1fLd)

335 Got news for ya, mate: unless we get immigration under control (ie, halted), Rubio would be the last Republican president you'd see until the party started nominating Mark Kirks and Dede Scozzafavas. Is that what you want? There's a reason Republicans don't win statewide in California anymore. I'm interested in winning more than one election.Posted by: Crrr6 (hotair refugee) at August 11, 2016 04:41 PM (s9KBB)

Got news for YOU, mate. Elect Hillary by nominating Trump and we won't ever see another Republican president. She'll "investigate" every state for "racism" in voting, turn the supreme court full left for many decades, throw open the borders, import muslims, use the IRS, EPA, etc to drown all right of center fundraising, have HUD blue-up every red neighborhood, etc.
It is O V E R. That was it. I support Trump because I am #neverhillary because that is The End.

But the notion that we didn't pick the most likely candidate to stop the full destruction but another to punish the GoPe and lose? We don't gain anything at all, we lose everything.
The Trumpsters and the nevertrumpsters think this is business as usual. It's not, 8 years of Hillary and the only two viable parties will be the democrats and the social-democrats.

Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 04:48 PM (eSQgj)

336 Posted by: Caliban at August 11, 2016 04:41 PM (DrC22)

IMO both Reagan and Thatcher , no matter how incredible we knew them to be, were elected because of appropriate timing. The conservative tough love philosophy is a hard sell.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at August 11, 2016 04:48 PM (uYSAz)

337 Project Veritas already did that. They called PP asking of their money could go to abort black babies. PP happily agreed.

*crickets*
Posted by: Lauren

There were crickets because:

-- it wasn't a vivid violent confrontation, just a phone call; and
-- Project Veritas outed themselves as engaging in political theater. This scenario needs to be done with complete sincerity. The white Supremacist team can NEVER emerge from their roles. Rest of the lives.

Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 04:49 PM (jBuUi)

338 And they'll say that while not saying the also support doubling legal immigration levels and boosting H1Bs by 400%.

That was the so-called conservative Cruz. Yeah, he dropped that BS late in the campaign after he realized it was eating his lunch but that was a mite disingenuous.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 04:49 PM (mpXpK)

339 The whole point is that the actions will tar,
successfully and truthfully, the pro-abortion side with the "racism"
label, from which they will not be able to escape.

Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 04:40 PM (jBuUi)

Course my real point is that most conservatives are insincere on that issue, and their inaction proves it, and as such they should quit demanding that it be a plank of the party.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 04:49 PM (aiB0J)

340 Finally got to read it all

Yay good post

A little late. I'm not interested in saving the party and no longer consider it worth preserving.

Posted by: Bigbys Olive Fingers at August 11, 2016 04:49 PM (k7xKb)

341 Did this argument nauseate you?

Posted by: GnuBreed at August 11, 2016 04:46 PM (gyKtp)

Reductio Ad Absurdum.

There is a very big qualitative difference between selling a fetus and selling one's organs in the free market.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at August 11, 2016 04:49 PM (Zu3d9)

342 In explaining the 2nd Amendment to a teenager findat least a dozen news stories of it in action. There are so many stories of citizens saving lives against potential mass murderers.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 04:50 PM (bksJQ)

343 "Or it could mean that you failed to offer an alternative that was believable regarding their primary issue..."

But no one could! Everything short of forcible deportation was labeled "amnesty". That's not even arguable. Every candidate with any immigration position left of Elian-style deportation was, and is, labeled a "globalist" or worse.

Until we come to terms about a realistic, doable solution to illegals, you're always going to justify whatever counter-productive path you choose by saying, "I won't support amnesty."

Let's see how that works out over the next four years.

Posted by: spongeworthy at August 11, 2016 04:50 PM (mrfTe)

344 I hate some of the Fake Issues Republicans come up with every election to gin up some kinda passion. Here it's return public lands to the state, by God! Because Federal Government! But I'm not so sure I trust our local yokel legislators not to sell it off to the lowest bidder.

Also, privatizing Social Security. Give it up hoss. SS lets you pool risk with multi generations and people who die before collecting. No 401k lets you do that. And most people can't handle the ups and downs of the mahkets.

And, did you know Republicans have a Solution to replace Obamacare! Just ask the Heritage Foundation!

Posted by: Jeanne del norte, now with sugartits at August 11, 2016 04:50 PM (uDgZ/)

345 Posted by: Ignoramus at August 11, 2016 04:48 PM (r1fLd)

I guess it's okay to call people deluded as long as you say respectfully right after it. Heh.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at August 11, 2016 04:50 PM (uYSAz)

346 There will be no more " oh that's just in California" we will all have to life under California laws.
Posted by: Sam at August 11, 2016 04:43 PM (nRWWi)

It'll be worse, because there will be no SCOTUS restraint of the 9th Circuit's and the CASC's more egregious rulings.

Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at August 11, 2016 04:51 PM (laMCB)

347 >So if anyone in GOP tells you that anything can be done with regards abortion they are lieing.
Posted by: Kreplach at August 11, 2016 04:47 PM (yJej4)

I really think this is one of the issues - this is a hearts and minds issue at this point. It isn't going to be fixed by legislation. Period.

Which is why people should see all the 3d/4d sonograms we can show them. Because that is true and real and SCIENCE. MFers.

Posted by: Lea at August 11, 2016 04:51 PM (lIU4e)

348 What sickens me, personally, most about abortion is those who have it as a matter of convenience, or because of shitty lifestyles.
Rightly or wrongly, I was able to tolerate the practice when it was for rape, incest or the health of the mother.
What we have now is a different world, and it's one where the convenience of any individual outweighs moral considerations.
Not, maybe, a nation of cowards, but a nation of narcissists. Or sociopaths, when I'm not my normal cheery optimistic self.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 04:51 PM (d6TTt)

349 So it would seem we should all get fitted for our onesies now to avoid the last minute rush before our internment. I think I will pick out a powder blue one with a Brony motif. Bet I get the best bunk with two blankets. Suck eggs hosers.

Posted by: Puddin Head at August 11, 2016 04:51 PM (oDCMR)

350 Oh, and of course the Establishment has been signalling its
absolutely-insincere support for a border wall since 2006 when it
authorized construction of a border wall, but never funded it.

Try the 1995 Ted the Swimmer bill that RR folded for. We got the amnesty, which was touted as a one off, and the promise of the wall. We got neither one.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 04:51 PM (mpXpK)

351 "If you think Cruz would be doing better than Trump right now, you're
deluded, respectfully, as Hillary would be hanging him on abortion."

Reasonable restrictions on abortion poll over 50%, and young voter are trending pro-life. Abortion as a single issue is not a winner. Apparently immigration isn't either.

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 04:51 PM (fn3+8)

352 Ahem:

http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=1953

Margaret Sanger quotes about race and eugenics

Game over.
Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 04:44 PM (jBuUi)

I know that she was a wild-eyed racist bitch. I also know that snopes is a Soros funded entity, but, you can't make people believe something when the disinformation is so prevalen.

Hell, PP is so damned proud of her, they give out an award in her name every year to people like Hillary and all the women in the Democratic party swoon over her--Black, Brown, whatever.

Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes Ima going long on popcorn and butter futures!! at August 11, 2016 04:51 PM (kXoT0)

353 By the way, here's a personal insult: Juan McLame is a venal, lying c*ckS*cker.

Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at August 11, 2016 04:51 PM (laMCB)

354 This is the path Republicans have chosen. Willfully and with premeditation.

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 04:46 PM (fn3+

Yep. The Trumpsters punishing the GoP and the NeverTrumpsters punishing the Trumpsters ends the country as a constitutional republic.

The Stupid Party isn't even close to being a harsh enough term.

Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 04:52 PM (eSQgj)

355
Pro Choice.

You mean the act of avoiding the consequences of your choices by totally snuffing out the totality of choices of another human being.

That Pro choice??

Posted by: fixerupper at August 11, 2016 04:52 PM (8XRCm)

356 So I'm not a shitweasle then?
Posted by: Goomba at August 11, 2016 04:47 PM (cjdxs)

Not today, Mr. goomba.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 04:52 PM (d6TTt)

357 The Paul Ryan wing no longer give a rat's ass about your typical American as Big Business Chamber of Commerce wants Free Trade / Open Borders, and are now aligned with elements of Big Gov and increasingly with the Cultural Left.

"Constitutional Conservatism" sounds nice, but other than informing how you pick judges, does nothing to tell you how to actually run the Federal government we now have.

Posted by: Ignoramus at August 11, 2016 04:48 PM (r1fLd)

Yeah, I guess it's good for debating, if you want to belong to a debate society, but at this stage I really have no idea what the word "conservative" means, regarding political philosophy/governing principles.

Not least of all because it's been commandeered by people who know jack about what conservatism is supposed to mean.

I'm just going to say I'm for limited government, and an end to federal involvement in everyday life, as much as possible. Anyone who agrees with that, I'm not going to object to pretty much anything else you have to say.

Posted by: BurtTC at August 11, 2016 04:52 PM (TOk1P)

358 During the convention, there was some idiot from the RNC being interviewed who was babbling about Hispanic voters being natural Republican constituents. What made it laughably absurd is that he quoted a number that Huckabee won almost 50% of the Hispanic vote in one of his elections. Stunning, really that Huckabee was used as example given that he is less free market than Trump, I think. So yeah, if you're religious and support Big Government, you can attract some Hispanic voters.

The RNC has f'n destroyed the party over immigration. It makes no sense: the common voter has more political savvy than these RNC big shots. The evidence that Hispanics will support limited government is non-existent.

Posted by: Maxwell at August 11, 2016 04:52 PM (n6tqt)

359 "I Squat well above my weight.
Posted by: Hillary Clinton"

I squat when I pee.

Posted by: Chris Hayes at August 11, 2016 04:53 PM (OD2ni)

360 Yeah, I think Cruz would actually have been doing worse. I sent him money and would have voted for him, but I've never met another person in-person who didn't loathe him.

Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 04:53 PM (eSQgj)

361 Posted by: GnuBreed at August 11, 2016 04:46 PM (gyKtp)

Really!? You can't tell the difference between a kidney and a child?

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 11, 2016 04:53 PM (GDulk)

362 Oh, and Establishment types seeking reelection will suddenly say this sort of thing as November approaches --

That's our way of saying we love you.

Posted by: GOPe at August 11, 2016 04:53 PM (R+30W)

363 One major problem is leftists living in one state change to goofy rules then they think the whole country will love living under their goofy rules.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 04:53 PM (bksJQ)

364 Conservatism is harder to articulate and less sexy than liberalism because it is a synthesis.

---

No it's defensive in nature, couldn't conserve a public toilet, and has no unifying thesis allowing action but is instead merely a parasitic reaction to liberalism. Truly, it hasn't any blood or life of its own.

Posted by: Bigbys Olive Fingers at August 11, 2016 04:53 PM (k7xKb)

365 What we have now is a different world, and it's one where the convenience of any individual outweighs moral considerations.
Not, maybe, a nation of cowards, but a nation of narcissists. Or sociopaths, when I'm not my normal cheery optimistic self.
------------------
Tubal, why do you wish to insist the amoral be moral? Allow them the freedom of their nihilism and thus free you and your family from being expected to be moral and care for them. You lose nothing if lesser people properly value themselves and their progeny by killing them. The one doing the self valuation is always right.

Posted by: Puddin Head at August 11, 2016 04:54 PM (oDCMR)

366 IMO both Reagan and Thatcher , no matter how incredible we knew them to be, were elected because of appropriate timing. The conservative tough love philosophy is a hard sell.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at August 11, 2016 04:48 PM (uYSAz)

Especially has a whole generation has been brainwashed to believe that conservativism is racism, sexism, and every bigotry all rolled into one and socialism is bestest thing ever

Posted by: TheQuietMan at August 11, 2016 04:54 PM (493sH)

367 For representative government to work, you have to have honesty.

If candidate A will set a 25% tax rate and candidate B a 20% one, the voters can then decide whether they want to give more money to the government, and what the implications are for either policy.

The final result will then implement the will of the people, at least in general, and you get a number of advantages - you have millions of people making the important decisions making significantly better decisions then any individual can, and also you have a broad group of people motivated to protect their own rights and property.

Absent that honesty the electorate cannot function. If both candidates run on "tax cuts for you, tax raises for people who aren't you!" the decision will instead be based on immaterial things - who has a better sound bite or seems nicer. And you will get a policy, essentially, at random.

The left knows that if you have an honest debate about their policies they lose - see the presidential election on 1984 the clearest policy election in modern history.

So the left lies and runs on emotion....and meanwhile imports a new class of voters...

Frankly at this point there is little value to representative government - we are voting for Kodos and Kang. But don't worry, once Hillary wins, the uniparty can start to roll back the trappings of democracy as well...

Posted by: 18-1 at August 11, 2016 04:54 PM (X7E8f)

368 During the convention, there was some idiot from the RNC being interviewed who was babbling about Hispanic voters being natural Republican constituents.

Posted by: Maxwell at August 11, 2016 04:52 PM (n6tqt)

I really wish they would quit interviewing Karl Rove

Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 04:54 PM (t06LC)

369 >>Rightly or wrongly, I was able to tolerate the practice when it was for rape, incest or the health of the mother.

Here's my thoughts on those.

Rape - Morning after pill.
Incest - Abortion is generally just covering up the problem and sending the person back to abuse.
Health of the Mother - Yes, but I think it's really, really rare where health of the mother is accomplished by abortion. An early csection maybe, or push to labor when the baby isn't viable.

Posted by: Lea at August 11, 2016 04:54 PM (lIU4e)

370 >> SS lets you pool risk with multi generations and people who die before collecting

Funny, that's how a Tontine works.

Posted by: garrett at August 11, 2016 04:54 PM (c1srJ)

371 I hate some of the Fake Issues Republicans come up with every election to gin up some kinda passion.

This includes abortion, I'm sorry to say. They use it to organize their support, but nothing else.

Posted by: Mr. Peebles at August 11, 2016 04:54 PM (PjWy4)

372 This scenario needs to be done with complete sincerity. The white Supremacist team can NEVER emerge from their roles. Rest of the lives.
Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 04:49 PM (jBuUi)

I like it. It's basically Westboro Baptist church, but with "God Hates Blacks!!" Instead of "God Hates F**s."

And the Baptist part lets you be a non profit. Genius. I think you should make it a Lutheran church in honor of teh Horde memes.

Posted by: LizLem at August 11, 2016 04:54 PM (hvf9s)

373 Now, the Establishment, and Establishment-aligned commentators, believe
the wall to be racist, they believe enforcing the border to be racist,
they believe deporting illegals any of them, except murderers to
be racist.

I can not believe that no conservative is fighting this by plainly saying that hispanic is NOT a race. It is reference to a point of origin and it is true. The last numbers I saw said 95% of illegals were hispanic and 70% of those were from Mexico.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 04:55 PM (mpXpK)

374 Posted by: Lea at August 11, 2016 04:51 PM (lIU4e)

Sorry, I disagree. According to the Marist study, 80%+ of Americans are against late term abortions.

Start with the low hanging fruit, then work your way back. But the GOP could never get their wobbly members in line. Remember the two Congresschicks that backed out last year?

Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at August 11, 2016 04:55 PM (laMCB)

375 Until we come to terms about a realistic, doable solution to illegals, you're always going to justify whatever counter-productive path you choose by saying, "I won't support amnesty."

Again, the problem is dishonesty. When "reasonable" bargains keep mysteriously winding up one-sided and when the requirements of a given course of action are distorted, you lose trust. Negotiation without trust is impossible.

I might once have accepted a non-absolutist position, but given the history, no more.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, down with Eph 6:12-13 at August 11, 2016 04:55 PM (9krrF)

376 >>You can't tell the difference between a kidney and a child?

I can tell you which one I'd rather have in the boat for the day.

Posted by: garrett at August 11, 2016 04:55 PM (c1srJ)

377 Especially has a whole generation has been brainwashed to believe that conservativism is racism, sexism, and every bigotry all rolled into one and socialism is bestest thing ever
Posted by: TheQuietMan at August 11, 2016 04:54 PM (493sH)

----

Ever notice that the lefts total intellectual output against conservatism is "hate".

Hell... its the ONLY output.

Posted by: fixerupper at August 11, 2016 04:56 PM (8XRCm)

378

Good Ace, Post.

Posted by: M Magoo's at August 11, 2016 04:56 PM (Xs7AG)

379
But no one could! Everything short of forcible
deportation was labeled "amnesty". That's not even arguable.

Posted by: spongeworthy at August 11, 2016 04:50 PM (mrfTe)

They are here illegally. Everything short of forcible deportation is an amnesty. Are seem confused let me help.

noun, plural amnesties.

1.
a general pardon for offenses, especially political offenses, against a government, often granted before any trial or conviction.

2.

Law. an act of forgiveness for past offenses, especially to a class of persons as a whole.

3.
a forgetting or overlooking of any past offense.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 04:56 PM (aiB0J)

380 I squat.

Posted by: Hope Soloholio at August 11, 2016 04:57 PM (1H9ox)

381 Let's put this in perspective.

10% of the Republican vote ALWAYS votes Democrat.

These are the people you see every election and you can't figure out why they even bother to keep the label Republican.

80% of Republicans are mix of Trump supporters and everybody else.

Those last 10% are not all #NeverTrumpers. There are just a mix of all kinds of holdouts and last to get on the train types.

The #NeverTrump people are a fraction of a fraction of a minority. They are throwing shadows to make themselves look much bigger than they are.

You can tell by the rip roaring success of the David French and Egg McMuffin campaigns.

The real story is the thousands upon thousands, many turned away, who show up at Trump rallies everywhere.

Posted by: #NeverHillary at August 11, 2016 04:57 PM (AS1dt)

382 >Sorry, I disagree. According to the Marist study, 80%+ of Americans are against late term abortions. Start with the low hanging fruit, then work your way back. But the GOP could never get their wobbly members in line. Remember the two Congresschicks that backed out last year?
Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at August 11, 2016 04:55 PM (laMCB)

It doesn't matter what the American public thinks if it's going to be thrown out regardless by the courts. That's the issue here.

Posted by: Lea at August 11, 2016 04:57 PM (lIU4e)

383 Am I "More Conservative" than you?
Based on how Trump is the "True Conservative" clearly I'm not.

Honesty to 100% on? I don't care about the wall.
Over 40% of our illegals are VISA overstays; not border jumpers.
That's a known fact.
But I'm supposed to pretend a wall will stop all illegals? Bullshit.
Sorry, but I don't think a bullshit lie is a good policy.
E-verify is good policy.
A "wall" is only putting out the fire on the north side of the house and pretending that stops the house from being destroyed.
So no, the "wall" didn't move me any.

What do I care about? Smaller limited government.
I did say this in the past. Fuck I ditched the GOP for the libertarian party when "Compassionate Conservative" Bush was the choice.
If that wasn't a clue for anyone? Don't claim I was in any way unclear.

And in Trump I see the same Bush attitude of:
"Hey, there's a problem; if we give the government more power and control over the economy and everything else then the Government can fix the problem...".
Sorry, fuck that noise. I didn't vote for Bush or Gore.
I'm not voting for Trump or Hillary.

So I'm not more "Conservative' than you...
Whatever that means now that Trump is a "Conservative".
But I'm a crapload more libertarian than Trump.

And if you're all for more intrusive government and more government economic control if you get a promise of a wall? Fine.
I'm not... and I won't support you. I've gotten a promise of a wall twice in my life... I'm not sure why a 3rd promise should move me.
I don't think I was ever unclear on this; but if you needed some clarification? Ok.
Here it is.

Posted by: gekkobear at August 11, 2016 04:57 PM (2iR3c)

384 And as Prager points out leftism is all about feelings, do what feels good without thinking about the consequences. He was pointing out on way home polygamy is coming, Muzzies are pushing for it and leftists will help them.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 04:57 PM (bksJQ)

385 Posted by: Brother Cavil, down with Eph 6:12-13 at August 11, 2016 04:55 PM (9krrF)

Sounds great until you have to pack people onto trains. But it's too late, we killed off the viable candidates in a quest for purity and will get the least pure of all time, Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 04:58 PM (eSQgj)

386 Racial quotas are not only unconstitutional AND illegal, they ARE racist because they are, in fact, based on race. They are based on black racism. The two biggest racist groups in the country are the NAACP and the Congressional Black Caucus. Literally EVERYTHING they do is based on race.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 04:58 PM (mpXpK)

387
The RNC has f'n destroyed the party over immigration. It makes no
sense: the common voter has more political savvy than these RNC big
shots. The evidence that Hispanics will support limited government is
non-existent.
***
You presume that the RNC exists as a separate thing that can make its own decisions, nominally with a goal of whatever is in the Republican party platform.

Instead consider the interests of the individual members of the Republican establishment.

If you are rich and connected mass immigration is GREAT in the short and medium term. The GOPers aren't stupid, they are just completely focused on their own self interest.

Posted by: 18-1 at August 11, 2016 04:58 PM (X7E8f)

388 5. I disagree with Ace's point 3. It is a good point, but I think it is secondary. I think the problem is that we are playing on the Left's ballfield, under their rules. Now politics is all about what type of control the gov. should have - should sucking dick be mandatory, or just recommended?

The problem is that the political class is now all about weilding their power. The Conservatives should be about reducing it, but instead we are arguing about how they should wield it. This comes up on every major issue.

Now the political class naturally wants to increase their power and they naturally do that by finding new ways to wield it. Then we can argue about that new way until they find a wedge to get that additional power. But what happened to the whole "limited and enumerated" ideology? Well, the Marxists/Progressives/Leftists/ Socialist/Environmentalists have so corrupted society that our philosophy is lost from the public square, and that suite the political class just fine - we are the guys that want to limit their ability to jet around and shake the world.

This is why I think the country is lost - by the time the millenials figure out what's what, there will be a new generation of agitators. We lost the country when we lost the schools.

Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at August 11, 2016 04:58 PM (LWu6U)

389 It doesn't matter what the American public thinks if it's going to be thrown out regardless by the courts. That's the issue here.

Which hints at the real problem--who is to decide these things, the people, or the courts?

Posted by: Brother Cavil, down with Eph 6:12-13 at August 11, 2016 04:59 PM (9krrF)

390 One of the problems with abortion is that the word has been so diluted in its impact by the Left deliberately styling it as just another contraceptive choice, which involved vacuuming out some inconvenient cells.

CALL.IT.WHAT.IT.DAMN.WELL.IS.

INFANTICIDE.BY.TORTUOUS.DISMEMBERMENT.

Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes Ima going long on popcorn and butter futures!! at August 11, 2016 04:59 PM (kXoT0)

391 No it's defensive in nature, couldn't conserve a public toilet, and has no unifying thesis allowing action but is instead merely a parasitic reaction to liberalism. Truly, it hasn't any blood or life of its own.
Posted by: Bigbys Olive Fingers at August 11, 2016 04:53 PM (k7xKb)

Conservatism - classical liberalism - has a long intellectual history stretching back to Edmund Burke. It is the source of many of the founding principles of this nation. It stands for limited government, a keen understanding of man's limitations and the need to withhold excessive power from any individual or faction, personal liberty, reasoned change based on an understanding of history, etc. It is not in any way bloodless, parisitic, or without a unifying thesis.

Bigby, what do you consider yourself?

Posted by: person(a non grata) at August 11, 2016 04:59 PM (mFkVC)

392 >>>> And how do you account for the fact that the #NeverTrumpers are being pilloried daily for electing Hillary when we had 15 other candidates who'd likely be beating her like a rented mule? "

Don't you guys ever get tired of this lie? If they were so good why didn't they win the nomination?
......

It's not a lie, however, your argument is not without merit.

Why did they lose? Because a growing MINORITY of right leaning voters are fed up with milquetoast, go along/ get along bullshit. I completely agree.

The 15 or whatever other candidates ran as milquetoast idiots, split the MAJORTY (60%+) of the right leaning vote, hung around until they ran out of money, and failed to learn that a sizable minority is fed up with milquetoast bullshit. Their response was to attack Trump in the single issue he is correct about. They deserved to lose.

This issue is that Trump never improved from who and what is actually is throughout the primaries or even up to today. Credit to him, he is not the same milquetoast BS we're all sick of. He is, however, completely incapable of expressing a coherent plan on anything, his positions are all to the left of everything that anyone on the right supports (with the possible exception of immigration, but even that has been shifting and incohent), and comes across as completely unstable and untrustworthy on everything. Aside from not being Hillary, there is virtually no reason to support him for a lot of people.

That has always been the case. Just as it has always been the case that, in GE match ups between R and Hillary, he was always and continues to be the only person who loses to her because he is the only person people dislike even more than an unindicted felon who's sole aspiration is expanding the reach and influence of her decades old crime family.

Personally, I think Hillary is worse than Trump. I will take inept fucktard over unindicted felon. Unfortunately, rather than doing anything to convince people that he's not as fucked up and crooked as Hillary, he calls daily press conference and makes an ass of himself while Hillary hides and allows him the rope to hang himself.

Posted by: Damiano at August 11, 2016 04:59 PM (71OEY)

393 Posted by: gekkobear at August 11, 2016 04:57 PM (2iR3c)

Your choice, but that's how we lose and the left is ascendant and then NONE of your goals are even in the wheel house of possibilities forever.

Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 05:00 PM (eSQgj)

394
remember all the Bullshit Brexit woes??

it was, get this, all bullshit

Posted by: M Magoo's at August 11, 2016 05:00 PM (Xs7AG)

395 "For representative government to work, you have to have honesty."

Give me competency. You know why Swedes don't mind paying 60% taxes? Because their government is efficient, courteous, and delivers services effectively.

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 05:02 PM (fn3+8)

396 Did you know Margaret Sanger's mom was assaulted and beaten by 2 vagrants when she was upstairs in the family home? She was 14 and her mom told her to stay put with the younger siblings no matter what she heard. She heard it all. Her mom died a year later.

Makes sense, I guess, why she turned to genocide of the poor under the guise of charity.

Posted by: Bigbys Olive Fingers at August 11, 2016 05:02 PM (k7xKb)

397 INFANTICIDE.BY.TORTUOUS.DISMEMBERMENT.
Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes Ima going long on popcorn and butter futures!! at August 11, 2016 04:59 PM (kXoT0)

-----

I dont care what your stance on abortion really is.

But, if we cant agree that halfway delivering a living human being to stab it in the spinal column and scramble the obdulla oblongata.... is a barbaric practice and not a "right".... there isnt going to be much middle ground to cover.

Posted by: fixerupper at August 11, 2016 05:02 PM (8XRCm)

398 Yeah, I think Cruz would actually have been doing worse. I sent him money and would have voted for him, but I've never met another person in-person who didn't loathe him.
Posted by: dagny

I don't loathe him and would have happily voted for him in the General Election, but yes, he would be doing much worse.

My Brother in law (who is for the most part a really great guy) thought Cruz was a cross between Richard Nixon and Joe McCarthy (and not in a good way, either). That's how a lot of so-called centrists and moderates think of Cruz. We insulate ourselves from a lot of that thinking, and don't realize how other actually view our "heroes".

Posted by: Bossy Conservative....outlaw in America at August 11, 2016 05:02 PM (S6Pax)

399 6. I gotta admit, there is a lot of good stuff in what Ace posted, but I am fading. He needs an editor. He needs to put this shit aside for a day and edit for length instead of pushing to post something every hour starting at the crack of 2.

Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at August 11, 2016 05:02 PM (LWu6U)

400 We have Trump because the rule of law does not apply to the democrat party. This I trace to Bill Clinton and how the first the democrats rallied around him and defended his actions. Later the Republican's were co-opted into supporting him by failing to convict him. I hope Voinovich is rotting in hell for voting to acquit and the same fate awaits every other person who cast a vote for acquittal.

What was Clinton's biggest crime, he lied under Oath. Our entire system of justice depends upon people telling the truth under oath and we punish those who don't that we catch. Without truth, there is no justice. No rule of law. The man holding the highest office in the land lied and was permitted to remain in office.

Is it any wonder that public officials all over the land refuse to enforce existing law. Is it any wonder Hillary ignored existing law and had a private server and then lied and destroyed documents. Not only has the president and the attorney general given her a free pass, but the director of the FBI, America's top cop.

You can read Angelo Codevilla for an explanation of the schism between average Americans and the ruling class who live isolated from the rest of us. http://spectator.org/39326_americas-ruling-class-and-perils-revolution/

You can read any number of works by Charles Murray explaining the breakdown of American civil society. The Bell Curve. Coming Apart.

In the end, everything depends upon the rule of law, and yet it does not apply to the Clinton's, the Obamas, the Reids, the Pelosi's, the Kennedy's etc. etc.

We have public officials all over the land, long before Obama, who refuse to enforce the immigration laws. Under my name, I've been published in the Wall Street Journal chiding Bob Morgenthau for his failure to enforce the laws of this nation. All the chiding by the common man falls upon the deaf ears of the ruling class.

This is why we have Trump. They cannot ignore him. They fear him, for Trump is not one of them. So they must destroy him by all means possible.

No matter ones political affiliation, we will witness whether one man can defeat Wall Street, the Media, Academia, Silicon Valley, Hollywood, the Democrat Party, the Republican Party and the Clinton global political machine. In other words, one man versus the corrupt American Ruling Class and its foreign allies. God help us if they win.

Immigration, enforce existing law, stop sanI think Angelo Codevilla

Posted by: Locke Common at August 11, 2016 05:03 PM (Mruaf)

401 If you are rich and connected mass immigration is GREAT in the short and medium term. The GOPers aren't stupid, they are just completely focused on their own self interest.

Posted by: 18-1 at August 11, 2016 04:58 PM (X7E8f)

Pretty much. I think they looked at the landscrape, realized there was no majority possible with the old coalition, and decided to get theirs while there was still a getting to be got.

I remember thinking, somewhere after 2010, that John Boehner was operating like a man who had no desire to be the Majority Party, to be the opposition Party.

I never saw anything that appeared to contradict that view.

Posted by: BurtTC at August 11, 2016 05:03 PM (TOk1P)

402 Abortion as a single issue is not a winner. Apparently immigration isn't either.

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 04:51 PM (fn3+

14% of residents in this country, and I'm betting that's low, is foreign born. They're all interested in getting the rest of the family into the land of milk and EBT cards.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 05:04 PM (aiB0J)

403 Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 04:32 PM (aiB0J)

Private money is still a subsidy. And more importantly it is still an incentive for the behavior that you are supposedly trying to reduce. You'll end up with more pregnant mothers who do not desire to rear their own child, but rather than just the ones who wish to abrogate their responsibility as a parent, there will also be a new group motivated by the financial incentive you created. Once the money runs out, which it inevitably will, you'll be left even higher rates of abortion, at least in the short term.

tl;dr apart from being ghoulish, your idea will completely backfire.

Posted by: Sjg at August 11, 2016 05:04 PM (gDSJf)

404 341 There is a very big qualitative difference between selling a fetus and selling one's organs in the free market.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo

Wrong-o. It already exists. It's called surrogate mothers, and none of their genetic material is even involved in most cases. Rent A Womb. For profit.

Posted by: GnuBreed at August 11, 2016 05:04 PM (gyKtp)

405 386 Racial quotas are not only unconstitutional AND illegal, they ARE racist because they are, in fact, based on race. They are based on black racism. The two biggest racist groups in the country are the NAACP and the Congressional Black Caucus. Literally EVERYTHING they do is based on race.
Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 04:58 PM (mpXpK)

Yes, the Dems morphed from the party of institutionalized racism for whites to institutionalized racism for blacks ( or people who pretend to be black)

Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 05:04 PM (wwH1X)

406 395 "For representative government to work, you have to have honesty."

Give me competency. You know why Swedes don't mind paying 60% taxes? Because their government is efficient, courteous, and delivers services effectively.
----------------------
Bullshit. Swedes don't mind paying money into a pool that helps others Swedes. Swedes have a high collective trust cuz Sweden is full of Swedes. They are quickly learning that Diversity sucks and is nothing more than one class cuckolding another class.

Posted by: Puddin Head at August 11, 2016 05:04 PM (oDCMR)

407 >>> And as Prager points out leftism is all about feelings, do what feels good without thinking about the consequences. He was pointing out on way home polygamy is coming, Muzzies are pushing for it and leftists will help them.
Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 04:57 PM (bksJQ)

already beginning: https://www.polygamy.com/

Notice the site asks of you are a woman seeking A man, OR a man seeking ANOTHER woman. I guess no gender equality polyandry with this place. But it was built by a Muslim so there you go.

Posted by: LizLem at August 11, 2016 05:05 PM (hvf9s)

408 I think the problem is that we are playing on the Left's ballfield, under their rules.

Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at August 11, 2016 04:58 PM (LWu6U)

Agreed. We need to get people to start saying "I reject your premise" To pretty much anything spewed by a Statist. *Hopefully* the statist will be so shocked that it will be possible to explain the actual stance (but that takes clarity and "yeah,yeah" doesn't build clarity) but, given that characterization has replaced quotation, I'm not sure if even that would be enough.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 11, 2016 05:05 PM (GDulk)

409 I don't loathe him and would have happily voted for him in the General Election, but yes, he would be doing much worse.

Posted by: Bossy Conservative....outlaw in America at August 11, 2016 05:02 PM (S6Pax)

Saying Cruz would be doing worse ignores a lot of polling from a period when Trump supporters were big fans of polling. It also ignores the source of many of Trump's problems - his lack of discipline, his lack of any campaign apparatus on the ground in key states, his lack of ads, his seemingly random decisions about where to hold rallies, etc.

Posted by: person(a non grata) at August 11, 2016 05:05 PM (mFkVC)

410 Eff it. A post about how to argue rationally devolves predictably. I'm going back to my work and cat pictures, but at this hour mostly cat pictures.

All that hate's gonna eat you up...which is why I had to let it go.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, down with Eph 6:12-13 at August 11, 2016 05:05 PM (9krrF)

411 I believe . . . That ketchup ought to come with fries without having to ask for it.

Posted by: Sphynx at August 11, 2016 05:06 PM (OZmbA)

412 There is only one party. It is the trough-swilling professional politician party, and it's ass is so big it sits on both sides of the aisle. Bastards.

Posted by: Eromero at August 11, 2016 05:06 PM (zLDYs)

413 Swedes have a high collective trust cuz Sweden is full of
Swedes.

Posted by: Puddin Head at August 11, 2016 05:04 PM (oDCMR)

Or is it because their politicians don't punch a baby's dick?

Posted by: Ian Galt at August 11, 2016 05:06 PM (8iiMU)

414 Sonograms - a personal story.

First child born, 6 months after birth found to have some problems and eventually diagnosed with genetic problem. Question arose - should we risk having another child? Don't know at that time how child first child will do since its a rare condition. Will we have the resources to care for one child with this problem what if second child has it also?

Wise friend says, well, suppose you don't have any more children, suppose in 10 years your only child asks Dad how come I don't have any brothers and sisters what are you going to say . . .we didn't want any more like you?

So we have a second child. As it turns out, during that pregnancy a doctor at Harvard developed a blood test for this genetic problem and wanted to see if she could do the blood test pre natally via amnio. Would we be willing to travel to boston and have the amnio and test? It would advance medical science blah blah, and oh yes there was a risk small that you could lose the baby. No thanks.

So we are at the first Ultrasound of the second baby. The tech is doing the US and says "oh wow I've never seen that before!" My heart sank.

Because my family was already the subject of a medical article. You don't really want to be the subject of a medical article. Novelty in medicine is rarely good. She took a picture and showed it to us. My second child - not yet born - was clearly displaying a "PEACE" sign with his little hand. I stopped worrying so much right about then.

I have framed that US in a double frame with a picture of him at about 4 months big blue eyes looking at me.

Yes he has the same genetic problem as his older brother.
we deal with it.

We then had a daughter. She didn't have the genetic problem, she had other problems. Everybody has problems. Sometimes its in childhood, sometimes its teen, sometimes middle age. Deal with it.
Being a parent is really, really, really, hard. But is the best thing I've ever done.

Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 05:06 PM (JTwsP)

415 FS : Hammond B3 Organ with 12" Wurlitzer Speaker. 100% Original. Local Pickup ONLY.

Posted by: garrett at August 11, 2016 05:06 PM (c1srJ)

416 392 >>>> And how do you account for the fact that the #NeverTrumpers are being pilloried daily for electing Hillary when we had 15 other candidates who'd likely be beating her like a rented mule? "

Don't you guys ever get tired of this lie? If they were so good why didn't they win the nomination?
......

It's not a lie, however, your argument is not without merit.

I disagree, the MSM/Clinton machine would be destroying all 17 candidates.
maybe Rubio would be able to survive, but I doubt Cruz or Kasich

Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 05:07 PM (wwH1X)

417 Shoving 350 million tribal people under a Federal Government is a no go from the start. It only stays together through an authoritarian police state, or tolerance of chaos until it fragments.
I base my opinion on history.
We disagree on every issue in America, and Conservatives are on the short end of the demographics.
There are areas and pockets of genuine Conservatism, but it's getting increasingly spread out and diluted?
So what are our options?

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 05:07 PM (d6TTt)

418 Immigration is in my top three concerns and didn't jump on the Trump train because not convinced hewill do much about it either.

On sidebar how the F does a sewage truck tank explode?

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 05:07 PM (bksJQ)

419 Put it this way - Trump's campaign strategy was based entirely on free coverage from the media, which made him uniquely vulnerable when the media turned on him.

Posted by: person(a non grata) at August 11, 2016 05:07 PM (mFkVC)

420 Interesting and thank you. I've been thinking about and struggling with this as an employee in a an organization where there are a few people who question + openly reject what almost everyone thinks is our purpose + mission. And it bothers me pretty deeply - in a way I take it personally. There are 3 reasons. First, it's *within* the group to which they belong. If Jane in the rival organization thinks we're full of crap, okay fine, but if Bob in *our* organization says most of what we do is crap that is demoralizing and disruptive. Second, they don't keep their radically different views to themselves. They openly, aggressively, relentlessly push them and try to convert others. There's a couple people with idiosyncratic views who generally keep it to themselves. Third, it leaves me wondering why the heck I spent all that time, effort, and money going through 12+ years of training preparing for this career when a few individuals *within the group* actively + relentlessly work to overthrow what most people in the group stand for. It's like trying to rehearse a group dance routine when two people keep jumping on stage and saying "this is wrong and nonsense... why are you doing this? you should listen to our music and perform only our dance steps".

I'm not disagreeing with you. My point is simply that there are circumstances in which the "different opinions" become very personal. And extremely disruptive to the group to which I've committed much of my life.

Posted by: Rick67 at August 11, 2016 05:07 PM (bqer+)

421 I believe . . . That Kim Khardashian's butt could be used to dam up the Mississippi River at Vicksburg.

Posted by: Sphynx at August 11, 2016 05:07 PM (OZmbA)

422 Yes, the Dems morphed from the party of institutionalized racism for whites to institutionalized racism for blacks ( or people who pretend to be black)
Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 05:04 PM (wwH1X)

-----

Sort of.

The Democrats used to hook up blacks to plows and cotton pickers and cotton gins for profit.

The Democrats now hook up blacks to EBT cards, and WIC, and Obama Phones for votes.

Remember what Johnson said.

Posted by: fixerupper at August 11, 2016 05:08 PM (8XRCm)

423 I'd also like some honesty about who opposes all immigration, who's into white identity, etc.

The commenters who said American servicemen shouldn't be allowed to bring home foreign wives, for example, seem to be more than just concerned about illegal immigration.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:08 PM (UBBWX)

424 Saying Cruz would be doing worse ignores a lot of polling from a period when Trump supporters were big fans of polling. It also ignores the source of many of Trump's problems - his lack of discipline, his lack of any campaign apparatus on the ground in key states, his lack of ads, his seemingly random decisions about where to hold rallies, etc.

Posted by: person(a non grata) at August 11, 2016 05:05 PM (mFkVC)

he would be Akined by the MSM

Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 05:08 PM (wwH1X)

425 I think we can all agree that the government needs to build a wall around Hope Solo's butthole.

Posted by: wooga at August 11, 2016 05:08 PM (sktuO)

426 Posted by: person(a non grata) at August 11, 2016 04:59 PM (mFkVC)

---

Have you read Burke? He was reaching for a unifying thesis out of disparate, often conflicting, themes. At this remove one ought to have the grace to admit failure.

I'm not sure what I would label myself as at this point. I'm not part of movement conservatism nor neoconservative. Guess I'm pending.

Posted by: Bigbys Olive Fingers at August 11, 2016 05:08 PM (k7xKb)

427 "IMO both Reagan and Thatcher , no matter how incredible we knew them to be, were elected because of appropriate timing."

Couldn't have had Reagan without Carter first. Couldn't have had Thatcher without the infamous "Winter of Discontent" first.

Unfortunately, it's not a general rule that bad leftist governance will always lead to a subsequent conservative return to power. There are many historical counterexamples where things were at their darkest just before going completely black.

Posted by: torquewrench at August 11, 2016 05:09 PM (noWW6)

428 Ace - all very good. I agree on the honest debate part. Its why I don't like rushing to endorse someone just to endorse. Its why I'd actually prefer a convention that involved some honest debate rather than just a rah - rah spectacle. But I do think a healthy debate is good. We can either all demand that we all get our entire loaf and get nothing. Or we can each get a slice here and there, and continue to argue in favor of getting another slice.

Posted by: SH at August 11, 2016 05:09 PM (gmeXX)

429
Remember when the Democrats REPEATEDLY said Bush was "creating" more terrorists and Bush was Al Qaeda's "best recruiter"?

I do.

Posted by: M Magoo's at August 11, 2016 05:10 PM (Xs7AG)

430 he would be Akined by the MSM
Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 05:08 PM (wwH1X)

Again, the MSM would attack him, as it would attack any GOP candidate. But since he had a larger plan then "get free media time by being a celebrity," it wouldn't have had the same impact.

Posted by: person(a non grata) at August 11, 2016 05:10 PM (mFkVC)

431 Listening to Laura Ingram show between jobs and her and Byron York were talking about how in the primary Trump coverage was even to positive. But since he has won coverage has been overly negative.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 05:10 PM (bksJQ)

432 Whatever, CUCK.

Seriously, though, great read.

Posted by: holygoat at August 11, 2016 05:10 PM (DbBV5)

433 >>>In a perverse way I wish Mittens was the nominee this year.

no way.

and there's no turning back for me when it comes to him OR ryan.

Posted by: concrete girl at August 11, 2016 05:11 PM (AhcCB)

434 Garrett: that Hammond isn't for sale in Western NC, is it? #unrealisticlongtermplans

Posted by: Sporkatus at August 11, 2016 05:11 PM (eXSOZ)

435
Remember just 2 months ago when Clinton, the media, and other Democrats said Trump was ISIS's best recruiter?

I do.

Posted by: M Magoo's at August 11, 2016 05:12 PM (Xs7AG)

436 "He is, however, completely incapable of expressing a coherent plan on anything, his positions are all to the left of everything that anyone on the right supports (with the possible exception of immigration, but even that has been shifting and incohent), and comes across as completely unstable and untrustworthy on everything. Aside from not being Hillary, there is virtually no reason to support him for a lot of people."

Opinion - according to you. Millions say the opposite.

"Unfortunately, rather than doing anything to convince people that he's not as fucked up and crooked as Hillary, he calls daily press conference and makes an ass of himself while Hillary hides and allows him the rope to hang himself. "

Opinion. I love his press conferences so do millions of others.

"That has always been the case. Just as it has always been the case that, in GE match ups between R and Hillary, he was always and continues to be the only person who loses to her because he is the only person people dislike even more than an unindicted felon who's sole aspiration is expanding the reach and influence of her decades old crime family."

Opinion again. They are tied in the polls within the margin of error after convention bounces for both.

Posted by: #NeverHillary at August 11, 2016 05:12 PM (AS1dt)

437 There are many historical counterexamples where things were at their darkest just before going completely black.

---

The Hell you say.

Posted by: The Romanovs at August 11, 2016 05:12 PM (8XRCm)

438 Great post, Ace. I would add that the media ignores the issues, too, and only presents the demonization of people who they don't favor ideologically. So that's all people read, and they think people are the issue. No one presents the actual issue.

A very liberal friend (with a gay son) was talking with me about gay marriage, and her position was the popular one: if you disagree, you hate gays. I asked, can you can conceive of reasons beyond pure hate why people disagree with gay marriage right now, like tradition or religion. She exploded with rage. It's happened to other people, too. Liberals are on the verge of emotional collapse all the time. Because we are demons.

So that's why I tell family and friends I won't discuss politics unless we set it up like an Oxford debate or a law and motion hearing. O/w it gets personal in a nanosecond.

Posted by: PJ at August 11, 2016 05:12 PM (cHuNI)

439 "14% of residents in this country, and I'm betting that's low, is foreign born. They're all interested in getting the rest of the family into the land of milk and EBT cards."

Sure. My foreign born doctor from Taiwan is just dying to get his EBT card.

My buddies wife is from Thailand and works as an accountant for the state of California...again, only here for the EBT.

Sometimes, you guys need to drop the endless stereotyping of immigrants.

you even used the word "all."

Hilarious.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:13 PM (UBBWX)

440 For conservatives trying to define themselves, remember, there were no conservatives until the Left appeared. Conservatives were and are by definition the people of the land and faith. The Left are people of universal fantasy and murder. That's it. If you innately are attracted to your people and country - you are a conservative. If you find yourself attracted to universal fantasies of justice and murder - you are a leftist. It all started in France - so its totes gay - and very bloody.

Posted by: Puddin Head at August 11, 2016 05:13 PM (oDCMR)

441
Hillary Clinton is not a historical candidate.

Hillary Clinton is a HYSTERICAL candidate.

Posted by: M Magoo's at August 11, 2016 05:13 PM (Xs7AG)

442 The commenters who said American servicemen shouldn't be allowed to bring home foreign wives, for example, seem to be more than just concerned about illegal immigration.

As a white guy with an immigrant minority wife, I noticed almost all hostility to our relationship came from other minorities. The only white people who had a problem were born before 1945. Old minorities actually tended to be happy to see us.

The anti-miscegenation crowd today is almost entirely made up of really old white people and young minorities.

Posted by: wooga at August 11, 2016 05:14 PM (sktuO)

443 "Opinion. I love his press conferences so do millions of others."

Not enough millions thrill at his words every day.

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 05:14 PM (fn3+8)

444 And let me say this, as a pretty "extreme" pro-lifer who holds views that I know are not mainstream, I cannot stand the Akin type politicians. I don't care that his professed views are similar to mine. If you can't articulate the reasons for such views, or worse, say things that make you sound like an idiot, you are actually doing me and my views a disservice. You can argue the pro-life view - including the "extreme" versions of it - without sounding like an idiot.

Posted by: SH at August 11, 2016 05:14 PM (gmeXX)

445 430 he would be Akined by the MSM
Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 05:08 PM (wwH1X)

Again, the MSM would attack him, as it would attack any GOP candidate. But since he had a larger plan then "get free media time by being a celebrity," it wouldn't have had the same impact.
Posted by: person(a non grata) at August 11, 2016 05:10 PM (mFkVC)

he did, but his plans were flawed. 50 years after Kennedy's immigration bill, Great society, loss of churchgoing population , gaiety, etc has dropped the conservative base to a smaller minority.
he might have gone from 60 to 70% in Oklahoma, but wouldn't win any Obama states. also he is not likable .

Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 05:14 PM (wwH1X)

446 "For representative government to work, you have to have honesty."

Not at all. That's the problem that our Constitution was set up to take care of. What you have to have is each branch of government defending its own turf. What is imperative in our governmental architecture is that there is no collusion among the branches of government to bypass the Constitutional restrictions. That is was the key in the American Constitutional Republic (R.I.P.)

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 05:14 PM (zc3Db)

447 "he would be Akined by the MSM"

If this is true, then it doesn't matter who we run.

And it reveals the problem is not elections, but the MSM.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:14 PM (UBBWX)

448 Taiwanese doctor?

They do have small hands.

Posted by: garrett at August 11, 2016 05:14 PM (c1srJ)

449 he would be Akined by the MSM
Posted by: avi

Cruz gave a find speech at the Convention about his principles and ideas. It was denigrated because he did not endorse Trump at the end, as many had hoped.

But he defines his own Constitutional Conservatism, and he can defend it. Until the Clinton-Media complex starts to spend time defenestrating him about it. And he would not back down.
It would either have been total marginalization, because a lot of "undecideds" would have been put off by Cruz and all this, or maybe a teaching moment.....but I think we are too far along the path of being an Idiocracy. Stand in the lines at the supermarket and read the tabloid headlines.

Posted by: Bossy Conservative....outlaw in America at August 11, 2016 05:14 PM (S6Pax)

450 404 341 There is a very big qualitative difference between selling a fetus and selling one's organs in the free market.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo

Wrong-o. It already exists. It's called surrogate mothers, and none of their genetic material is even involved in most cases. Rent A Womb. For profit.

Posted by: GnuBreed at August 11, 2016 05:04 PM (gyKtp)

++++

Change the language. What is being sold in that scenario is not the baby. It is the parental rights. The purchaser would not own the baby, they would own the right to be its parents.

Posted by: GOPe at August 11, 2016 05:14 PM (R+30W)

451 I don't think any politician holds any core principle except for furthering the family business, politics. Otherwise they would eventually sour on politics and go home to do something useful.

Posted by: Dave at Buffalo Roam at August 11, 2016 05:15 PM (zS8hy)

452 /sock

Posted by: GOPe at August 11, 2016 05:15 PM (R+30W)

453 The only white people who had a problem were born before 1945. Old minorities actually tended to be happy to see us.
***
Based on online dating site data, the least racist people in America are white men.

Posted by: 18-1 at August 11, 2016 05:15 PM (X7E8f)

454 ORCA II - Binders Filled with Boogaloo!

Posted by: garrett
****

We refuse to claim it.

Posted by: Tilikum KAW- Skeet Surfing at August 11, 2016 05:16 PM (+aCe4)

455 Liberals are on the verge of emotional collapse all the time.

----

Its because as demographic they have reached their conclusions based on emotion. They are the pure Virtue Signalers.

You and I can disagree on a topic, and we disagree on a topic. But to the left, their very identity is emotionally intertwined with their positions. To disagree with them is to injure them, to insult them. Facts enrage them. Ego squashes Id for self preservation.

They lash out.

Posted by: fixerupper at August 11, 2016 05:16 PM (8XRCm)

456 >>Based on online dating site data, the least racist people in America are white men.

They're all pink on the inside.

Posted by: garrett at August 11, 2016 05:16 PM (c1srJ)

457 The commenters who said American servicemen shouldn't be allowed to bring home foreign wives, for example, seem to be more than just concerned about illegal immigration.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:08 PM (UBBWX)

Wow, seems like such a boutique battle you got going there. I can't recall ever hearing any such comment made here, but I'm not here all the time, so maybe it's come up.

Still, I think it is more likely you are conflating your own personal issue onto others where it does not belong.

Posted by: BurtTC at August 11, 2016 05:16 PM (TOk1P)

458 "Trump's campaign strategy was based entirely on free coverage from the
media, which made him uniquely vulnerable when the media turned on him"

When the media _quite predictably_ turned on him.

In 2008, John McCain was a cosseted darling of the media, who constantly played up to the "Maverick!" self___ with which McCain is so besotten. Then he won the primaries and got the nomination. Overnight, he became an unstable warmonger with anger management issues and a body raddled by cancer, who couldn't be trusted with Presidential responsibilities.

In 2012, during the primaries, the media presented Mitt Romney as the calm steady hand under whose governorship Massachusetts had prospered, and who had saved the SLC Olympics. Then he won the primaries and got the nomination. Overnight, he became a cold calculating corporatist monster who murdered employees' wives for dishonest profit and then stowed the proceeds, without paying taxes, in offshore banks.

Did Trump learn from this Lucy-pulling-away-the-football routine that he too was going to endure the same treatment? He learned precisely nothing. And was visibly surprised when the media turned on him just as it was obvious they would do, based on their long prior history of the same. Scott Adams, call your office.

Posted by: torquewrench at August 11, 2016 05:16 PM (noWW6)

459 "As a white guy with an immigrant minority wife, I noticed almost all hostility to our relationship came from other minorities. The only white people who had a problem were born before 1945. Old minorities actually tended to be happy to see us.

The anti-miscegenation crowd today is almost entirely made up of really old white people and young minorities."

I agree, but since commenters here indeed said these words...does that mean they are probably really old white people? or maybe in very ummmm, white bread parts of the country.

I could believe it. It boggles me which is why I brought it up.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:17 PM (UBBWX)

460 And, of course, the most fundamental requirements for our sort of Constitutional Republic to work is a deep love and respect for the concept of national sovereignty and private property rights. Those are the two real foundations of the US.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 05:17 PM (zc3Db)

461
Sometimes, you guys need to drop the endless stereotyping of immigrants.

you even used the word "all."

Hilarious.
Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:13 PM (UBBWX)

ah, but they like my grandparents are IMMIGRANTS.
not illegal invaders.

Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 05:18 PM (wwH1X)

462 I agree, but since commenters here indeed said these words...does that mean they are probably really old white people? or maybe in very ummmm, white bread parts of the country.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:17 PM (UBBWX)

Link it.

Posted by: buzzion at August 11, 2016 05:18 PM (z/Ubi)

463 If this is true, then it doesn't matter who we run.
----

Of course it doesnt.

Ever notice that EVERY single Republican candidate is a stupid, knuckledragging, dangerous racist....

And every Democrat is a virtuous, hyper intellegent caring passionate protector of the people???

Posted by: fixerupper at August 11, 2016 05:19 PM (8XRCm)

464 I think we can all agree that the government needs to build a wall around Hope Solo's butthole.
...
What?!?!? Aren't the curtains I already hung enough?

Posted by: Hope Soloholio at August 11, 2016 05:19 PM (1H9ox)

465 430 he would be Akined by the MSM
Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 05:08 PM (wwH1X)

Again, the MSM would attack him, as it would attack any GOP candidate. But since he had a larger plan then "get free media time by being a celebrity," it wouldn't have had the same impact.
------------------
Cruz's plan was to win Caucus states by appealing to Church Ladies and local Conservatives. He did well with this plan. Unfortuneately, he had no idea how to broaden his appeal. He still doesn't.

Trump's plan was yuge and strategic - to sweep up all the bitter clingers (white blue collars) discarded by Obama in 2008 in the Midwest and turn the GOP into a real Majority Party with muscle and balls. This plan is still in play. Cruz's is not.

Posted by: Puddin Head at August 11, 2016 05:19 PM (oDCMR)

466 >>Link it.

Done.

...and done.

Posted by: Jimmy Dean at August 11, 2016 05:19 PM (c1srJ)

467 tl;dr apart from being ghoulish, your idea will completely backfire.

Posted by: Sjg at August 11, 2016 05:04 PM (gDSJf)

It's never going to happen, and that wasn't my point, anyway. My point was that conservatives are being insincere. When I hear one of them tell me what their plan is to support all those black babies that will suddenly spring into existence, then I'll listen to them. Since they are insincere they should quit holding the rest of us hostage with their fake party plank. The issue is irrelevant anyway, since the GOP never intends to do anything about abortion. It's just a dog whistle they use to 25% of the base to volunteer and donate.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 05:20 PM (aiB0J)

468 Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:17 PM (UBBWX)

Who and when? Long term commenter or drive-by? Back up the assertion or everything you claim is suspect.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 11, 2016 05:20 PM (GDulk)

469 438 ... That's really tactful of you PJ.

I just tell them to get the Hell out of my house.

We are past the point of discussion. One side wants to curtail the freedoms and consumptions of the other while simultaneously demanding the subjucated maintain their current productivity if not increase it.

Indentured Servitude at best. Slavery more like it.

Sorry Ace ... no reasoning our way out of this one.

Posted by: ScoggDog at August 11, 2016 05:20 PM (1Boes)

470 What you have to have is each branch of government defending its own turf
***

Absent honesty it still doesn't work. You get the better emotive President and Congress. They can easily "defend their turf" by agreeing to each other's goals to loot the treasury (eg 2008-2010) even if the population would oppose them doing so...if they had been honest about it.

Congress giving basically all of its power to the president and the courts is a problem, but not a fundamental one.

Imagine if, for example, the current election was specifically a mandate on "should the president be allowed to do whatever the hell she wants with no restrictions, which WILL include taking things from the majority of voters for her clients and herself personally." - which is an objective take on what this election is. How would people vote? Presuming Trump were to honestly oppose this (and he did sort of run on this in the primaries) we would get a correction...

Posted by: 18-1 at August 11, 2016 05:21 PM (X7E8f)

471 Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:17 PM (UBBWX)

----

Oh God.

Is this where you are going to call all the commenters here racist???

Cuz we really dont need more people rolling with that schtick.

Posted by: fixerupper at August 11, 2016 05:21 PM (8XRCm)

472 465 430 he would be Akined by the MSM
----------------
Trump's plan was yuge and strategic - to sweep up all the bitter clingers (white blue collars) discarded by Obama in 2008 in the Midwest and turn the GOP into a real Majority Party with muscle and balls. This plan is still in play. Cruz's is not.
Posted by: Puddin Head at August 11, 2016 05:19 PM (oDCMR)

I call it the Huey Long gambit.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 05:21 PM (d6TTt)

473 I have thought for a long time part of the pre 1945 racism was built in, lots of people thought that because thats how it was when they were young.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 05:22 PM (bksJQ)

474 Of course it doesnt.

Ever notice that EVERY single Republican candidate is a stupid, knuckledragging, dangerous racist....

And every Democrat is a virtuous, hyper intellegent caring passionate protector of the people???
Posted by: fixerupper at August 11, 2016 05:19 PM (8XRCm)

Yes. Which is why any Conservative candidate must have a very tight media plan. If they want to hit back at the media and the Dem candidate, which they should, they have to focused, precise, witty and tough.

Posted by: person(a non grata) at August 11, 2016 05:22 PM (mFkVC)

475 I'm not disagreeing with you. My point is simply that there are circumstances in which the "different opinions" become very personal. And extremely disruptive to the group to which I've committed much of my life.

Posted by: Rick67 at August 11, 2016 05:07 PM (bqer+)

The fascists and the communists didn't hate each other because they were so different, rather it was because they were so alike.

Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 05:23 PM (t06LC)

476 Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:17 PM (UBBWX)

I lurk here...a lot.

I think I would have remembered something like that, and I don't.

Posted by: Pug Mahon at August 11, 2016 05:23 PM (RwwCT)

477 Oh God.

Is this where you are going to call all the commenters here racist???

Cuz we really dont need more people rolling with that schtick.

Posted by: fixerupper

In a manner reminiscent of Ghengis Khan!

Khannnnnnnnn!

Posted by: Bossy Conservative....outlaw in America at August 11, 2016 05:23 PM (S6Pax)

478 "Wow, seems like such a boutique battle you got going there. I can't recall ever hearing any such comment made here, but I'm not here all the time, so maybe it's come up."

Oh, it came up. I was shocked.

Its not a boutique battle. Trump has attracted white nationalists.

I don't even really blame people for being white nationalists as Democratic identity politics makes it "logical" at some point.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:24 PM (UBBWX)

479 Oh, it came up. I was shocked.

Its not a boutique battle. Trump has attracted white nationalists.

I don't even really blame people for being white nationalists as Democratic identity politics makes it "logical" at some point.
Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:24 PM (UBBWX)

Prove it.

Posted by: buzzion at August 11, 2016 05:24 PM (z/Ubi)

480 DFCtomm, if your "point" was supposed to be demonstrated by the fact that "nobody does this", the fact that Lauren provided support that people *do* should detonate your point, n'est pas? Total dead letter.

Blatantly insincere Kabuki and faux tribute on the part of the establishment to a topic that is important to many does not mean the topic should be dropped - quite the opposite.

Posted by: Sporkatus at August 11, 2016 05:24 PM (eXSOZ)

481
Indentured Servitude at best. Slavery more like it.

***
The term you are looking for is serfdom.

And the left is running the same game, essentially, that the European aristocracy was running in the "dark" ages.

Basically you offer to "help" people but in return they have to give up their freedom...and often the reason they need help is because what you and your peers did...

Posted by: 18-1 at August 11, 2016 05:24 PM (X7E8f)

482 think we can all agree that the government needs to build a wall around Hope Solo's butthole.

And you trust them not to insert a secret backdoor in it?

Posted by: Duncanthrax at August 11, 2016 05:24 PM (zzUT1)

483 Time to feed the kittahs, no one write anything till I get back.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 05:25 PM (bksJQ)

484
Again, the MSM would attack him, as it would attack any GOP candidate. But since he had a larger plan then "get free media time by being a celebrity," it wouldn't have had the same impact.
Posted by: person(a non grata) at August 11, 2016 05:10 PM (mFkVC)

Oh brother,Cruz would be right in Clinton's and the MSM wheelhouse.They would tee off on him,hates gays,hates women,hates minorities too religiousand he's so extremeright wing even other republicans don't like him.Have you noticed they've given up that line of attack with Trump?

Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at August 11, 2016 05:25 PM (lKyWE)

485 18-1 at August 11

Hayek. Is that you?

That guy owes me money!!!

Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 05:25 PM (JTwsP)

486
Is this where you are going to call all the commenters here racist???
Posted by: fixerupper

Is this where you are going to call all the commenters here racist AGAIN???

Because it ain't exactly the first time xe has said something like this.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at August 11, 2016 05:26 PM (kdS6q)

487 472 465 430 he would be Akined by the MSM
----------------
Trump's plan was yuge and strategic - to sweep up all the bitter clingers (white blue collars) discarded by Obama in 2008 in the Midwest and turn the GOP into a real Majority Party with muscle and balls. This plan is still in play. Cruz's is not.
Posted by: Puddin Head at August 11, 2016 05:19 PM (oDCMR)

I call it the Huey Long gambit.
-----------------
Huey or Franklin - same plan. You can't have a majority party without a base of workers. The Dems don't really have that anymore - GOP can have it, but they have to pimp slap their elite who are addicted to coolie labor. Build this party and crush the Dems.

Posted by: Puddin Head at August 11, 2016 05:26 PM (oDCMR)

488 I see women driving into the clinics in BMWs. It's not the money. It's the cold, dead heart.

Lauren - This is true.

I have had reason to think about this a lot lately, and our whole society is built on avoiding any sacrifice. Christianity teaches that sacrifice is an offering to God, but our society today is that if you have to wait on hold with comcast for 5 min. you are a victim.

To many women, the idea of 9 months sacrificing is too much. the idea of stretch marks, damaged reputation, post adoption emotions. it is all too much. avoid sacrifice at all costs. Spouse chews their food noisily - get a divorce. Boss is an ass - sue.

The center can not hold, and the dead heart is the result.

Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at August 11, 2016 05:26 PM (LWu6U)

489 Oh, it came up. I was shocked.

Its not a boutique battle. Trump has attracted white nationalists.

I don't even really blame people for being white nationalists as Democratic identity politics makes it "logical" at some point.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:24 PM (UBBWX)

Now you're just being silly. Lots of mind-reading going on, and frankly, not worth arguing.

Bye now.

Posted by: BurtTC at August 11, 2016 05:26 PM (TOk1P)

490 Yes, Ace, Yes!

Posted by: Fred at August 11, 2016 05:26 PM (0mPvA)

491 We can add National Security to Ace's point about not being up front with people. Most "establishment" Republicans thump their chest about National Security being the most important thing.

They tell us we need to nation build Iraq, Syria, etc. and to dry up the swamp of Jihadists around the world. They tell us we need to stop Russian expansionism in such far off places as Central Asia. They tell us we need to deal with Chinese expansion in the SCS, and their constant theft of intellectual properties from American companies, etc.

In every case they yell - "National Security First" above anything like personal freedom, etc. But then we come to the subjects of border security, immigration, and trade. Then national security is no longer important with these same people.

All these issues seem like important national security problems to me. I mean you don't want to trade something important that might be used in a war against you...They did say China is a huge threat right?

You don't want people just roaming across your unprotected border if the world is as dangerous as they say...You don't want Islamists and drug cartels just crossing the American border right?

So the only conclusion you can come to is they do have limits to national security and those are trade and immigration.

Posted by: William Eaton at August 11, 2016 05:26 PM (KhJh8)

492
The fascists and the communists didn't hate each other because they
were so different, rather it was because they were so alike.
***
It has to be so if you think about it. If you have different groups of government minimalists, it doesn't really matter whether they differ, and how much power each group gets - because they are going to leave each other alone.

If you have different groups of authoritarians though, they are all fighting to control the government to empower their own faction - and this is true even if the differences are minor.

Posted by: 18-1 at August 11, 2016 05:27 PM (X7E8f)

493 Have you noticed they've given up that line of attack with Trump?

Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at August 11, 2016 05:25 PM (lKyWE)

They gave up on it because the unhinged and undisciplined attack line works so well.

Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 05:27 PM (t06LC)

494 "Is this where you are going to call all the commenters here racist???"

Like the guy who said "all immigrants" are here for EBT?

Do you think that guy isn't racist?

Maybe he's not.

Maybe he thinks Melania is here for EBT, too.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:27 PM (UBBWX)

495 Absent honesty it still doesn't work. You get the better emotive President and Congress. They can easily "defend their turf" by agreeing to each other's goals to loot the treasury (eg 2008-2010) even if the population would oppose them doing so...if they had been honest about it.

Congress giving basically all of its power to the president and the courts is a problem, but not a fundamental one.

Posted by: 18-1 at August 11, 2016 05:21 PM (X7E8f)

I addressed that exact issue in the second part of my post - about collusion among the arms of government.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 05:27 PM (zc3Db)

496 The pro amnesty repubs will never outright admit it because they know most of them would lose their seats.

Sooooo, they lie to us non stop and tell us they want to build the dang fence, then they defund the fence and do everything possible to stop the fence once we all go back to our lives after the election so most people don't realize what they are doing.

Posted by: Duncan Macleod, The Highlander at August 11, 2016 05:27 PM (NAv1Q)

497 Re: Darwin/Eugenics link. The full title of "Origin of Species" is: "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life." The last subtitle doesn't seem to appear in later editions.

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at August 11, 2016 05:28 PM (SeD0w)

498 The fascists and the communists didn't hate each other because they were so different, rather it was because they were so alike.
---------------------
This is why Bernie decided on the retirement home versus the revolution.

Posted by: Puddin Head at August 11, 2016 05:28 PM (oDCMR)

499 I trot this out every time we start debating what a "conservative" is:

Personally my definition of a conservative would be someone who:

1. Believes in the Constitution as written in the text.

2. Believes in small government, not "no government". In other words as one of the founders said, that government which governs least governs best. That also includes item 1 for the federal gov for the enumerated powers of congress not withstanding the liberal's false interpretation of the general welfare clause which really means nothing.

3. Believes in a strong national defense, including protecting the borders.

4. Believes in the rule of law, not the rule of man. This means judges ruling in accordance with the law, not in accordance with outcomes.

I

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 05:28 PM (mpXpK)

500 Laying my cards on the table, I'm just a guy who wants to be left to his own devices as much as possible, while not screwing with other peoples rights to do the same.
I don't mind government, as long as it knows its place.
I don't have any desire to push anyone else around.
I don't recognize anyone who thinks they are my "betters".
I don't want a Pontifex Maximus running the show, nor a Robespierre, nor a Mao.

So, what's the name of the Party I belong to?

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 05:28 PM (d6TTt)

501 480
DFCtomm, if your "point" was supposed to be demonstrated by the fact
that "nobody does this", the fact that Lauren provided support that
people *do* should detonate your point, n'est pas? Total dead letter.

Posted by: Sporkatus at August 11, 2016 05:24 PM (eXSOZ)

You know how I know it doesn't happen as I suggested. It's because the media would be screaming at the top if their lungs, if anything like I suggested existed. Of course there are charities that try to offer assistance to young women through a pregnancy hoping they will keep it or offer it for adoption, but name me one that will pay the mother X amount of money when the adoption papers are signed.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 05:28 PM (aiB0J)

502 I'm a racist.

The MSM has convinced me.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 05:28 PM (9HX7k)

503 Good news, everyone. An Olympian has contracted the bacteria that causes dysentery in Rio.

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 05:29 PM (AI/U6)

504 Sad seeing Trump supporters reminisce about his primary victory over Cruz.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at August 11, 2016 05:29 PM (uYSAz)

505 It has to be so if you think about it. If you have different groups of government minimalists, it doesn't really matter whether they differ, and how much power each group gets - because they are going to leave each other alone.

If you have different groups of authoritarians though, they are all fighting to control the government to empower their own faction - and this is true even if the differences are minor.

Posted by: 18-1 at August 11, 2016 05:27 PM (X7E8f)

Exactly! That's why leftists have such a huge advantage. They can easily live under conservative government - we allow them to turn their states into socialist shitholes so they can be the turds they want to be. But we cannot live under leftist government since they want to control everything from Washington and to dictate to us who we are and what we can do (and think).

This is the natural advantage that leftists have over conservatives in America.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 05:29 PM (zc3Db)

506 Its not a boutique battle. Trump has attracted white nationalists.

I don't even really blame people for being white nationalists as Democratic identity politics makes it "logical" at some point.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:24 PM (UBBWX)

-------

Whoa....... how'd we get from.."service members not allowed to bring home foreign wives" to...

"Trump attracts white nationalists."

Follow Aces advice. Stop yeah yeahing us .

Come out and say it.

Come out and say "you are all a bunch of racists".

You'll feel better. You'll feel honest.

YOU can DO IT!!!

Posted by: fixerupper at August 11, 2016 05:30 PM (8XRCm)

507 The absolutists on abortion have cost so many elections, that the most vocal are surely commie infiltrators. Or they should be, as they have assured so many conservative defeats that they could have been well paid.

Late term is a winner, but we lose everything if "purity" means losing to Hillary on purity grounds going to "citizenship starts with one cell with 46 chromosomes" (except the citizens that don't attach in the vagina and get flushed).

The Tea Party took off when Santelli did his rant on CNBC, about not subsidizing his neighbor that bought more house than he could afford. The issue was big bank subsidies, market manipulation to favor the "1%". Occupy was an astroturfed altLeft response, as evidenced when Pelosi claimed the grassroots tea party was the astroturf fake, occupy is genuine.

But then the religious folks showed up at the crowded tea party meetings and said "wait wait ... let's open with a word of prayer". When some didn't want abortion to be part of their newly formed groups, a devout smug woman stands up and says "why must we always have this argument, abortion must be central, we must have principles !!!"

(that story is from real video of some woman I vividly recall). So the energy is nixed, and a bunch of people walk out, not wanting to join "her church" ... and they say, thank God we got rid of the unbelievers. praise the lord. And hence they were so marginalized ... Lucifer won.

As Coulter said, they can do abortions in the White House if they'll stop the immigration.

If Queen Hillary is crowned, abortion is free, borders open to everything that serves the globalist ... and that means America Last, pedophile island becomes an amusement park for Billy Bob, free coke.

Posted by: illiniwek at August 11, 2016 05:30 PM (l6e0e)

508 Time to feed the kittahs, no one write anything till I get back.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 05:25 PM (bksJQ)
=============================================

I hadn't been writing before you left to feed the cats. I guess I'll keep doing that.

Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 05:30 PM (dFi94)

509 it's 5:00 EDT, right?
Asking for a friend.

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at August 11, 2016 05:30 PM (SeD0w)

510 496
The pro amnesty repubs will never outright admit it because they know most of them would lose their seats.

Sooooo, they lie to us non stop and tell us they want to build the
dang fence, then they defund the fence and do everything possible to
stop the fence once we all go back to our lives after the election so
most people don't realize what they are doing.

Posted by: Duncan Macleod, The Highlander at August 11, 2016 05:27 PM (NAv1Q)

This is why nobody believed Cruz when he suddenly turned border hawk, but can't get that through the head of a cruzbot.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 05:30 PM (aiB0J)

511 our whole society is built on avoiding any sacrifice.///

True.

See you and raise you.

our whole society is built on avoiding any discomfort.

No one who lived in times before us, would see us now and be impressed with our characters. Our wealth, our gadgets etc might be impressive, our character. Meh.

Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 05:31 PM (JTwsP)

512 All of this will soon be academic once the demographics of America are suitably changed. We are almost there believe it or not.

This has been the left's holy grail and the republicans are actually helping them achieve it!

If you don't think demographics matter then you are not paying attention and should take a look at Europe. If you think the Left is a pain in the ass now in the USA, wait 20 years and you will think you are on another planet unless two things happen.

1. Our borders are sealed and we stop this mass immigration.

2. Our alternative media (internet mostly) can penetrate to the low info crowd of voters who now only get their news from liberals on tv and in entertainment.

If we don't do both of those, stick a fork in the conservative cause.

Posted by: Duncan Macleod, The Highlander at August 11, 2016 05:31 PM (NAv1Q)

513 6
This philosophy would NOT be "conservative," nor would it be labelled as such. Because the label itself is contaminated with too much baggage and slander.

To get rid of the baggage, we need a new name. And since we have a new name, might as well refine the philosophy itself to be more on-point, sleeker, more irrefutable, more self-evident.

So, I also have no interest in rescuing "conservatism." Let that burn as well.
Posted by: zombie at August 11, 2016 03:31 PM (jBuUi)

Abso-effing-lutely. I've said similar things myself. The word itself is simply toxic to great numbers of Americans.

Posted by: rickl at August 11, 2016 05:31 PM (zoehZ)

514 How in the world can I expect everyone to agree with me, when even I don't about half the time?

Posted by: Natrium at August 11, 2016 05:31 PM (K6acV)

515 503 Good news, everyone. An Olympian has contracted the bacteria that causes dysentery in Rio.
Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 05:29 PM (AI/U6)

That's the problem with third-world venues.

Posted by: Insomniac at August 11, 2016 05:31 PM (0mRoj)

516 The absolutists on abortion have cost so many elections, that the most
vocal are surely commie infiltrators. Or they should be, as they have
assured so many conservative defeats that they could have been well
paid.
============================================

I've been called a lot of things. Communist hasn't been one of them since Woodstock. heh

Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 05:31 PM (dFi94)

517 "When I hear one of them tell me what their plan is to support all those black babies that will suddenly spring into existence, then I'll listen to them."

You mean like I already have and has been in existence since before Roe?

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 05:32 PM (AI/U6)

518 Lauren - This is true.

I have had reason to think about this a lot lately, and our whole society is built on avoiding any sacrifice. Christianity teaches that sacrifice is an offering to God, but our society today is that if you have to wait on hold with comcast for 5 min. you are a victim.

To many women, the idea of 9 months sacrificing is too much. the idea of stretch marks, damaged reputation, post adoption emotions. it is all too much. avoid sacrifice at all costs. Spouse chews their food noisily - get a divorce. Boss is an ass - sue.

The center can not hold, and the dead heart is the result.

Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at August 11, 2016 05:26 PM (LWu6U)

Oh, men, too. I'm sure the pro-Trump people here hate Ben Domenech, but he finds some good links in his email newsletter. A week or so ago he had a story about research done on men in their 30s who were staying home in increasing numbers, playing video games instead of getting jobs and finding girlfriends. They were happy- they didn't feel like they were missing anything.

Today he has a story about how American fertility is at its lowest level ever. Americans aren't having babies like we used to. If it continues- and no country has yet figured out to reverse the trend- it will mean less growth, less demand, and an increasing drag on our finances.

Men don't want to sacrifice to have families, and women don't want to sacrifice to have them either.

Posted by: El Skippito Friskito at August 11, 2016 05:32 PM (q/kmn)

519 448 Taiwanese doctor?

They do have small hands.
Posted by: garrett at August 11, 2016 05:14 PM (c1srJ)
lol
I had a patient with prostate Cancer who said " don't go to oriental urologists. they can't feel your prostate because of small hands."

Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 05:32 PM (wwH1X)

520 "Now you're just being silly. Lots of mind-reading going on, and frankly, not worth arguing."

Its not mind-reading when two commenters agreed that American servicemen shouldn't be allowed to bring home foreign wives.

Is it everyone here? No, not by a long shot. but that was a helluva an eye-opener to me.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:32 PM (UBBWX)

521 But we cannot live under leftist government since they want to control
everything from Washington and to dictate to us who we are and what we
can do (and think).
***
And that's why Gov Abbott needs to call for a non-binding vote on TEXIT right now. Texas has a clear right to secede and the American republic will not survive a Hillary presidency. Presuming a majority of the populace in some states see the danger, it is time to break the union, so at least part of it can still be free.

Posted by: 18-1 at August 11, 2016 05:32 PM (X7E8f)

522 516 The absolutists on abortion have cost so many elections, that the most
vocal are surely commie infiltrators. Or they should be, as they have
assured so many conservative defeats that they could have been well
paid.
============================================

I've been called a lot of things. Communist hasn't been one of them since Woodstock. heh
Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 05:31 PM (dFi94)

You were a hippie?

Posted by: Insomniac at August 11, 2016 05:32 PM (0mRoj)

523 And every time we start talking about "immigration reform" which in politico speak means amensty I roll this out:

Real Reform; I roll this out every time there is a question about reform

Yes we need immigration reform, but NOT what has been rolled out the last half dozen times. Every bill that has come out since the first major rewrite in 1965 has basically been amnesty and open invitation for illegals to flood across the border.

We are no longer the country of the 19th century with vast open areas in the West. Our cities are overcrowded shit holes run by corrupt communist hacks AND there is no longer a vast area open for the inhabitants to flee to and take up farming.

This is not to mention that we have entire towns in CA with a population > 20,000 in which none of the citizens speak English. The current crew of "immigrants" do not appear to desire to assimilate and the current crowd of liberals do not think they should. The schools have gone from teaching America as a mixing pot to America as a salad bowl where "diversity" is celebrated and heritage counts for all, unless you have a European heritage then you are a racist.

Yes, there are a lot of things that need to be done to "fix" our immigration laws. The first one of these should be to repeal that POS of Amnesty Round I that got us where we are today.

We need immigration law that does the following AND that is enforced:

Eliminate the BS anchor baby interpretation by providing a definition of what the term "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" means, which is not dashing across the border to deliver a baby. Personally, I would require that at least one of the parents of any child born in the U.S. be a citizen before that child was eligible for "birthright" citizenship. If not, then the child would have to undergo naturalization.

Provide a reliable means for employers to check the status of employees.

Provide severe punishments for knowingly hiring illegals (or reckless disregard). That punishment should include jail time for repeat violations.

Eliminate ALL benefits for illegals including schools for children.

Rewrite legal immigration to allow in immigrants with a desirable education and/or skill set and arrange the waiting list to have the most skilled/educated at the top of the list. (Australian system) Also include a check for communicable diseases (as we did in the past) and provide for immunization. Immigrants from countries on the list of terror support need not apply.

For groups that already have large populations in the U.S. who have not assimilated, reduce the allowable numbers until they do (eliminate whole towns that do not speak English)

Provide severe penalties for mules.

Provide the death penalty for people involved in sex slavery.

Eliminate all forms of asylum. That system has been abused to the point of making it a joke. Any true case that needs to be let in should be a case by case special act passed by congress. Get them on record.

Immigrants who become involved in any serious crime prior to becoming a citizen should be deported back to their home country.

Absolutely no dual citizenship allowed.

And I will add a new one for Obama

Automatic requirement for articles of impeachment if the laws are not enforced.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 05:33 PM (mpXpK)

524 May I also suggest that you stop thinking you know my motives or the motives of ll the other Republicans who will not back this nominee. That assumption makes part of your argument fall into the straw man category.

Posted by: NC Mountain Girl at August 11, 2016 05:33 PM (Fw9d/)

525 "Coulter said, they can do abortions in the White House if they'll stop the immigration.
"

Some of us don't want to live in a country that sanctions killing children. Damn us!

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 05:34 PM (AI/U6)

526 Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 05:28 PM (aiB0J)

Because it's *illegal* and they would be shut down immediately if they *did* do such a thing. Demanding that people go well beyond civil disobedience before you'll consider them sincere is hardly a reasonable standard.

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 11, 2016 05:34 PM (GDulk)

527 Wasn't me.

Posted by: Hope Soloholio at August 11, 2016 05:34 PM (1H9ox)

528 DFCtomm: so your point was that only the ridiculous cartoon version of what you suggested and not more carefully chosen forms, as described in detail by Lauren will work? And that unless somebody tries the ridiculous and impractical version they're not serious about the issue? I think I detect a flaw.

Less snarky, several points got covered above. Specifically, that there is an illogical revulsion at the topic of adoption which doesn't exist for abortion (!) and that for many, either the money is not at object or the required responsibility of coming to term is considered too much.

Posted by: Sporkatus at August 11, 2016 05:34 PM (eXSOZ)

529
They gave up on it because the unhinged and undisciplined attack line works so well.
Posted by: Jollyroger at August 11, 2016 05:27 PM (t06LC)

At least we get something diffirent,and the book is still out on how well the unhinged and undisciplined attack will work.

Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at August 11, 2016 05:34 PM (lKyWE)

530 Good news, everyone. An Olympian has contracted the bacteria that causes dysentery in Rio.

Perhaps I'm a bad person but I'd consider it good news if BOB COSTAS contracted the bacteria that causes dysentery . . .

Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 05:34 PM (JTwsP)

531 OT but the Olympics are tolerating anti-Semitism by arabs, when every one of these delegations should be sent home instead.

http://tinyurl.com/hljqbtg

Posted by: MTF at August 11, 2016 05:34 PM (/m8T6)

532 You easily could have said that in 140 characters, all caps and a few emoji's.

Posted by: Clutch Cargo at August 11, 2016 05:34 PM (RHEDC)

533 "This is why nobody believed Cruz when he suddenly turned border hawk, but can't get that through the head of a cruzbot."

You are right, Cruz was opportunist on this issue. He was for increasing H1B's before he was against it.

This is really donor vs. base issue.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:34 PM (UBBWX)

534 OK, here is where I stand on some of these issues.

1) I disapprove of abortion, and find it offensive that feminists CELEBRATE it. I don't want to make it illegal; I want people to be ASHAMED that they couldn't get their shit together to successfully use birth control.

Victims of rape are victims of rape. I would prefer that they give their unwanted children of said rape up for adoption, but that's up to them.

If women want to get an abortion, they should be able to, but no one should be forced to provide abortions if they find them abhorrent. I absolutely disagree that ANY taxpayer money be used to fund it. I don't care how financially strapped you are. I'm sure there are plenty of deep-pocketed liberals who will be happy to open their wallets for you, since they care so f*cking much about this issue.

2) I absolutely want a REAL TANGIBLE WALL. Go ahead and put one up to the north and south, but build the one along the southern border FIRST. Put razor wire and armed soldiers on top to patrol it, and tell them to shoot to kill.

At one time I was tender-hearted about the children whose parents dragged them here without their consent, and agonized over what would become of them. But since I've been demonized as RAAACISSS for years, now I say, send them all back to where they or their genes came from. F*ck it.

3) Welfare rots the soul. Get people off it ASAP. You've got to be cruel to be kind - some people can't even see the damage they're doing to their own children and grandchildren. Stop encouraging women to have birth out of wedlock. That's f*cking evil. All children deserve REAL fathers who come home every night from a JOB.

There. Now you know where I stand.

Posted by: Miley's Tongue Depressor at August 11, 2016 05:35 PM (NTqvt)

535 Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 05:30 PM (aiB0J
You don't live in Texas do you.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at August 11, 2016 05:35 PM (uYSAz)

536 You were a hippie?
Posted by: Insomniac
-----------------
I can see it. You've seen her taste in music, right?

Posted by: Chi at August 11, 2016 05:37 PM (o4KXN)

537 Here's my extremist commie infiltrator position on abortion: You can't just go around killing people.

Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 05:37 PM (dFi94)

538 Going back a-waise, culturally, you know you can be just as "racist" as you want to be, and still believe in limited government and equal justice before the law. An underlying belief that certain bloodlines of people probably will never amount to much doesn't really matter much at all, until you start believing that you need to use the power of government to make sure they don't. Just, er, richening the mix here.

Absent modern concepts like making everyone pay for government schools only for one race, or the disarming of certain races, or outlawing miscegenation, racism really doesn't amount to much.

Posted by: Stringer Davis at August 11, 2016 05:37 PM (tIja6)

539 The problem is that something like 40% of voters identify with being 'conservative' while 100% of the same group disagrees with the other 100% of that group over the definition.

Liberals act in lockstep.

If only there was some unifying issue.

Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 05:38 PM (ZnIt3)

540 494
"Is this where you are going to call all the commenters here racist???"

Like the guy who said "all immigrants" are here for EBT?

Do you think that guy isn't racist?

Maybe he's not.

Maybe he thinks Melania is here for EBT, too.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:27 PM (UBBWX)

You know nobody gives a shit anymore, right? Why is it that if you find one immigrant who isn't here for the EBT card then you're justified, but if I find 1000 who are, then it's purely anecdotal, and I'm evil. The truth is it's simply human nature.
We go where the resources are easy and abundant, and we consume those resources until they're gone. That is an excellent survival strategy, when you're worried that the elk you just killed will be stolen by a short faced bear, but sadly our evolution lags behind our society, so you have to defend your resources. You can call that evil and racist if you wish, but I simply don't care anymore.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 05:38 PM (aiB0J)

541 Congress giving basically all of its power to the president and the courts is a problem, but not a fundamental one.

Posted by: 18-1 at August 11, 2016 05:21 PM (X7E8f)

++++

Actually, it is. I would go further and say it is the fundamental problem. Congress is supposed to be the check on the president. It is they who are the ones charged with preventing him from ruling by fiat. And they are utterly failing in their responsibility.

The are also supposed to be the check on the courts. It is in their power to remove any area of law from the courts, including SCOTUS. That they have failed to properly used the power vested in them is the basis for many of the problems we are facing today.

Posted by: GOPe at August 11, 2016 05:38 PM (R+30W)

542 OK, half way through the comments and a thought formed.

if, (a) Illegals are hard workers as attested to by someone up there.

and (b) the R's need their vote,

Then (c) why not build a party based on reducing the regulatory state, treating people as independent agents able to enter contracts, hire, and fire at will without unions, osha, permits, eeoc, etc.

It seems that aligns with their natural philosophy.

Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at August 11, 2016 05:38 PM (LWu6U)

543 536 You were a hippie?
Posted by: Insomniac
-----------------
I can see it. You've seen her taste in music, right?
Posted by: Chi at August 11, 2016 05:37 PM (o4KXN)

Hadn't noticed it.

Posted by: Insomniac at August 11, 2016 05:38 PM (0mRoj)

544 Vic, we have no party,

"Rewrite legal immigration to allow in immigrants with a desirable education and/or skill set and arrange the waiting list to have the most skilled/educated at the top of the list. (Australian system) Also include a check for communicable diseases (as we did in the past) and provide for immunization. Immigrants from countries on the list of terror support need not apply."

Legal immigrants have to undergo health checks. At least my wife did. Maybe that's changed - so much fo our written laws has become "optional."

my main reason to be hard against illegal immigration isn't even immigration: its rule of law being allowed to lapse!

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:38 PM (UBBWX)

545 You were a hippie?

Posted by: Insomniac at August 11, 2016 05:32 PM (0mRoj)
==========================================

I didn't get married barefoot for nothing, you know.

Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 05:39 PM (dFi94)

546 Whoa. It's raining like a mofo right now.

Posted by: Insomniac at August 11, 2016 05:39 PM (0mRoj)

547 Ok I'm back, its hard to catch back up if your to far behind

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 05:39 PM (bksJQ)

548 545 You were a hippie?

Posted by: Insomniac at August 11, 2016 05:32 PM (0mRoj)
==========================================

I didn't get married barefoot for nothing, you know.
Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 05:39 PM (dFi94)

Hah!

Posted by: Insomniac at August 11, 2016 05:40 PM (0mRoj)

549 507 The absolutists on abortion have cost so many elections, that the most vocal are surely commie infiltrators. Or they should be, as they have assured so many conservative defeats that they could have been well paid.

Reminds me, I should look in my bank account to see if my check from the Comintern for voting pro-lfie has come in this month.

Posted by: El Skippito Friskito at August 11, 2016 05:40 PM (q/kmn)

550 "but name me one that will pay the mother X amount of money when the adoption papers are signed. "

That is illegal.

Super. Illegal.

What these groups do provide, however, is financial assistance in the form of paid for medical care, money for pregnancy related expenses, and sometimes housing.

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 05:40 PM (AI/U6)

551 persomnally I do not think we can have any honest conversations re the gop, they are diametrically opposed to anything whwere They personally aren't raking in the bucks, or part of the handshake and wink to left partying.. we as a peon must accept we don't have a right to work here when we can easily be replaced for a fraction of the cost.
we do get told while going down the tubes financially because of their Bankrolling their own lifestyles we must also bank roll obamcare. because Really they both like having access to all that cash, and makes those fellow partiers happy.
control of us is the game, they have shown little back bone to keep US flush in our rights to autonomy or freedom.
They actually do promise to stop the left swing while writing legislation Helping the left swing the country left.

so really what conversation Can we have when they aren't marginally on team American, when that doesn't actually give them the power they so want in all countries citizens of the world?
with their other buds.

Posted by: willow at August 11, 2016 05:40 PM (A1MMY)

552 "Then (c) why not build a party based on reducing the regulatory state, treating people as independent agents able to enter contracts, hire, and fire at will without unions, osha, permits, eeoc, etc.

It seems that aligns with their natural philosophy."

This will happen. eventually, probably in California, some Hispanic guy who started out with a landscaping gig, will become a big success and then run for office in some party that is all about this.

Martinez was kind of in this mold: family business type who ended up in GOP.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:40 PM (UBBWX)

553
Better to show kids in health class. What a baby looks like at different stages of development. Tie it in with sex ed. It makes sense anyway.
Posted by: Lea at August 11, 2016 04:38 PM (lIU4e)

ACK!!!! trigger warning.

parents signature - referral to counseling.

This will never happen

Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at August 11, 2016 05:41 PM (LWu6U)

554 The basic foundation of a nation is its people, its demographics.

Want to fundamentally transform the the nation?

Transform its demographics.

Posted by: Things TFG Was Taught at August 11, 2016 05:41 PM (mkppl)

555 Hah!

Posted by: Insomniac at August 11, 2016 05:40 PM (0mRoj)
===========================================

Seriously. I started down the aisle, looked down at my pretty shoes, said "forget this" and kicked them off. I think one of them hit the photographer.

Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 05:42 PM (dFi94)

556 Then (c) why not build a party based on reducing the regulatory state, treating people as independent agents able to enter contracts, hire, and fire at will without unions, osha, permits, eeoc, etc.

It seems that aligns with their natural philosophy.

Posted by: Gentlemen

Because supporters of limited government have been declare white nationalists by our betters at NRO. You think I'm kidding.

I'm not.

Avik Roy said that explicitly on the Ricochet podcast 2 weeks ago.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at August 11, 2016 05:42 PM (9sySV)

557 "Transform its demographics."

Because personnel is policy.

Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 05:43 PM (JTwsP)

558 #400

You can read Angelo Codevilla for an explanation of the schism between
average Americans and the ruling class who live isolated from the rest
of us.
===============

Excellent comment. Angelo Codevilla's essay is a must-read for every American - Left-Center-Right.

Thanks for the post, Ace.

LINK (America's Ruling Class -- And The Perils Of Revolution):

http://preview.tinyurl.com/j6vgskr

Posted by: mrp at August 11, 2016 05:43 PM (JBggj)

559 "Coulter said, they can do abortions in the White House if they'll stop the immigration.
"

Some of us don't want to live in a country that sanctions killing children. Damn us!

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 05:34 PM (AI/U6)

Coulter's point was that you'll never stop the abortion unless you stop the immigration first.

Posted by: Emmett Milbarge at August 11, 2016 05:43 PM (nFdGS)

560 Here's my extremist commie infiltrator position on abortion: You can't just go around killing people.
Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 05:37 PM (dFi94)

Wait- what?

Oh yeah, Jefferson Airplane, remember them?

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 05:43 PM (d6TTt)

561 Its not mind-reading when two commenters agreed that American servicemen shouldn't be allowed to bring home foreign wives.

Is it everyone here? No, not by a long shot. but that was a helluva an eye-opener to me.
Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:32 PM (UBBWX)

Prove it.

Posted by: buzzion at August 11, 2016 05:44 PM (z/Ubi)

562 "You know nobody gives a shit anymore, right? Why is it that if you find one immigrant who isn't here for the EBT card then you're justified, but if I find 1000 who are, then it's purely anecdotal, and I'm evil. The truth is it's simply human nature."

So you think its 1 out of a 1,000 immigrants who are here to work hard and succeed and 999 are here for the EBT.

I don't think you're evil. I just think you're wrong.

I live in a mixed area, and we do have plenty of immigrants on EBT - even though technically they supposedly can't get it.

But i also know a ton more who aren't on EBT.

I also know native born Americans who abuse disability and are on EBT, too.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:44 PM (UBBWX)

563
That is illegal.

Super. Illegal.

What these groups do provide, however, is financial assistance in
the form of paid for medical care, money for pregnancy related expenses,
and sometimes housing.

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 05:40 PM (AI/U6)

How do wombs for rent pull that then?

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 05:44 PM (aiB0J)

564 An Olympian has contracted the bacteria that causes dysentery in Rio.

Crazy ol' English with its word-order modifiers again. What a language.
OK, so if you're not in Rio, you'll be fine? It only causes the dysentery in Rio?

Posted by: Stringer Davis at August 11, 2016 05:44 PM (tIja6)

565 Because supporters of limited government have been declare white nationalists by our betters at NRO. You think I'm kidding.

I'm not.

Avik Roy said that explicitly on the Ricochet podcast 2 weeks ago.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at August 11, 2016 05:42 PM (9sySV)

I'm going to have to track that down. I've been having an argument with some liberal dolt on FB who argued that Norquist's pledge is sedition because he wants to starve the government down to essentially nothing.

Posted by: El Skippito Friskito at August 11, 2016 05:45 PM (q/kmn)

566 Why is it that if you find one immigrant who isn't here for the EBT card
then you're justified, but if I find 1000 who are, then it's purely
anecdotal, and I'm evil.

How do you know the ratio is 1 to 1000?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 05:45 PM (5115x)

567 he wants to starve the government down to essentially nothing.

Posted by: El Skippito Friskito at August 11, 2016 05:45 PM (q/kmn)

Instant wood.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at August 11, 2016 05:45 PM (Zu3d9)

568 "How do wombs for rent pull that then? "

Because they are being "reimbursed" for the aforementioned costs.

Posted by: Lauren at August 11, 2016 05:45 PM (AI/U6)

569 Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 05:44 PM (aiB0J)

By entering into the contract *before* pregnancy which isn't in any way analogous to what you are suggesting (other than the commenter who brought up that supply would grow to meet demand and swamp the resources intended for the original purpose).

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 11, 2016 05:47 PM (GDulk)

570 Stringer you are burying the lede. Again.

An OLYMPIAN got sick.

Clearly not an ordinary bug, but not just because it only makes you sick in Rio.

Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 05:47 PM (JTwsP)

571 as far as I know American servicemen have been bringing foreign nationals home to wed and start a family with for decades upon decades. I believe that is still legal immigration.
what's the deal?

Posted by: willow at August 11, 2016 05:47 PM (A1MMY)

572
566 Why is it that if you find one immigrant who isn't here for the EBT card
then you're justified, but if I find 1000 who are, then it's purely
anecdotal, and I'm evil.

How do you know the ratio is 1 to 1000?
Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 05:45

:eye roll:

Posted by: buzzion at August 11, 2016 05:47 PM (z/Ubi)

573 Wombs for rent? I could use a womb. Haven't had one since '92. Does Medicare reimburse for that?

Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 05:48 PM (dFi94)

574 buzzion,

If comments had a search function, I could easily do this. It was on a thread about an Islamic terror attack.

If you don't believe me, that's fine. I know what I read.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:48 PM (UBBWX)

575 (other than the commenter who brought up that supply would grow to meet demand and swamp the resources intended for the original purpose).

Posted by: Please allow me to introduce myself - Unintended Consequences at August 11, 2016 05:48 PM (JTwsP)

576 Because supporters of limited government have been declare white nationalists by our betters at NRO. You think I'm kidding.

I'm not.

Avik Roy said that explicitly on the Ricochet podcast 2 weeks ago.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at August 11, 2016 05:42 PM (9sySV)

I'm gonna call bullshit on that one. Please provide a citation.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 05:48 PM (5115x)

577 567 he wants to starve the government down to essentially nothing.

Posted by: El Skippito Friskito at August 11, 2016 05:45 PM (q/kmn)

Instant wood.
Posted by: Charlie Brown's Dildo

My take- come back, Silent Cal, we need you man.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 05:48 PM (d6TTt)

578
I live in a mixed area, and we do have plenty of immigrants on EBT - even though technically they supposedly can't get it.

But i also know a ton more who aren't on EBT.

I also know native born Americans who abuse disability and are on EBT, too.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:44 PM (UBBWX)

Having previously lived in a poor, mixed area I'd say that 2/3 are scamming the system, and that a system funded by American taxpayers (not illegals, since they can't legally work and thus the vast majority don't pay taxes) should be for citizens only. Let's make citizenship have some real benefits again, and lock our benefits systems to citizens only. The deal we'd be offering is basically this: If we're going to help you if you fall on hard times, you have to show the commitment to us through thick or thin by going through the citizenship process and pledging allegiance.

That's not mean-spirited. Requiring that people clear a fairly low bar of learning about and professing loyalty to their new nation of residence before we give them taxpayer-funded largesse is common sense.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at August 11, 2016 05:49 PM (J+mig)

579
574 buzzion,

If comments had a search function, I could easily do this. It was on a thread about an Islamic terror attack.

If you don't believe me, that's fine. I know what I read.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:48 PM (UBBWX)

I have no problem searching for comments.

Posted by: buzzion at August 11, 2016 05:49 PM (z/Ubi)

580 Sexypig, I recall the same discussion you are referring to. Let me see if I can find it.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 05:50 PM (5115x)

581 I also know native born Americans who abuse disability and are on EBT, too.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:44 PM (UBBWX)

You're opening another kettle of worms regarding offshoring/legal immigration/illegal immigration/automation. Every native American who is abusing disability isn't necessarily unemployed by choice, but every immigrant here is here by choice, and they compete for an ever shrinking pool of jobs. The smart nation might realize that we are full up on cheap low skill labor. What are we going to do with all this unassimilated unskilled labor once it can't get a job? It's a social disaster in the making, and one that may linger for generations, like the social costs of slavery continue to this day. However that's a small price to be paid so that you can virtue signal how you aren't a racist.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 05:50 PM (aiB0J)

582 I constantly mention that people would rather be serfs than citizens, that we've got an elected monarchy ... and you all just roll your eyes and mutter "There goes ScoggDog again. Can we come to your bunker Scogg ? HaHaHaHaHa ... seriously, don't invite Scogg to the MoMee."

I switch up the wording ONE DAMN TIME ... and here comes 18-1 and he's all "Actually Scogg, the word you are looking for is SERFDOM."

And I'll be damned if y'all don't all start noddin' and goin' all "Why you know, Mr. 18'-1 is correct. I do believe this is serfdom. Well played, good sir."

*bangs head on steel work table*

*hits head with hammer repeatedly*

Posted by: ScoggDog at August 11, 2016 05:51 PM (1Boes)

583 572
566 Why is it that if you find one immigrant who isn't here for the EBT card
then you're justified, but if I find 1000 who are, then it's purely
anecdotal, and I'm evil.

How do you know the ratio is 1 to 1000?
Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 05:45

:eye roll:
Posted by: buzzion at August 11, 2016 05:47 PM (z/Ubi)

in the days of Ellis Island, there were no EBT et al. You made it or you left.
now the dreck stays.

Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 05:51 PM (wwH1X)

584 Sexypig still hasn't offered any evidence of his vilest slur.

Doesn't exist, does it?

Posted by: Robert Crawford at August 11, 2016 05:52 PM (dbxue)

585 @278

"Don't you guys ever get tired of this lie? If they were so good why didn't they win the nomination?

It's like fans of a team that never even made it to the playoffs fantasizing about how their team would winning the Super Bowl right now."

Rock totally crushed Scissors in the primary, I don't know why Scissors keeps insisting it would be doing better against Paper in the general election.

Posted by: cjw at August 11, 2016 05:53 PM (onydf)

586 @6 zombie follow my link, give me your opinion

@156 Damiano How many people were 'Republican' based on what they heard versus what the Platform actually said?

I agree with Ace, however, I've been on the outs with Conservatives since RedState kicked me off back in '08 for talking '3rd party'. My argument that Conservatives were not being served by the GOP. Most Conservatives kick me out for being 'too liberal'. That is the price of liberty, people get to choose to do things you disagree with. Freedom is messy.

Trump is talking to the people that are tired of "Party", it lies, it cheats, it steals, it serves itself (the 2% of Republicans that are actually party members not just party voters).

I support a right to abortion, until viability. Individual rights.
I support gay marriage, people free to 'contract' with whom they choose
I want government to be small and local, but a Federal government concerned FIRST with protecting our rights/liberty/property.

I have principles too...

Posted by: Tracy Coyle at August 11, 2016 05:54 PM (SXT9g)

587 They will never level with us. They want our votes. We get farmed for them like Bitcoin.

They level with the billionaire donor class.

There are solutions to that.

Posted by: Colonel Kurtz at August 11, 2016 05:54 PM (zaKUF)

588 You cannot run a welfare state country with open borders.

Its like having a block party and busing in people from other neighborhoods. You Just Run Out of Nachos.

The idiots in charge see that they are already out of nachos or close too it. So they advertise the party and all are welcome and expect the new comers to bring their own nachos. Some will, most won't and the end result is more people with no nachos.

Posted by: Please allow me to introduce myself - Unintended Consequences at August 11, 2016 05:54 PM (JTwsP)

589 A cavil on abortion after rape, Ace.

Rape is always presented as a matter of choice, freedom of choice, a woman's right to choose. Then when the time comes to defend it we are presented with the one example where there IS no choice involved, that the "choice" of a rape victim is morally equivalent to the choice of the woman just back from a Spring Break she can't remember or the woman worried she'll miss a step on the race to that corner office.

I don't approve of abortion after rape... I believe it means a second victim is victimized by the artist's act. But I don't believe I have the moral authority to deny her that choice. What I DO believe is that we as a society should make every means available, moral and material, to give the rape victim the option of keeping that. Any with minimal life consequences.

Posted by: Richard McEnroe at August 11, 2016 05:55 PM (smjYc)

590 544 Legal immigrants have to undergo health checks. At
least my wife did. Maybe that's changed - so much fo our written laws
has become "optional."

my main reason to be hard against illegal immigration isn't even immigration: its rule of law being allowed to lapse!

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:38 PM (UBBWX)

Heath checks can be wavered. Obama has literally made that automatic.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 05:55 PM (mpXpK)

591 OK, so if you're not in Rio, you'll be fine?

Posted by: Stringer Davis at August 11, 2016 05:44 PM (tIja6)

This is the thing about conservatives. You know the answer to this. You know that yes if you aren't in Rio, or anywhere else in the third world then you're probably fine, but you're going to act like you don't because......racism.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 05:56 PM (aiB0J)

592 I don't approve of abortion after rape... I believe it means a second victim is victimized by the artist's act. But I don't believe I have the moral authority to deny her that choice. What I DO believe is that we as a society should make every means available, moral and material, to give the rape victim the option of keeping that. Any with minimal life consequences.
Posted by: Richard McEnroe at August 11, 2016 05:55 PM (smjYc)

My position. Better stated.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 05:57 PM (d6TTt)

593 Since the beginning of time soldiers have brought back wives. The Greeks, Romans, middle ages, Napoleoic, WWI and II, Vietnam and Gulf war. And will be so until the end of time.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 05:57 PM (bksJQ)

594 Ack, Ace's comment search function is horrible. I cannot find it. But yes, I also recall a commenter saying that he thought American servicemembers shouldn't be allowed to bring back foreign brides, that it was basically just a ruse for the bride to "infiltrate" the US.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 05:57 PM (5115x)

595 I want a federal administration that doesn't send $400,000,000 of tax-payer funded ransom money to a nation that hates America, hates American allies, hates my religious faith, and hates the US Constitution.

Posted by: mrp at August 11, 2016 05:58 PM (JBggj)

596 :eye roll:
Posted by: buzzion

Yeah, this place is very echo chamber.

Posted by: Sexypig at August 11, 2016 05:58 PM (UBBWX)

597 in the days of Ellis Island, there were no EBT et al. You made it or you left.

now the dreck stays.

Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 05:51 PM (wwH1X)
See, this is part of the problem right here. You are characterizing immigrants as "dreck". Don't you see how some might take offense to that characterization?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 05:59 PM (5115x)

598 Qui tacet consentiret

Silence implies consent

Works great for the Roman that kills anyone who disagrees - everybody else not so much.

Posted by: DaveA at August 11, 2016 05:59 PM (8J/Te)

599 Since the beginning of time soldiers have brought back wives. The Greeks, Romans, middle ages, Napoleoic, WWI and II, Vietnam and Gulf war. And will be so until the end of time.
Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 05:57 PM (bksJQ)

My ancestors, on one side anyway, did not bring home wives. They acquired them, after burning the monasteries and the hamlets.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 05:59 PM (d6TTt)

600 ~NONACHOS4U!~

Do you like my Snidely Whiplash mustache?

Posted by: Miley's Nachos at August 11, 2016 06:00 PM (NTqvt)

601 Rock totally crushed Scissors in the primary, I don't know why Scissors keeps insisting it would be doing better against Paper in the general election.

Posted by: cjw at August 11, 2016 05:53 PM (onydf)

By all means, wear that Conference Championship t-shirt with pride.

Posted by: El Skippito Friskito at August 11, 2016 06:00 PM (q/kmn)

602 By entering into the contract *before* pregnancy
which isn't in any way analogous to what you are suggesting (other than
the commenter who brought up that supply would grow to meet demand and
swamp the resources intended for the original purpose).

Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette at August 11, 2016 05:47 PM (GDulk)

Technically, wasn't my point, but you're technically right, and that's the best kind of right.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:01 PM (aiB0J)

603 I have no problem searching for comments.

Posted by: buzzion at August 11, 2016 05:49 PM (z/Ubi)
Then maybe you can share some of your tricks? I am reduced to going thread by thread to try to find the comment I am looking for.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:01 PM (5115x)

604 #597 I believe he was characterizing the dreck as "dreck."

Posted by: Miley's Nachos at August 11, 2016 06:01 PM (NTqvt)

605 Nachos for everyone, or we take to the streets!

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 06:01 PM (d6TTt)

606 in the days of Ellis Island, there were no EBT et al. You made it or you left.

now the dreck stays.

Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 05:51 PM (wwH1X)
-----
See, this
is part of the problem right here. You are characterizing immigrants as
"dreck". Don't you see how some might take offense to that
characterization?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 05:59 PM (5115x)

That's some nice selective interpretation.

Posted by: Country Singer at August 11, 2016 06:01 PM (GUBah)

607 Complain about traffic jams? Don't like "suburban sprawl"? Dont like huge lines at the supermarket? Does all that seem to be getting better, or worse, year in and year out?

Most "small towns" have a lot more roads, more houses and more people than they used to even a generation ago. There are exceptions, but that't the general rule.

Small towns have become, suburbs. Suburbs have become exurbs. And the urban has become a Third World hellhole.

The forests and farms of our youth are now mostly crap houses.

Has our population not increased from 200+ million to over 300 million in a single generation?

The left goes on about "green" everything and "sustainability" but invites 6 Billion people to come and strip the US like locusts, becuz "racist."

While the priests of the Free Market take their hands off the wheel and trust The Market to prevent the country from becoming more of a dump, or worse, just want the cheap labor.

Zoning ninnys who are all about "planning" worry about whether your sticks are separated from your leaves, and the wattage of your light bulbs, while the entire town gets paved over from end to end.

Even the "no illegals" (Trump included) make a fetish over LEGAL immigration, or "unvetted terrorists" in immigration, when yes those are part of the problem, but the much larger problem is just TOO MUCH immigration.

And nobody honestly suggests maybe we should hold off trying to accept, feed and house the planet for no other reason than that this country is just getting too damned crowded.

Posted by: xnycpeasant at August 11, 2016 06:01 PM (c0/+W)

608 going to go finish making dinner, have fun.

Posted by: willow at August 11, 2016 06:02 PM (A1MMY)

609 #601 Lizard poisons Spock

Posted by: Miley's Nachos at August 11, 2016 06:02 PM (NTqvt)

610 Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 05:59 PM (5115x)

Dreck=Illegal

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 06:02 PM (9HX7k)

611 #597

See, this is part of the problem right here. You are characterizing
immigrants as "dreck". Don't you see how some might take offense to that
characterization?
===================

Whoa. That's two days in a row that I've agreed with one of Jeff's comments.

Posted by: mrp at August 11, 2016 06:02 PM (JBggj)

612 I recall a comment here some months ago where some commenter stated that nachos are for "those" people, not real Americans. Well I never. . .

Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 06:03 PM (JTwsP)

613 "Don't you guys ever get tired of this lie? If they were so good why didn't they win the nomination?

It's like fans of a team that never even made it to the playoffs
fantasizing about how their team would winning the Super Bowl right
now."

Rock totally crushed Scissors in the primary, I don't know why
Scissors keeps insisting it would be doing better against Paper in the
general election.

Posted by: cjw at August 11, 2016 05:53 PM (onydf)

The primary basically went the way it did because every candidate was a niche candidate. Cruz was playing to the Constitutional and Social Conservative crowds (he made a bigger play for SoCons after Carson dropped out, and it cost him votes among people for whom social issues are the least concern at the moment). JEB and Rubio were playing to habitual Republicans, the Country Club set, and the DC Establishment. Kasich was playing to Northern Republicans.

Trump focused on a different, and far less narrow demographic - people who aren't happy with the status quo. He offered an alternative to a system that, increasingly, doesn't give them a voice. It wasn't even a particularly good alternative, but everything else looked like more of the same.

Cruz, for his strong points, is a lawyer and looked and sounded too much like the rest of the well rehearsed, practiced liars that have been playing Lucy with the Football with us since the end of the Reagan era.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at August 11, 2016 06:03 PM (J+mig)

614 And I also think it should be pointed out, contra that Federalist article I linked a little while ago, that the three major factions on the right - the Establishment, the Grassroots, and the Nationalists - immigration is THE issue that most starkly divides them all.

Nationalists tend to be anti-immigration and place that issue at the top of the priority list.

Establishment-types tend to be pro-immigration and also place that issue at the top of the priority list.

Grassroots-types tend to be pragmatic on the issue, and are caught in the crossfire to a degree. They don't agree with some of the more draconian ideas for border enforcement, but they don't agree with wide open borders either.

So keep that in mind when you are sparring.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:04 PM (5115x)

615 *sits on grammie's white couch*

Grammie ... I mention serfdom all the time. Nobody listens. Nobody cares. Somebody else mentions serfdom ... and the whole damn Horde is all ears. I dunno' ... sometimes I wonder if it's even worth the effort anymore.

*slumps shoulders*

*finishes longneck*

*grabs another*

Posted by: ScoggDog at August 11, 2016 06:04 PM (1Boes)

616 Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 05:51 PM (wwH1X)
See, this is part of the problem right here. You are characterizing immigrants as "dreck". Don't you see how some might take offense to that characterization?
Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 05:59 PM (5115x)

if that is your interpretation, i will help explain it to you. In the heyday of Ellis Island, 1/3 went home because they couldn't hack it ( and there was no dole).Hence, Darwin provided a way for us to get the BEST.
Now the 1/3rd that would have left can stay and get EBTs et al.
there was nothing in what I posted that said anything else. I expect libtards to pretend that I did, but not here.
I wasn't being cryptic and you don't need an advanced degree to understand it.

Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 06:05 PM (wwH1X)

617 This is a great post + comment thread.

Good thing I bought another six-pack this afternoon

Posted by: mrp at August 11, 2016 06:05 PM (JBggj)

618 Dreck=Illegal

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 06:02 PM (9HX7k)
No. Dreck means "rubbish" or "trash", at least according to my dictionary.
Can we stop it with broadly characterizing immigrants as "dreck" or "trash" or just welfare moochers? Please?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:05 PM (5115x)

619 just my pet peeve

one of these days in a discussion about a woman's right to choose

I would like to see a discussion about those who force a woman to "choose" abortion through threats, beatings, bullying and general all around thuggishness.

I saw something the other day that a friend's daughter wrote. She said "Boyfriend X says he will stab me in the stomach if I get pregnant."

Think she's alone? Think again. I'm missing a niece.

Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 06:05 PM (dFi94)

620 *slumps shoulders*

*finishes longneck*

*grabs another*

* passes scogg the nachos*

Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 06:05 PM (JTwsP)

621 597 See, this is part of the problem right here. You are
characterizing immigrants as "dreck". Don't you see how some might take
offense to that characterization?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 05:59 PM (5115x)

Under Obama and even Bush the overwhelming majority have been "dreck". The system set up by Ted the Swimmer favors dreck. I posted links a few months ago to some statistics.

95% of all of our current LEGAL immigrants come from third world shit holes. And the overwhelming majority of them are illiterate in their own native language and unemployable here. They all get a gov check on arrival and 75% of them go immediately on welfare or some form of living assistance.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 06:05 PM (mpXpK)

622 Dreck=Illegal

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 06:02 PM (9HX7k)

Agreed. If a person's first act in our country is to spit on our immigration laws and hold themselves superior to our system, they can go to hell as far as I'm concerned.

Get in line. Come here legally. Or don't come here.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at August 11, 2016 06:06 PM (J+mig)

623 See, this is part of the problem right here. You are
characterizing immigrants as "dreck". Don't you see how some might take
offense to that characterization?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 05:59 PM (5115x)
See this is what everybody is tired of coming from Conservatives. There is dreck in the world, when referring to people. You know this, and you would call ISIS dreck, but can't say it because you're afraid. Conservatism is too soft and squishy to survive.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:06 PM (aiB0J)

624 And will be so until the end of time.

I believe there was quite a bit of "buyer's remorse" after the Korean conflict. Every other table-top ballerina on Dyer Street in El Paso seemed to be a Korean import.

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at August 11, 2016 06:06 PM (SeD0w)

625 612 I recall a comment here some months ago where some commenter stated that nachos are for "those" people, not real Americans. Well I never. . .
Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 06:03 PM (JTwsP)

Well, there are nachos, and the there are NACHOS.
"Those people" will get free Velveeta Cheese and generic chips. The other people will get Sargentos Cheese, and Old ElPaso chips. Not really, but people gotta bitch, and make shit up.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 06:07 PM (d6TTt)

626 *slumps shoulders*

*finishes longneck*

*grabs another*

Posted by: ScoggDog at August 11, 2016 06:04 PM (1Boes)
==========================================

Don't be drinking on my white couch. And use a coaster.

Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 06:07 PM (dFi94)

627 And thus we have come around to people spouting stuff that is more insulting than just calling them idiots.

Posted by: buzzion at August 11, 2016 06:07 PM (z/Ubi)

628 Part of the Ellis Island deal was that eligible human beings applying for US residency were required to pass an extensive health examination and also had to provide proof of financial support, which was either money in hand and/or sponsorship by other human beings already residing in the US.

Posted by: mrp at August 11, 2016 06:08 PM (JBggj)

629 95% of all of our current LEGAL immigrants come
from third world shit holes. And the overwhelming majority of them are
illiterate in their own native language and unemployable here. They all
get a gov check on arrival and 75% of them go immediately on welfare or
some form of living assistance.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 06:05 PM (mpXpK)

We need to reform legal immigration with a points-based system like Australia. Immigration laws should serve the needs of the country and its citizenry, not the political agendas of its ruling class.

If you've got in-demand skills, or if you're here to work and you've got a job lined up, or you're bringing money to start a business? Come right on in! If you want to suck off the public teat, try Europe.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at August 11, 2016 06:09 PM (J+mig)

630 "And thus we have come around to people spouting stuff that is more insulting than just calling them idiots."

Nacho eater.

Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 06:09 PM (C6xeQ)

631 and also had to provide proof of financial support,
which was either money in hand and/or sponsorship by other human beings
already residing in the US.

Posted by: mrp at August 11, 2016 06:08 PM (JBggj)
==========================================

That's how the Skandi's snuck in.

Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 06:10 PM (dFi94)

632 Under Obama and even Bush the overwhelming majority have been "dreck".
Uhh, often times this has been the intention of the exporting country.
See: Boat-lift, Mariana

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at August 11, 2016 06:10 PM (SeD0w)

633 grammie, word around here is that you were a hippie.
If that's the case, who were your favorite music groups?
And do you still listen to them?

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 06:10 PM (d6TTt)

634 On EBT/disability etc...

My wife works in benefits eligibility. There is a whole class of people who basically just game the system to squeeze the max amount of benefits out of it, claiming two households when really there's one, etc. Aliens aren't eligible for TANF but they can open a case to get food stamps on their children only. BUT the amount of background checking the state has the time to do is pretty limited. I *think* they would catch a phony SSN with their system, though a lot of other fraudulent claims get through for lack of time -- they're even told NOT to spend time checking out certain claims, like if they say they don't have a felony conviction you can't spend the 30 seconds it would take to look them up on CaseNet.

But this is a problem of cultural rot and lowered expectations across the board. In rural Missouri, if somebody tells you they're on disability, and you say "what's your disability?" they'll tell you with a straight face "$733 a month". They don't even remember what bullcrap phony disability their lawyer and doctor made up for them. Nobody in public housing ever contemplates getting an apartment that is not subsidized, like they can't even conceive of the idea. Many of them are using various schemes to get paid by Medicaid as well for "in home health care" on relatives that they aren't actually providing. Once Hillary gets daycare paid for, they'll be scamming us on that too, pairing off and providing daycare for the other party while that party does the same for them, pointlessly -- they're already doing that crap somewhat by using a state assistance program.

That is the craptastic world of rural poor whites in the 4th generation of the welfare state; they have zero expectations, zero motivations, and are perfectly willing to accept a lousy standard of living so long as they never have to work, and if they can find a doctor to prescribe some narcotics for their "bad back" and make the responsible citizens pay for their pill addiction while they lay around and get high, all the better.

I don't think aliens should receive government benefits, but that's because I don't think ANYBODY should be receiving them for other than very temporary periods of time. Permanent welfare with permanent intoxication is now a lifestyle for a ton of Americans, and will be the lifestyle of their children in 20 years too, that's the problem.

Posted by: cjw at August 11, 2016 06:10 PM (onydf)

635 Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 06:05 PM (mpXpK)

Perhaps you would be good enough to repost those links, because I would like to see the factual basis behind the conclusion that most immigrants today are "dreck".

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:11 PM (5115x)

636 Looks like we're never going to get over Nacho Grande today.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 06:11 PM (d6TTt)

637 I also posted a link to a Heritage article a few weeks ago where they did a nationwide survey of 1000 people on "immigration".

They were shocked to find that the overwhelming majority of people who identified as Republicans were opposed to ALL immigration, both legal and illegal. And even Democrats were opposed to illegals.

In short, people are fed up.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 06:11 PM (mpXpK)

638 Posted by: mrp at August 11, 2016 06:08 PM (JBggj)

This.

Just got my county tax bill. 48% goes to Human Services.

25% of the population is Hispanic. Pretty sure there aren't many VISA overstays except for the convenience store employees.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 06:12 PM (9HX7k)

639 635 Perhaps you would be good enough to repost those
links, because I would like to see the factual basis behind the
conclusion that most immigrants today are "dreck".

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:11 PM (5115x)

You have a search engine, go find them. I don't save links.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 06:12 PM (mpXpK)

640 @635: Visit Queens.

Posted by: xnycpeasant at August 11, 2016 06:12 PM (c0/+W)

641 grammie, word around here is that you were a hippie.

If that's the case, who were your favorite music groups?

And do you still listen to them?

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 06:10 PM (d6TTt)
=======================================

I'm a huge Beatles fan, and yes I listen to them nearly every day. Also the Kinks, CSNY, Jefferson Airplane, Buffalo Springfield, Poco, Yes, ELO among others. Time warp. I's in it.

Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 06:12 PM (dFi94)

642 Great piece. I think there's a lot of truth to it.

But I oppose Trump. I'll probably vote for Johnson, although I don't really like him either.

I'm one of those upper middle class professionals who doesn't really care about illegal immigration. But I also don't think it's racist to defend the border, to call for tougher immigration, or even to state--accurately--that Mexican immigrants commit more crime than the average person. The issue isn't close to the top of my priority list. Living in the Northeast and not fearing for my job from immigrant competition affects that obviously.

One other thing that I don't think is quite far here: a lot of Republicans have been calling for comprehensive immigration reform for years. I mean, that's what the whole 2012 autopsy was about. They didn't hide that. It was out in the open. And, while some border hawks may get the sense that others on the right view their position as racist, I think the idea is more that certain voters perceive that position as nativist or appealing to bigotry, and the 2012 autopsy crowd was trying to run away from that perception, not that they agreed it was an accurate view.

Posted by: gts109 at August 11, 2016 06:12 PM (Deogo)

643 That is the craptastic world of rural poor whites in the 4th generation of the welfare state; they have zero expectations, zero motivations, and are perfectly willing to accept a lousy standard of living so long as they never have to work, and if they can find a doctor to prescribe some narcotics for their "bad back" and make the responsible citizens pay for their pill addiction while they lay around and get high, all the better.

I don't think aliens should receive government benefits, but that's because I don't think ANYBODY should be receiving them for other than very temporary periods of time. Permanent welfare with permanent intoxication is now a lifestyle for a ton of Americans, and will be the lifestyle of their children in 20 years too, that's the problem.

Posted by: cjw at August 11, 2016 06:10 PM (onydf)

Sure you aren't Kevin Williamson's sock? (/sarcasm)

Rod Dreher is also probably not of much interest to those here who love Trump, but he's been posting some great stuff on the declining culture and suffering of the white underclass.

Posted by: El Skippito Friskito at August 11, 2016 06:13 PM (q/kmn)

644 In rural Missouri, if somebody tells you they're on disability, and you say "what's your disability?" they'll tell you with a straight face "$733 a month".

Yep. Gospel truth. Took a few depositions there and got this answer from more than a few people.

Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 06:13 PM (C6xeQ)

645 Is there white dreck in America too or is it just an ethnic thing?

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 06:13 PM (fn3+8)

646 Perhaps you would be good enough to repost those
links, because I would like to see the factual basis behind the
conclusion that most immigrants today are "dreck".

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:11 PM (5115x)

Why don't you prove that they aren't? If he has to prove his point, you have to prove yours. Get cracking.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at August 11, 2016 06:13 PM (J+mig)

647 628 Part of the Ellis Island deal was that eligible human beings applying for US residency were required to pass an extensive health examination and also had to provide proof of financial support, which was either money in hand and/or sponsorship by other human beings already residing in the US.
Posted by: mrp at August 11, 2016 06:08 PM (JBggj)

yes it was a darwinian system that ensured we were getting the best not the worst (dreck). Do you understand now chemjeff?

Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 06:13 PM (wwH1X)

648 Oops almost forgot Janis Joplin. Sorry Janis, won't happen again.

Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 06:14 PM (dFi94)

649

618 Chemjeff

Can we stop it with broadly characterizing immigrants as "dreck" or "trash" or just welfare moochers? Please?

Well, to do that, we'd need to compare the number of illegals in the country to the number of illegals receiving some sort of government benefits ... and for how long. Then, we'd need to do the same for legal immigrants.

I think you will not like the results. I don't.

Posted by: Arbalest at August 11, 2016 06:14 PM (FlRtG)

650 Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:06 PM (aiB0J)

I don't think ISIS is "dreck". I think ISIS is evil. Dreck implies no redeeming value. ISIS certainly does have a redeeming value - to jihadists. That's the problem.

And I have a knee-jerk opposition to characterizing anyone as "dreck". I don't want to debase their humanity like that. I think everyone has some redeeming value.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:14 PM (5115x)

651 and when libtards(or some posters) call illegal invading criminals "immigrants"you are insulting my grandparents!

Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 06:15 PM (wwH1X)

652 Hey Chemjeff. Have you ever been in Brooklyn during what used to be called Labor Day. Now its "Juvee" and the "Caribbean Day Parade."
Oh. My. Fucking. God.

Posted by: xnycpeasant at August 11, 2016 06:15 PM (c0/+W)

653 I'm a huge Beatles fan, and yes I listen to them nearly every day. Also the Kinks, CSNY, Jefferson Airplane, Buffalo Springfield, Poco, Yes, ELO among others. Time warp. I's in it.
Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 06:12 PM (dFi94)

Awesome list. I would add Joplin, and the Doors. I was in love with Grace Slick. Jumping ahead a little, I'm a huge Zevon fan. "Desperados Under the Eaves".

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 06:15 PM (d6TTt)

654 Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 06:13 PM (wwH1X)

Thank you for clarifying your response.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:15 PM (5115x)

655
That is the craptastic world of rural poor
whites in the 4th generation of the welfare state; they have zero
expectations, zero motivations, and are perfectly willing to accept a
lousy standard of living so long as they never have to work,

Posted by: cjw at August 11, 2016 06:10 PM (onydf)

Work at what? This is what you lost in time conservatives don't get. The jobs are gone. Are there some lazy native Americans, yes, but you can't tell which are which because there aren't any jobs, and it's only going to get worse from here. This is why all immigration needs to stop, unless it's a true genius.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:15 PM (aiB0J)

656 duh - the Doors! Senility is setting in. Of course the Doors.

Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 06:16 PM (dFi94)

657 644 In rural Missouri, if somebody tells you they're on disability, and you say "what's your disability?" they'll tell you with a straight face "$733 a month".

Yep. Gospel truth. Took a few depositions there and got this answer from more than a few people.
Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 06:13 PM (C6xeQ)

Illegals. Doing the jobs Americans are paid not to do.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 06:16 PM (9HX7k)

658 Why don't you prove that they aren't?

can't prove a negative

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:16 PM (5115x)

659 645 Is there white dreck in America too or is it just an ethnic thing?
Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 06:13 PM (fn3+

dreck everywhere, and our prior immigration laws kept them out.

Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 06:16 PM (wwH1X)

660 Work at what? This is what you lost in time conservatives don't get. The jobs are gone.

They're obviously not ALL gone, if some companies feel the need to import illegal labor.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:17 PM (5115x)

661 Posted by: xnycpeasant at August 11, 2016 06:15 PM (c0/+W)

The one time I was in Brooklyn, I went to Yankee Stadium, and that was it.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:18 PM (5115x)

662 645 Is there white dreck in America too or is it just an ethnic thing?

Bunches of 'em. I prefer the term "wheck".

Posted by: ScoggDog at August 11, 2016 06:18 PM (1Boes)

663 duh - the Doors! Senility is setting in. Of course the Doors.
Posted by:

LA Woman!

Do you ever feel just a little smug that we used up all the fun, back then?
Nowdays, it looks like it just all serious hedonism.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 06:19 PM (d6TTt)

664 You are kidding right?
Bronx is up and the Battery's down (and Brooklyn too)

Posted by: xnycpeasant at August 11, 2016 06:19 PM (c0/+W)

665 645
Is there white dreck in America too or is it just an ethnic thing?

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 06:13 PM (fn3+

Plenty of white dreck, and I'm related to it.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:19 PM (aiB0J)

666 I think you will not like the results. I don't.//

You can not reason a man out of a position he has not reasoned himself into. Even using facts. Just doesn't matter because that's not what that man was using to begin with. Not that this applies to anyone in particular. General observation.

Posted by: simplemind at August 11, 2016 06:19 PM (C6xeQ)

667
Sure you aren't Kevin Williamson's sock? (/sarcasm)

The response to Kevin Williamson's article proved that there is such a thing as Political Correctness on the right. You can't disparage poor rural whites who have made poor choices, otherwise you get a crapload of shit thrown at you.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:19 PM (5115x)

668 Posted by: xnycpeasant at August 11, 2016 06:19 PM (c0/+W)

Is Yankee Stadium in the Bronx? Oh yeah, I guess they are. Sorry I just don't know very much about NYC.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:20 PM (5115x)

669 One of the other things I found very revealing in that report about "immigrants" going on welfare was that the federal goverment did everything they could do to obfuscate and hide the data to make it almost impossible to track down accurate numbers.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 06:20 PM (mpXpK)

670 Work at what? This is what you lost in time
conservatives don't get. The jobs are gone. Are there some lazy native
Americans, yes, but you can't tell which are which because there aren't
any jobs, and it's only going to get worse from here. This is why all
immigration needs to stop, unless it's a true genius.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:15 PM (aiB0J)

Exactly! A lot of these people would be happy to get up off their ass and go to work, if they could make more working than they do sponging off the system. The opportunity to do so is gone, there's very few decent jobs left anymore, competition for them is absurd, and you can spend years trying to get one with no progress. There's only so much you can take dealing with part-time retail BS for less than you'd make on welfare before your pride buckles and you go "F-this" and take the quick and easy path. I know because I came very close to that point before I got a decently professional sort of job. A lot of people aren't as lucky.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at August 11, 2016 06:21 PM (J+mig)

671 That's perfectly all right. I often tell cabdrivers who've "lived here for ten years" (in NYC) that they should go out of the City once in awhile and actually visit the US.

Posted by: xnycpeasant at August 11, 2016 06:22 PM (c0/+W)

672 They're obviously not ALL gone, if some companies feel the need to import illegal labor.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:17 PM (5115x)

I didn't say they were all gone. I said it only gets worse from here, but there aren't enough for native born Americans who want to work, and the illegals/legals/automation. Something has to give, and if you can't see that then it certainly explains why Trump caught you off guard.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:22 PM (aiB0J)

673 667
Sure you aren't Kevin Williamson's sock? (/sarcasm)

The response to Kevin Williamson's article proved that there is such a thing as Political Correctness on the right. You can't disparage poor rural whites who have made poor choices, otherwise you get a crapload of shit thrown at you.
Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:19 PM (5115x)

Jeff, the premise that essentially America is a welfare state, and it has become for large numbers of people, socially acceptable.
Agree, or disagree?

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 06:23 PM (d6TTt)

674 Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 06:20 PM (mpXpK)

Not to oversimplify, but how much of this tolerance of illegals and inviting others is to prop up SS etc?

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 06:23 PM (9HX7k)

675 660 They're obviously not ALL gone, if some companies feel the need to import illegal labor.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:17 PM (5115x)

You are ignoring the FACT that many large companies are laying off permanent employees so they can hire H1B visa LEGAL immigrants at lower wages. Illegals are being hired at mass rates by chicken factories in the midwest and farmers everywhere. Not because there are no US workers available, but because they can get the illegals as virtual slave labor.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 06:23 PM (mpXpK)

676 @643: I'm skimming over some of Dreher's stuff to check it out later tonight, I used to read TAC many years ago back in my more Buchanan-curious days and am a little surprised that their columnists aren't all full-throated Trump supporters. Must've been a changeover in editorial direction at some point.

Posted by: cjw at August 11, 2016 06:23 PM (onydf)

677 "Work at what? This is what you lost in time conservatives don't get. The
jobs are gone. Are there some lazy native Americans, yes, but you can't
tell which are which because there aren't any jobs, and it's only going
to get worse from here. This is why all immigration needs to stop,
unless it's a true genius."

Perhaps if people who live where there are no jobs showed the same willingness to move somewhere there are jobs as the immigrants that are stealing their jobs they might find jobs.

I see help wanted signs around Dallas all the time. Any halfway motivated person could find a job in two days.

Boo hoo. Jobs don't come knock on your door and drag your ass out of bed. And no immigration policy or tariff is going to change that.

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 06:24 PM (fn3+8)

678 Jeff, the premise that essentially America is a
welfare state, and it has become for large numbers of people, socially
acceptable.

Agree, or disagree?

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 06:23 PM (d6TTt)
Oh, I agree.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:25 PM (5115x)

679 Grassroots-types tend to be pragmatic on the issue, and are caught in the crossfire to a degree. They don't agree with some of the more draconian ideas for border enforcement, but they don't agree with wide open borders either.
So keep that in mind when you are sparring.
Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:04 PM (5115x)

I'd be curious to know what would constitute a "draconian" measure. A wall? Deportation? Do these "pragmatic" conservatives think it best that immigration laws be enforced 50% as opposed to 80% of the time?

Posted by: Reggie1971 at August 11, 2016 06:25 PM (H6376)

680 574 Not to oversimplify, but how much of this tolerance of illegals and inviting others is to prop up SS etc?

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 06:23 PM (9HX7k)

NONE; it is hard to prop up SS by adding people who do not pay taxes or SS since they are unemployed and drawing welfare.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 06:26 PM (mpXpK)

681 I'm guessing most of the illegals Isee day to day and up close are hard workers. I havd heard recently a illegal was pulling in over $100,000. But I know they work sometimes 12 hrs a day and at least 6 days a week. But I don't care how industrial they are, that money is going south and is mostly if not all is tax free. And I do care that Americans are sitting at home not doing anything and could use that money to better themselves and their families. Leftists could care less about them.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 06:27 PM (bksJQ)

682 Why would you want to disparage any group? How about no group disparaging. I don't remember that article well, but if I remember correctly, it had Williamson's usual combination of leaden writing and total lack of nuance.

Posted by: bjk at August 11, 2016 06:27 PM (K3ibK)

683 Which is more important: more "law enforcement" or less immigration?

Posted by: xnycpeasant at August 11, 2016 06:27 PM (c0/+W)

684 Poor choices is watching their job exported to China? Somebody apparently thought they were dreck.

Now which Clinton would that be?

*ponders*

Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 06:28 PM (ZnIt3)

685 Boo hoo. Jobs don't come knock on your door and drag your ass out of bed. And no immigration policy or tariff is going to change that.
Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 06:24 PM (fn3+

I think you are hitting on something. Agree there is often a laziness factor. Additionally, I think that there is a great deal of apathy out there, and it's a hell of a problem.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 06:28 PM (d6TTt)

686 Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 06:23 PM (mpXpK)

Yep. I invite any Moron to ride around with me for a day. Two chicken plants within 20 miles of my house. Building another that will employ a much touted 1,100 jobs. Our schools suck.

Might need to buy a trailer park.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 06:28 PM (9HX7k)

687 "I've been called a lot of things. Communist hasn't been one of them since Woodstock. heh" grammie winger

as I said, "or they should be"

VD Hanson wrote on this, that there is this "thing" where to prove how sincere one is, they will go beyond the pragmatic to the ideological, even at the expense of great loss. "My Principles"

It is especially true of the religious, that think God will now, or at least in eternity, reward the devout that were willing to sacrifice even their own son in devout obedience. (that's an OT reference)

I think they are just ego driven, at best. Commie infiltrators, yes, they exist as well. But probably they are behind the scenes. The Pharisees were pretty sincere.

Posted by: illiniwek at August 11, 2016 06:29 PM (l6e0e)

688
Perhaps if people who live where there are no
jobs showed the same willingness to move somewhere there are jobs as the
immigrants that are stealing their jobs they might find jobs.

I see help wanted signs around Dallas all the time. Any halfway motivated person could find a job in two days.

Boo
hoo. Jobs don't come knock on your door and drag your ass out of bed.
And no immigration policy or tariff is going to change that.

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 06:24 PM (fn3+

You people really don't understand the dynamic do you? Where is our white redneck going to live, when he competes with that illegal and gets the job in Dallas? It's a low skill job so he's going to have to go live in the ghetto or the barrio, and that's dangerous if you're white. Or he can stay home where the cost of living is low enough that he can get by on a check.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:29 PM (aiB0J)

689 Ace: this has been the best week for your opinion writing that I can remember. Thank you.

Posted by: Afroman at August 11, 2016 06:30 PM (YhvyR)

690 Well I don't know if these are the statistics that Vic is referring to.

But this is what I was able to come up with.

http://cis.org/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-Native-Households

They do show that immigrants use welfare at a higher rate than the native-born population. A much higher rate.

Later on, though, it appears that the major reason is due to (a) education and (b) income. Immigrants tend to have lower education and lower incomes, and those immigrants who are better educated and have higher incomes, their welfare usage rates become much closer to the native-born population. It is still higher, but not the huge disparity that you see when comparing the two populations overall.

So it seems to me, anyway, that immigrants are using welfare not because they are culturally predisposed to live on the dole, but they do so for the same reasons that the native-born population does: because they lack money, and they lack education to income their income-earning potential.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:30 PM (5115x)

691 What's really is bothering the country and AND ALONE TRUMP HAS MADE THEM ISSUES are constant foreign wars while we have needs at home, the hollowing out of the economy with outsourcing of jobs, the uncontrolled flood of illegal/ legal immigration for cheap labour that's lead to 20 years of stagnate wages, people with vastly different values and who are not interested in assimilating into America. Uncontrolled legal and illegal immigration and the strain it is putting on school, hospital and all public services, the absolute subservience of government to corporate interests rather than the rights and needs of the people.

Both parties are complicit in all those things, and it's taken this long for them to get fired up about the economic rape that ensued after Clinton did NAFTA. You wonder why support for TPPA and TTIP is under 20%? And why to get it passed both parties had to agree to fast track it? We have an utterly corrupt governing body now that's looking after its own and not the governed, and the governed are finally waking up to that fact.
Posted by: Tom at August 11, 2016 04:01 PM (nRWWi)

----------------

Gonna be honest, in terms of getting my vote one of the things that greatly turns me away from Trump is how he and supporters (but him, really), pretend no one in the history of the movement has ever talked about some of these issues and he, and ONLY HE, had the bravery to bring them up. He's a johnny-come-lately in a war that has been raging for a long time. He's not the first, not even close, to talk about any of this.

Posted by: Rich at August 11, 2016 06:31 PM (ygBCA)

692 Boo hoo. Jobs don't come knock on your door and drag
your ass out of bed. And no immigration policy or tariff is going to
change that.

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 06:24 PM (fn3+

Enjoy Trump he's a response to you

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:32 PM (aiB0J)

693 So it seems to me, anyway, that immigrants are using
welfare not because they are culturally predisposed to live on the
dole, but they do so for the same reasons that the native-born
population does: because they lack money, and they lack education to
income their income-earning potential.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:30 PM (5115x)

Which isn't our problem until we let them in.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:33 PM (aiB0J)

694 "You people really don't understand the dynamic do you? Where is our
white redneck going to live, when he competes with that illegal and gets
the job in Dallas? It's a low skill job so he's going to have to go
live in the ghetto or the barrio, and that's dangerous if you're white.
Or he can stay home where the cost of living is low enough that he can
get by on a check."

That's the spirit!

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 06:34 PM (fn3+8)

695 So it seems to me, anyway, that immigrants are using

welfare not because they are culturally predisposed to live on the

dole, but they do so for the same reasons that the native-born

population does: because they lack money, and they lack education to

income their income-earning potential.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:30 PM (5115x)

Which isn't our problem until we let them in, and then it's our problem for all of eternity.*

*edit

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:35 PM (aiB0J)

696 Most illegals I see in construction are in heavy labor, but they are moving into higher skilled jobs like plumbing and electrical.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 06:35 PM (bksJQ)

697 chemjeff -- put this in your google search bar. also add hash if you know who said it. you can also add date range since it seems to pull up a lot of old posts

site:http://acecomments.mu.nu/

Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at August 11, 2016 06:35 PM (LWu6U)

698 So it seems to me, anyway, that immigrants are using welfare not because they are culturally predisposed to live on the dole, but they do so for the same reasons that the native-born population does: because they lack money, and they lack education to income their income-earning potential.
Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:30 PM (5115x)

remember , living on the dole makes you wealthier than 95% of the world.
not bad if you're from the third world.

Posted by: avi at August 11, 2016 06:35 PM (wwH1X)

699 Bitch, you better not be a Hobbit.

Posted by: Kanye West at August 11, 2016 06:35 PM (UMRT/)

700 The economy has left behind the assembly line worker and the unskilled laborer. Those jobs, where they exist, have fallen in price due to overseas pressure from workers satisfied with a lower standard of living ... or left entirely for those countries.

Many people are fine with that. Their prices are lower as a result, and they don't think too much about the displaced worker. It's really no skin off their back. It's not their problem.

That's all there is to it.

Posted by: ScoggDog at August 11, 2016 06:35 PM (1Boes)

701 Agree, or disagree?

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 06:23 PM (d6TTt)
Oh, I agree.
Posted by: chemjeff

Seems like a significant number of people have just - given up. And I believe this cuts through racial and ethnic lines. I'm more worried about the belief that some have that things will never improve but always get worse, and what that does to create a permanent underclass.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 06:36 PM (d6TTt)

702 @655: "Work at what? This is what you lost in time conservatives don't get. The jobs are gone. Are there some lazy native Americans, yes, but you can't tell which are which because there aren't any jobs, and it's only going to get worse from here. This is why all immigration needs to stop, unless it's a true genius. "

The jobs aren't gone. But they are gone from these particular rural counties. And they are NEVER coming back to these rural counties, no person or policy will change that. The old men at my Elks Lodge can sit around til they're blue in the face talking about the good ol' days when you could drop out of high school at 16 in this country and walk down to the Kraft factory and get a nice job that you would keep for 40 years until you get a gold watch and a plaque, but that world is over.

And that world had a LOT of hidden expenses to it that nobody thinks about. People in my county who couldn't afford ground beef back then and ate nothing but deer meat, and sewed all their own clothes because new clothes were expensive as hell, can now eat about anything they want and buy a new wardrobe once a year on even a meager salary.

If you want to work your butt off, the sawmill is open and always hiring. Know why they're always hiring? Because it's freakin' hard and nobody wants to do it if the alternative is to sit around and collect a check. You could also move to where the jobs are, but nobody wants to do that either, because staying put in their little rural county is too easy for them. Getting a job in this country isn't that hard if you'll work, and getting a "good" job isn't even that hard if you're willing to be mobile. But the old days just aren't coming back, and Trump is being very deceptive to promise that they will -- he knows what labor costs in other countries, and knows what the price of textiles would be to make them here, he can't be that stupid to think that we're going to bring back a wave of low-tech manufacturing.

Posted by: cjw at August 11, 2016 06:37 PM (onydf)

703 "Enjoy Trump he's a response to you"

Sure. Who needs a sense of pride and a sense of shame and initiative when Daddy will fix everything.

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 06:37 PM (fn3+8)

704 690 So it seems to me, anyway, that immigrants are using
welfare not because they are culturally predisposed to live on the
dole, but they do so for the same reasons that the native-born
population does: because they lack money, and they lack education to
income their income-earning potential.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:30 PM (5115x)

That is because of that other statistic that say 95% of our LEGAL immigration is coming from third world shit holes and the overwhelming majority of them are illiterate in their own native language. I would say 100% of our illegal immigration is from third world shit holes.

The report that said 75% of ALL immigrants go on welfare or some other type of dole does not differentiate between legals and illegals because they said that data is impossible to find thanks to the feds.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 06:37 PM (mpXpK)

705 I'm more worried about the belief that some have that things will never improve but always get worse

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 06:36 PM (d6TTt)

Whenever I feel this way, I eat some Arby's and the feelings worsen.

Posted by: El Skippito Friskito at August 11, 2016 06:37 PM (q/kmn)

706 That's the spirit!

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 06:34 PM (fn3+

Remember this exchange the next time you're wondering what the hell happened to your party. How does it feel to be slowly sinking in a tar pit? Maybe they'll dig you up and put you in some museum a few thousand years from now.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:38 PM (aiB0J)

707 How are you certain that poor rural whites have made poor choices, chemjeff? No externalities in play?

Posted by: Afroman at August 11, 2016 06:38 PM (YhvyR)

708 Every country south of the border is big leftist goverment. They promise big handouts but can't produce them. (Venezuela) so when they get here its expected the goverment will bail them out.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 06:38 PM (bksJQ)

709 Whenever I feel this way, I eat some Arby's and the feelings worsen.
Posted by: El Skippito Friskito at August 11, 2016 06:37 PM (q/kmn)

Okay, made me laugh.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 06:39 PM (d6TTt)

710 because they lack money, and they lack education to income their income-earning potential.Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:30 PM (5115x)

Lack income to income?

Get a grip.

They don't want to go to college. They don't want to 'get ahead'. They want a job for a couple of years, then back to were they came. Meanwhile, taking a job away from someone else. There's no empathy on their part.

The people who shed crocodile tears over their so-called 'plight' are useful idiots.

Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 06:39 PM (ZnIt3)

711 I'd be curious to know what would constitute a
"draconian" measure. A wall? Deportation? Do these "pragmatic"
conservatives think it best that immigration laws be enforced 50% as
opposed to 80% of the time?

Posted by: Reggie1971 at August 11, 2016 06:25 PM (H6376)
Speaking only for myself:
1. E-Verify, which many in the restrictionist crowd want to make mandatory, is essentially just one more regulation imposed on small businesses; furthermore, it turns businesses into de facto law enforcement agents for weeding out the illegals. Why should private businesses be doing law enforcement's job for them?
2. What I have observed, is that some people who insist that we "enforce the law", believe that illegals should be detained at the moment that they encounter law enforcement during some other matter. What this means in practice is that it shifts the burden of proof: instead of law enforcement having to prove that someone is here illegally, everyone will have to prove to law enforcement that they are here legally. I think this is potentially dangerous from a libertarian point of view.
3. Building "the wall" is likely to be a giant boondoggle, a crony's dream project come true, and will do very little to affect the largest source of illegal immigration, visa overstays.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:40 PM (5115x)

712 It is especially true of the religious,
===========================

As if being a commie wasn't bad enough, now I'm dreadful and most dreadfully problematic because I'm a Christ-follower. What a mess I've made of things. I think I'll grab a Snickers bar, put on a little Jethro Tull and wallow in my shame.

Posted by: grammie winger at August 11, 2016 06:40 PM (dFi94)

713 They don't want to go to college. They don't want to 'get ahead'. They want a job for a couple of years, then back to were they came. Meanwhile, taking a job away from someone else. There's no empathy on their part.

Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 06:39 PM (ZnIt3)

Wait, are they taking jobs or sitting around unemployed and sucking up welfare?

Posted by: person(a non grata) at August 11, 2016 06:40 PM (mFkVC)

714 707 How are you certain that poor rural whites have made poor choices, chemjeff? No externalities in play?
Posted by: Afroman at August 11, 2016 06:38 PM (YhvyR)

I would say, from observation, early frequent pregnancies, Oxy, and meth. But mostly meth.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 06:40 PM (d6TTt)

715 time to close this thread and do something useful.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 06:41 PM (mpXpK)

716 The report that said 75% of ALL immigrants go on
welfare or some other type of dole does not differentiate between legals
and illegals because they said that data is impossible to find thanks
to the feds.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at August 11, 2016 06:37 PM (mpXpK)
The study that I cited claimed that welfare usage among all immigrants is 51% (in 2012), not the 75% that you claim. What is your source?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:41 PM (5115x)

717 Sure. Who needs a sense of pride and a sense of shame and initiative when Daddy will fix everything.

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 06:37 PM (fn3+

Shame me more virtuous conservative. See how many elections that wins you.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:41 PM (aiB0J)

718
707 How are you certain that poor rural whites have made poor choices, chemjeff? No externalities in play?

Posted by: Afroman at August 11, 2016 06:38 PM (YhvyR)

I don't say that they all have made poor choices. Some have for sure.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:42 PM (5115x)

719 As if being a commie wasn't bad enough, now I'm dreadful and most dreadfully problematic because I'm a Christ-follower. What a mess I've made of things. I think I'll grab a Snickers bar, put on a little Jethro Tull and wallow in my shame.
Posted grammiewinger

Yes- "Roundabout", or Moody Blues - " Ride My Seesaw" works for me every time grammie.

Posted by: tubal at August 11, 2016 06:43 PM (d6TTt)

720 I don't know how they do it but many illegals travel back to where they come from at least part of the year. Also many travel many states away for jobs.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 06:43 PM (bksJQ)

721 Shame me more virtuous conservative. See how many elections that wins you.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:41 PM (aiB0J)
If you're basically saying that it's totally okay and justified to go on the dole, without shame or embarrassment, because someone else up and took all the jobs away, then what makes you think that this argument ought to be appealing to conservatives in the first place?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:43 PM (5115x)

722 ... What this means in practice is that it shifts the burden of proof: instead of law enforcement having to prove that someone is here illegally, everyone will have to prove to law enforcement that they are here legally. I think this is potentially dangerous from a libertarian point of view.

Jeez chemjeff

Go to Mexico or any where without your papers. See what happens.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 06:43 PM (9HX7k)

723 The people who shed crocodile tears over their so-called 'plight' are useful idiots.

Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 06:39 PM (ZnIt3)

An yet your coalition depends upon them.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:44 PM (aiB0J)

724 Posted by: cjw at August 11, 2016 06:37 PM (onydf)

Your assessment does not square with my experience. I used to live right between Tampa and Orlando and applied for every hard, dirty, physical job in both cities and everywhere between. Nothing. Zip, zero, nada. All of my friends and acquaintances had just as much trouble as I did, so it wasn't just me. The only jobs that could be had were in retail, and after the first year or two of your working career, it's time to move on and away from that nonsense. Those jobs are supposed to be for students and people just entering the work force, not something you're stuck with for the rest of your life.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party at August 11, 2016 06:44 PM (J+mig)

725 Remember this exchange the next time you're wondering what the hell happened to your party. How does it feel to be slowly sinking in a tar pit? Maybe they'll dig you up and put you in some museum a few thousand years from now.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:38 PM (aiB0J)

The GOP will instantly become a glorified social club if Trump doesn't win the election. His supporters will leave the Republican party en masse the day after the election. They aren't interested in subsidizing Kabuki theater any longer.

Posted by: Reggie1971 at August 11, 2016 06:45 PM (H6376)

726 This is the 4 or 5th time I got into threads and there is a new thread a hour old.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 06:45 PM (bksJQ)

727 They don't want to go to college. They don't want to 'get ahead'. They
want a job for a couple of years, then back to were they came.
Meanwhile, taking a job away from someone else. There's no empathy on
their part.

How the fuck do you know what THEY all want? You are making broad negative generalizations about an entire class of people.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:45 PM (5115x)

728 Wait, are they taking jobs or sitting around unemployed and sucking up welfare?Posted by: person(a non grata)�

The men work. The women have babies, aka us citizens, due a shitload of benefits. Because otherwise is 'war on women'.

Then they go home, to native countries, and laugh at us.

Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 06:46 PM (ZnIt3)

729 Go to Mexico or any where without your papers. See what happens.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 06:43 PM (9HX7k)
I don't know if we want to look to Mexico as a model state for civil liberties

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:46 PM (5115x)

730 So, no, just being "honest" with each other about what the various party factions may want is not a magic recipe for success. Not so long as some factions are prepared to (a) nail their colors to the mast and then (b) sink the ship. Which they will do. Openly. Honestly. Not hiding a thing about their intent.
Posted by: torquewrench at August 11, 2016 03:55 PM (noWW6)

This is the nature of coalition politics; if you want someone's vote, you have to agree to pursue their core interests, whatever they happen to be. I agree with Ace that honesty is important, but there must also be recognition of the need to accommodate the core interests of divergent elements of a coalition, not on the basis of what you consider reasonable, but on the basis of what THEY consider reasonable.

And just about everybody has a core interests that is unpopular, you cannot jettison such an interest and expect them to continue to support the coalition.

Posted by: lowtech redneck at August 11, 2016 06:46 PM (KF8B+)

731 People ...

... many Republicans simply believe that many Americans do not work either hard enough or cheap enough - and therefor should be replaced by immigrant labor.

That's it in a nutshell.

Posted by: ScoggDog at August 11, 2016 06:46 PM (1Boes)

732 If you're basically saying that it's totally okay
and justified to go on the dole, without shame or embarrassment, because
someone else up and took all the jobs away, then what makes you think
that this argument ought to be appealing to conservatives in the first
place?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:43 PM (5115x)

To call someone lazy you have to first offer opportunity for them to reject. You can get away with this calling people lazy shit for a while, because there are still some jobs, but that window closes every day, and then what? You know there are 26 states, I think, that list truck driver as it's most numerous occupation. What names will you call them when automation replaces them?

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:46 PM (aiB0J)

733 I keep hearing this is the only country you don't need a ID to vote.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 06:46 PM (bksJQ)

734 The GOP will instantly become a glorified social club if Trump doesn't win the election. His supporters will leave the Republican party en masse the day after the election. They aren't interested in subsidizing Kabuki theater any longer.
Posted by: Reggie1971 at August 11, 2016 06:45 PM (H6376)

Then why are they voting for the loudest GOP Kabuki in the last several decades?

Posted by: person(a non grata) at August 11, 2016 06:47 PM (mFkVC)

735 Then they go home, to native countries, and laugh at us.
Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 06:46 PM (ZnIt3)

I'd be interested to see the statistics upon which you are basing these statements.

Posted by: person(a non grata) at August 11, 2016 06:49 PM (mFkVC)

736 Getting something for doing nothing will make you want to do nothing.more.

Posted by: Skip at August 11, 2016 06:49 PM (bksJQ)

737 "Free Trade" is just another big lie, they are ONLY supporting multinationals that pay them.

If they believed all the rules on our businesses are to make a better world, they would demand each and every that we buy from obey those rules for their part of the globe as well. We share the planet, right?

Instead the free trade liars say it is fine for China to pollute, to treat their workers as slaves, to subject workers to horrible conditions with no "severance pay". Fine for us to buy from communists that practice oppression, while demanding our workers obey 100 regulations, allegedly because they want "clean air, a clean world".

What a crock, they are destroying the liberty, and supporting the high margin income in places where all those ideals are laughed at. LIARS ... but we sing kum ba yah and go in deep debt.

Traitors one and all. Except for US suckers.

Posted by: illiniwek at August 11, 2016 06:50 PM (l6e0e)

738 Then why are they voting for the loudest GOP Kabuki in the last several decades?

They like what he's saying?

Just spitballing here.

Posted by: Grump928(C) says Free Soothie! at August 11, 2016 06:51 PM (rwI+c)

739 "You know there are 26 states, I think, that list truck driver as it's
most numerous occupation. What names will you call them when automation
replaces them?"

Who will you blame for their plight?

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 06:51 PM (fn3+8)

740 Nobody commented on my "lie back and think of Bloomberg's lawn" quip.

I thought that was pretty good.

Posted by: Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest at August 11, 2016 06:52 PM (LWu6U)

741 734 The GOP will instantly become a glorified social club if Trump doesn't win the election. His supporters will leave the Republican party en masse the day after the election. They aren't interested in subsidizing Kabuki theater any longer.
Posted by: Reggie1971 at August 11, 2016 06:45 PM (H6376)

Then why are they voting for the loudest GOP Kabuki in the last several decades?
Posted by: person(a non grata) at August 11, 2016 06:47 PM (mFkVC

The Kabuki theater I refer to is the GOP establishment playing the role of "opposition" to the Dem establishment. I wasn't aware that Trump was even invited by the GOPe to participate in that ongoing production.

Posted by: Reggie1971 at August 11, 2016 06:52 PM (H6376)

742
The GOP will instantly become a glorified social
club if Trump doesn't win the election. His supporters will leave the
Republican party en masse the day after the election. They aren't
interested in subsidizing Kabuki theater any longer.

Posted by: Reggie1971 at August 11, 2016 06:45 PM (H6376)

My 60 year old, former, Fox watching Mother is now saying she isn't a Republican or a Conservative. When you've lost Mom you're done, but you just don't know it yet.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:54 PM (aiB0J)

743 To call someone lazy you have to first offer
opportunity for them to reject. You can get away with this calling
people lazy shit for a while, because there are still some jobs, but
that window closes every day, and then what? You know there are 26
states, I think, that list truck driver as it's most numerous
occupation. What names will you call them when automation replaces them?

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:46 PM (aiB0J)
Okay here is part of the problem right here. In the bolded part, who exactly is the "you" who ought to be offering the opportunities? The government? Businesses?
As Baron said, there is no one who will knock on your door and offer you a job. That doesn't happen. Individuals have to seek out their own opportunities. And yes it is harder for some than others. Life is not fair.
And if a hypothetical truck driver, who was replaced by automation, did absolutely nothing to try to broaden his/her skill set and try to find gainful employment in some other field, and instead sat at home all day and blamed "those damn robots" for taking away his job and stewed in victimhood all day while collecting welfare checks, then yes I would call that person lazy.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:54 PM (5115x)

744 @714 "I would say, from observation, early frequent pregnancies, Oxy, and meth. But mostly meth."

My experience as a public defender was in a mixed-race-demographic southern county. I would say that 99% of my clients had dropped out of high school, and that 90% of them had a child before they were 20 years old. If there's two things you could avoid doing if you didn't want to end up an indigent criminal, those are it. Nothing else correlated as strongly as those. So when I was once invited to speak to high schoolers visiting our courtroom I told them to stay in school and wait to have kids. (This of course didn't go over well with the ones who were already pregnant, but honestly the ones who aren't certainly SHOULD be avoiding it and I wish there were a social stigma like there used to be.)

Posted by: cjw at August 11, 2016 06:54 PM (onydf)

745 I'd be interested to see the statistics upon which you are basing these statements.Posted by: person(a non grata)

I'd be more interested in you actually doing the research to see the standard of living in other countries, seeing the buying power of our dollar In other countries, and coming back and apologizing for your ignorance.

Don't think I'm gonna hold my breath for that. See ya. Wouldn't want to be ya.

Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 06:54 PM (ZnIt3)

746 it's nice to see you guys argue about all this all over again lol

everything is a circle always with conservatives

Posted by: Bigby's Knuckle Sandwich at August 11, 2016 06:55 PM (U0lQa)

747 A large part of the Trump appeal is that he's an "outsider". Yeah, yeah he's part of the rich but he's not a Washington insider. He may not do what he says he will, but he hasn't actually stabbed us in the back yet.

The Republican Leadership has.

Better an honest foe than an untrustworthy ally.

Posted by: Grump928(C) says Free Soothie! at August 11, 2016 06:56 PM (rwI+c)

748 My 60 year old, former, Fox watching Mother is now saying she isn't a Republican or a Conservative. When you've lost Mom you're done, but you just don't know it yet.
Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:54 PM (aiB0J)

That's the truth.

Posted by: Reggie1971 at August 11, 2016 06:56 PM (H6376)

749 Fair enough, chemjeff.

You didn't address the externalities, tubal. I think it's more dynamic than believing that a segment of our population just wants to hit the pipe. One anecdote: I dated a girl whose mother had a very good job, raised her family - and was fighting to hang on to the edge of middle class. She lost her job to a visa worker and it destroyed her. She lost it. I can't abide that happening to good people. Just my view...

Posted by: Afroman at August 11, 2016 06:57 PM (YhvyR)

750
Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 06:54 PM (ZnIt3)
I think person here is referring to your claim that immigrants as a group are not interested in personal advancement, only in getting rich quick.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:57 PM (5115x)

751
I'd be more interested in you actually doing the research to see the standard of living in other countries, seeing the buying power of our dollar In other countries, and coming back and apologizing for your ignorance.

Don't think I'm gonna hold my breath for that. See ya. Wouldn't want to be ya.
Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 06:54 PM (ZnIt3)

OK, so you don't have any real basis for your earlier statements. Gotcha.

Posted by: person(a non grata) at August 11, 2016 06:57 PM (mFkVC)

752 Who will you blame for their plight?

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 06:51 PM (fn3+

You, but seriously I won't blame anybody. It's simply technology. The dumber you are the quicker you'll be replaced. Hell there are phone apps already popping up to compete with lawyers. The pace is insane, but if you think these people won't be out for blood, then you are truly a dumbass, but go ahead call them names, that will fix it, and when they put your head on a pike don't cry to me.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 06:58 PM (aiB0J)

753 Michael Savage was correct 20 plus years ago when he tried to frame conservativism as Borders, Language, Culture.
Compare 1996 to now. The USA is Balkinized. The USA is divided.

It is The Tyranny of the Minority. American Citizens are fucked.

Posted by: Cactus of Liberty at August 11, 2016 06:59 PM (p6cXT)

754 but if you think these people won't be out for blood,

Of course workers who are replaced by automation and technology will be "out for blood" if their livelihoods are eliminated. That is a natural human reaction.

But what is the legitimate grievance here? That technology *shouldn't* replace human workers?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:01 PM (5115x)

755 Global Trade helps all people in general, but harms some people in particular, often very badly. When those people are my fellow citizens, it bothers me.

Posted by: Grump928(C) says Free Soothie! at August 11, 2016 07:01 PM (rwI+c)

756 Just to throw more fire on the "Bible Thumpers" fire (it's an ok term, I was called one for a decade) ... the Bible in the OT law said a man that caused a woman to lose her fetus was fined, but if he harmed the woman it was an eye for an eye. (fetus not = to a living soul)

This seems outrageous I guess, but is backed up by Genesis ... God formed man of the dust of the ground, breathed into him the breath of life, and man became a living soul.

So ... soul life came with breath ... we talk of birth days, not single cell conception days. Seems obvious? Passing life on is a process ... formed is a process ... big bang to man a process? God and science as one?

I do prefer the tighter modern standard of 12-21 weeks, before any mental function at all, but if you are hard core Bible ... ?

Posted by: illiniwek at August 11, 2016 07:03 PM (l6e0e)

757 xnycpeasant

The Sierra club had quite a fight on the issue of immigration a few years back.The faction against unlimited growth was branded racist of course and lost the election.

Posted by: Pj at August 11, 2016 07:03 PM (cHuNI)

758 Whoa. That's two days in a row that I've agreed with one of Jeff's comments.
Posted by: mrp at August 11, 2016 06:02 PM (JBggj)

Then you are being as ignorant as he is with the comment in question. The comment meant that the dreck (ie the immigrants who can't cut it and don't have jobs) stay and get welfare. Chemjeff just continues to play the troll.

In the Ellis Island days about half of all immigrants ended up returning home.

Posted by: WOPR - Nationalist at August 11, 2016 07:03 PM (Ee2nz)

759 >>>Go to Mexico or any where without your papers. See what happens.

>>>Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 06:43 PM (9HX7k)

I don't know if we want to look to Mexico as a model state for civil liberties

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:46 PM (5115x)

Breaching a nation's borders and being illegally present in a country is not a civil liberty.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:03 PM (zc3Db)

760 755
Global Trade helps all people in general, but harms some people in
particular, often very badly. When those people are my fellow citizens,
it bothers me.

Posted by: Grump928(C) says Free Soothie! at August 11, 2016 07:01 PM (rwI+c)
It bothers me too. What should the government do about it?
Shut down free trade and artificially prop up the otherwise replaceable jobs?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:03 PM (5115x)

761 753 Michael Savage was correct 20 plus years ago when he tried to frame conservativism as Borders, Language, Culture.
Compare 1996 to now. The USA is Balkinized. The USA is divided.

It is The Tyranny of the Minority. American Citizens are fucked.
Posted by: Cactus of Liberty at August 11, 2016 06:59 PM (p6cXT)

To the GOPe, borders, language, and culture are of minuscule importance compared with tax cuts, cheap labor, and cheap goods.

Posted by: Reggie1971 at August 11, 2016 07:04 PM (H6376)

762 But what is the legitimate grievance here? That technology *shouldn't* replace human workers?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:01 PM (5115x)

You can't stop it. Conservatism, communism, it's all obsolete, or will be shortly. This is as big as agriculture, language, or fire. Our world will never be the same, and it's not looking good for the stupid, or even the average. I don't offer any answers, other than to try to make the transition as easy as possible. You should be looking for lube, not insults.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 07:04 PM (aiB0J)

763 Breaching a nation's borders and being illegally present in a country is not a civil liberty.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:03 PM (zc3Db)
Of course it isn't. You missed the point. See my point #2 in comment #711.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:04 PM (5115x)

764 Shut down free trade and artificially prop up the otherwise replaceable jobs?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:03 PM (5115x)

Free importation (which is really what we are talking about) is NOT "free trade". Trade goes two ways.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:05 PM (zc3Db)

765 o it seems to me, anyway, that immigrants are using
welfare not because they are culturally predisposed to live on the
dole, but they do so for the same reasons that the native-born
population does: because they lack money, and they lack education to
income their income-earning potential.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 06:30 PM (5115x)

THEN WHY ARE THEY HERE? IT IS NOT THE JOB OF TAXPAYERS TO PAY THE WELFARE BENEFITS ON NON-CITIZENS.

Posted by: WOPR - Nationalist at August 11, 2016 07:05 PM (Ee2nz)

766 @724

Cato, not sure what the deal is there, maybe Florida is a bizarre labor market, or you're close enough to the suburbs that it's not a rural market. I'm able to get convicted felons into construction jobs and sawmill jobs and other such physical labor pretty easily in my county, with at least 35-40 hours a week to satisfy their probation officers' requirements, and we are a pretty depressed area. On the other hand, there is very little retail to be had, there are few retail stores and even fewer where you can carry over 20 hours a week.

I'm guessing that a lot more people want to live in Florida than want to live in landlocked rural Missouri. I've been to Orlando and Tampa just this February, it had my wife wanting us to quit our jobs and move down there even if we had to derail our careers, becoming "dog walkers" was her suggestion.

Posted by: cjw at August 11, 2016 07:06 PM (onydf)

767 Apropos of nothing, my Polish AK top cover came and I got it installed on my 1960. It took me over an hour because it was about 2mm too long to fit the receiver. I tried prying it in various ways (not easy btw, that sheet metal is strong) but finally decided that when CAI assembled the receiver, they just pushed the gas block back a smidge too much. Very slow and careful filing on the gas block end let me fit it tight. Very tight, gotta Ivan it down with a sharp rap tight.

Looks very nice though.

Posted by: Grump928(C) says Free Soothie! at August 11, 2016 07:06 PM (rwI+c)

768 Of course it isn't. You missed the point. See my point #2 in comment #711.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:04 PM (5115x)

Your point is incorrect. It's a false complaint.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:07 PM (zc3Db)

769 Free importation (which is really what we are talking about) is NOT "free trade". Trade goes two ways.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:05 PM (zc3Db)

We can do that, but when the factories come back they'll be automated. The new factories they're building in China are already automated. However, it can buy us some time, and so we should make it a priority.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 07:07 PM (aiB0J)

770 Just to throw more fire on the "Bible Thumpers" fire (it's an ok term, I was called one for a decade) ... the Bible in the OT law said a man that caused a woman to lose her fetus was fined, but if he harmed the woman it was an eye for an eye. (fetus not = to a living soul)

I think that's a canard. I googled some Jewish theos discussing this and it's no way as clear cut as that.

Posted by: Grump928(C) says Free Soothie! at August 11, 2016 07:08 PM (rwI+c)

771
But what is the legitimate grievance here? That technology *shouldn't* replace human workers?

=====

cutting through a lot of bs could you look upon it all as a water level kind of issue?

not race, not jobs, not factories leaving at an accelerating pace. but the aggregate pace of change being so rapid that it must halt for a time so as to seek a better level?

so. close the door to the borders. it's causing problems currently.
stop the factories from leaving - however that can be done - because its evidently causing problems. address the needs of the displaced, for the same reasons.

I'm merely asking that you extend your concerns to your own countrymen first for a time.

Posted by: Bigby's Knuckle Sandwich at August 11, 2016 07:09 PM (U0lQa)

772 DFCtomm, what are you talking about? First, I don't think I called anyone any names. I implied they lack character and by implied I mean anyone who sits around for years on welfare because they lost their job lacks character.

My opinion.

Second, who the fuck is going to come after me? I'm some stooge Internet commenter. What, I'm going to answer, "Sucks being you" when the mob is going door-to-door asking what you think about the robots and Mexicans taking their jobs?

Or the Mexican robot that took their bending job?

I believe in personal responsibility and self determination. I guess those have joined conscience as bad things in the Republican party.

I'll be fine.

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 07:10 PM (fn3+8)

773 Your point is incorrect. It's a false complaint.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:07 PM (zc3Db)
No, it's a perfectly valid complaint. Why should I have to prove that I am a citizen every time I come into contact with law enforcement?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:10 PM (5115x)

774 "Maybe the political class can learn from this"
You are an optimist.

The party is beyond saving. It needs to have a stake driven through its heart.

Posted by: Benko at August 11, 2016 07:10 PM (5FKUO)

775
I'll be fine.

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 07:10 PM (fn3+

If you aren't in your 60s then no, you won't be fine.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 07:12 PM (aiB0J)

776 But what is the legitimate grievance here? That technology *shouldn't* replace human workers?
Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:01 PM (5115x)

We better figure out how we are going to handle the situation because we are fast moving beyond the hard/repetitive labor folks into the no smart enough cohort. People who are above average intelligence but not top of the field type people. Those people will start a revolution if they decide they don't have a chance at a job. And flooding the market with foreigners for the jobs they still have a shot at is not smart either.

Posted by: WOPR - Nationalist at August 11, 2016 07:12 PM (Ee2nz)

777 OK, so you don't have any real basis for your earlier statements. Gotcha.Posted by: person(a non grata)�

You're back already? Did all that research?

You didn't? Yeah, I would bet my life you are a lazy f@*k.

Take a flying f@*k at the moon.

Get back to me when you do the basic research on the topic instead of being such a lazy f@*k. It's not that hard.

Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 07:13 PM (ZnIt3)

778 Why bother saving the Party?

Defeat in wartime.

Taxpayer funding for abortion.

Gay marriage.

Liberal judges.

Tax hikes.

It's pointless to tout the platform. The nominee repudiates it openly and the Congress won't be guided by it.

Blow them up. And then blow up the federal authority that tries to enforce the Democrat agenda. If the Soviet Union couldn't brazen it through, you think Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton will succeed?

Posted by: Chris_Balsz at August 11, 2016 07:15 PM (EioIi)

779 Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 07:13 PM (ZnIt3)

Oh look, he wants random Internet commenters to do all his work for him.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:15 PM (5115x)

780 okay e'erbody...$50 to Ace just for the damn border comments!

Posted by: DanMan at August 11, 2016 07:15 PM (p1WR7)

781 761 753 Michael Savage was correct 20 plus years ago when he tried to frame conservativism as Borders, Language, Culture.
Compare 1996 to now. The USA is Balkinized. The USA is divided.

It is The Tyranny of the Minority. American Citizens are fucked.
Posted by: Cactus of Liberty at August 11, 2016 06:59 PM (p6cXT)

To the GOPe, borders, language, and culture are of minuscule importance compared with tax cuts, cheap labor, and cheap goods.
Posted by: Reggie1971 at August 11, 2016 07:04 PM (H6376)

Yes. American Citizens have been lied to over and over again distracted by cheap trinkets that they don't need.

And now they are waking up and are very very pissed off.

Posted by: Cactus of Liberty at August 11, 2016 07:16 PM (p6cXT)

782 The party is beyond saving. It needs to have a stake driven through its heart.
Posted by: Benko at August 11, 2016 07:10 PM(5FKUO)

I would encourage Republican politicians I admire like Jeff Sessions to leave the party if Trump isn't elected. There is no place for them there. As for the miserable chamber of commerce hack GOPe, they should have their political careers destroyed ASAP. I'll strategically vote Democrat to help make that happen.

Posted by: Reggie1971 at August 11, 2016 07:16 PM (H6376)

783 > The Establishment's Unwillingness to State, Forthrightly, It Is Pro-Amnesty and Against the Wall is What Gave Us Trump.

All the digital ink spilled by National Review and they never once admitted this.

That was it for me. Pretty much the first words out of Trump's mouth when he announced were: "Build a wall." And I'm left saying, hell damn yes let's build a wall. It took Donald Trump to finally say it and mean it.

And still, when everyone knew that this was the truth, that the immigration issue was the key, the Republicans still wanted to play games and dismiss Trump through ad hominem attacks.

Posted by: Brewdog at August 11, 2016 07:17 PM (F+bI6)

784 No, it's a perfectly valid complaint. Why should I have to prove that I am a citizen every time I come into contact with law enforcement?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:10 PM (5115x)

Uh ... do you even know what you're talking about? You make it sound as if you have to personally run around and collect evidence to prove your citizenship. That's a ridiculous claim. You present ID, do you not? Is that a major hardship for you, already? Now, when the various governments start giving out the same sorts of IDs to illegals (in order to confuse the situation) then that makes things a little more difficult, but in general law enforcement doesn't have much of a problem checking whether someone is illegal.

You act as if it's totally impossible to tell if one is very likely American. LOL. Two minutes in reality tells everyone different. Language is one big tell. Of course, I know that you are going to scream bloody murder about that ... because that is what you do, but language easily separates 98%, just for a quickie assessment. An effective shibboleth, if you will.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:17 PM (zc3Db)

785 "Why should I have to prove that I am a citizen every time I come into contact with law enforcement? "

Treaty of Vienna. We agreed to put foriegn nationals in contact with their consuls IMMEDIATELY.

Posted by: Chris_Balsz at August 11, 2016 07:19 PM (EioIi)

786 New nude on top of the previous nude.

Posted by: Grump928(C) says Free Soothie! at August 11, 2016 07:20 PM (rwI+c)

787 Oh look, he wants random Internet commenters to do all his work for him.Posted by: chemjeff

Your days here are numbered. Spend them wisely.
Supporting some lazy trool doesn't earn you bonus minutes.

Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 07:20 PM (ZnIt3)

788 I'm merely asking that you extend your concerns to your own countrymen first for a time.

Posted by: Bigby's Knuckle Sandwich at August 11, 2016 07:09 PM (U0lQa)
Believe it or not, I am - by not patronizing them.
What you seem to be arguing, in essence, is that the government should prop up the domestic buggy whip industry because lots of people used to make buggy whips in the past but now they don't and that's "causing problems". The better solution IMO, instead of the government creating economic "safe spaces" for an artificial domestic buggy whip industry, is to enable individuals to adapt to the pace of economic change. Government shouldn't be trying to get back crummy jobs from third world shit holes that literally an uneducated 7th grader can do. Government should, if anything, be investing in creating a climate for better jobs that uses American labor in a much better way.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:20 PM (5115x)

789 You act as if it's totally impossible to tell if one
is very likely American. LOL. Two minutes in reality tells everyone
different.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:17 PM (zc3Db)

Yet another one of those truths that conservatives wish to deny. You can't tell who is an American and who isn't by interaction, but the truth is that 90% of the time you can tell in 30 seconds. It's silly, but it's all to avoid being called racist. It's the bullshit everybody has come to hate.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 07:21 PM (aiB0J)

790 Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 07:20 PM (ZnIt3)

You sound like one of my lazy students who couldn't be bothered to do his homework.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:22 PM (5115x)

791 Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:17 PM (zc3Db)

No you missed the point yet again, deliberately most likely.

It isn't about the difficulty of obtaining proof of citizenship. That is easy enough. It is about the propriety of having to show my proof to law enforcement whenever I come into contact with them. Why should I? Just answer that one question.

You act as if it's totally impossible to tell if one is very likely
American. LOL. Two minutes in reality tells everyone different.
Language is one big tell. Of course, I know that you are going to
scream bloody murder about that ... because that is what you do, but
language easily separates 98%, just for a quickie assessment. An
effective shibboleth, if you will.

So what do you want the police officer to do, exactly?

OFFICER: Are you a citizen?
PERSON: Yeah
OFFICER: Okay you spoke English, you clearly are a citizen, I don't need to see your papers

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:26 PM (5115x)

792 Believe it or not, I am - by not patronizing them.
What
you seem to be arguing, in essence, is that the government should prop
up the domestic buggy whip industry because lots of people used to make
buggy whips in the past but now they don't and that's "causing
problems". The better solution IMO, instead of the government creating
economic "safe spaces" for an artificial domestic buggy whip industry,
is to enable individuals to adapt to the pace of economic change.
Government shouldn't be trying to get back crummy jobs from third world
shit holes that literally an uneducated 7th grader can do. Government
should, if anything, be investing in creating a climate for better jobs
that uses American labor in a much better way.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:20 PM (5115x)

You know, once upon a time hunter gatherer societies, tribes because that's all the population their technology could support, probably had elaborate philosophies, and ideologies that made sense in a hunter gatherer society. Those were no good, of course, to the agricultural societies that replaced them. They made no sense in that new context, they were simply gibberish. What you wrote is soon to be gibberish.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 07:26 PM (aiB0J)

793 You can't tell who is an American and who isn't by interaction, but the
truth is that 90% of the time you can tell in 30 seconds.

No, you fail to distinguish between American citizenship and American cultural assimilation. The two are not the same. I'm sure plenty of Canadians could pass as Americans just on a cultural level, but that doesn't make them citizens.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:27 PM (5115x)

794 "Yet another one of those truths that conservatives wish to deny. You
can't tell who is an American and who isn't by interaction, but the
truth is that 90% of the time you can tell in 30 seconds. It's silly,
but it's all to avoid being called racist. It's the bullshit everybody
has come to hate."

How are you defining "American"?

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 07:28 PM (fn3+8)

795 You sound like one of my lazy students who couldn't be bothered to do his homework.Posted by: chemjeff

Except he's a millionaire who looks upon your sorry ass with scorn. I've never been in a classroom where I couldn't teach the class better than an arrogant asshole like you.

I can spend five minutes researching a topic. All you can do is fling shit with an attitude of superiority. Get over yourself. You're not all that.

Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 07:30 PM (ZnIt3)

796
Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 07:26 PM (aiB0J)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but your argument seems to be, "I shouldn't have to adapt to the pace of economic change, the government should protect me from such changes." Am I wrong?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:30 PM (5115x)

797 No, you fail to distinguish between American
citizenship and American cultural assimilation. The two are not the
same. I'm sure plenty of Canadians could pass as Americans just on a
cultural level, but that doesn't make them citizens.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:27 PM (5115x)

How are you defining "American"?

Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at August 11, 2016 07:28 PM (fn3+

See there is no "Americans". It's all just a construct. You've absorbed your programming well.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 07:31 PM (aiB0J)

798 It isn't about the difficulty of obtaining proof of citizenship. That is easy enough. It is about the propriety of having to show my proof to law enforcement whenever I come into contact with them. Why should I? Just answer that one question.

You are aware that green card holders have to carry their green cards with them, everywhere, are you not? WHy do you think that is? Have you ever been harassed to show your green card? Or a visa?

Your arguments get so silly, so quickly.

>>>You act as if it's totally impossible to tell if one is very likely American. LOL. Two minutes in reality tells everyone different. Language is one big tell. Of course, I know that you are going to scream bloody murder about that ... because that is what you do, but language easily separates 98%, just for a quickie assessment. An effective shibboleth, if you will.

So what do you want the police officer to do, exactly?

OFFICER: Are you a citizen?
PERSON: Yeah
OFFICER: Okay you spoke English, you clearly are a citizen, I don't need to see your papers

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:26 PM (5115x)

Uh ... okey doke.

I'm starting to have doubts that you have ever even set foot on the street or talked to anyone. Evidently, you couldn't recognize an American, at all. The rest of your ideas are starting to make more sense in that light.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:31 PM (zc3Db)

799

Posted by: free range 'sorta' conservative but not 'true' conservative at August 11, 2016 07:30 PM (ZnIt3)
yawn just another Internet tough guy. whatever dude

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:31 PM (5115x)

800 I don't think telling the white working class to get fucked or deliver pizza is going to do the GOP or the country any good.

Posted by: the guy that moves pianos for a living at August 11, 2016 07:32 PM (tEDMc)

801 796

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 07:26 PM (aiB0J)
Correct
me if I'm wrong, but your argument seems to be, "I shouldn't have to
adapt to the pace of economic change, the government should protect me
from such changes." Am I wrong?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:30 PM (5115x)

The government can't protect itself, and that's what you don't seem to grasp.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 07:32 PM (aiB0J)

802 "Global Trade helps all people in general, but harms some people in particular,"

It does? So if we get crappy moldy dry wall and lead paint toys, and China manipulates currency and wins deals so they have more control over their slaves, and they build a military to impose more communism, and America goes dormant and freedom dies ....

nothing matters but the phony mantra of "free trade = cheaper cell phones, and ain't that grand"?

what a crock.

there is a global struggle ... only the good deserve most favored status, and that process itself is corrupted by globalist traitors like the Clintons, or worse, the commies/jihadists that will torture, rape kill.

The "free trade is always good" is just silly nonsense ... except it is actually globalist propaganda by those that would enslave us.

Posted by: illiniwek at August 11, 2016 07:32 PM (l6e0e)

803 See there is no "Americans". It's all just a construct. You've absorbed your programming well.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 07:31 PM (aiB0J)

Yep. That is exactly where they are at.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:33 PM (zc3Db)

804 See there is no "Americans". It's all just a construct. You've absorbed your programming well.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 07:31 PM (aiB0J)
American citizenship is defined by law. American culture is much more nebulous. You can tell if someone is culturally American by interacting with them, but that is not necessarily the same as claiming that the person is a legal American citizen.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:33 PM (5115x)

805 American citizenship is defined by law. American
culture is much more nebulous. You can tell if someone is culturally
American by interacting with them, but that is not necessarily the same
as claiming that the person is a legal American citizen.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:33 PM (5115x)

This is what you don't get. If being culturally American isn't part of being an American citizen then we're doing it wrong.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 07:35 PM (aiB0J)

806 The "free trade is always good" is just silly nonsense ... except it is actually globalist propaganda by those that would enslave us.
Posted by: illiniwek at August 11, 2016 07:32 PM (l6e0e)

I prefer the term Fair Trade.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 07:38 PM (9HX7k)

807
You are aware that green card holders have to carry their green
cards with them, everywhere, are you not? WHy do you think that is?
Have you ever been harassed to show your green card? Or a visa?

Yes, green card holders have to do that, because they are not citizens and are not entitled to the same rights as citizens (yet). As I pointed out above, many of those who favor stricter enforcement of immigration laws tend to want law enforcement to apprehend any illegal who comes into contact with the police in some other way. What this means in practice, is that *citizens* will have to show proof of citizenship *as well* if they come into contact with law enforcement, otherwise, how will the police know if they are illegals or not? This is the point that you keep avoiding.

You cannot know with legal certainty if a random person on the street is a legal American citizen just via a cursory interaction with them. So just looking at a person for cultural or linguistic cues that the person is "an American" is insufficient. Does this really need to be said?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:38 PM (5115x)

808 American citizenship is defined by law.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:33 PM (5115x)

Not for natural born citizens, it isn't, which constitute the huge majority of Americans.

I throw that in because you like being so nit-picky with certain quantifications. You should, at least, be accurate with majority quantifications.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:39 PM (zc3Db)

809 This is what you don't get. If being culturally American isn't part of being an American citizen then we're doing it wrong.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 07:35 PM (aiB0J)
It is *part*, but not the entire story. A person can be a legal American citizen and yet still not "appear" American, in a cultural sense. There is a difference between being a legal American citizen, and having an affinity for American culture.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:41 PM (5115x)

810 it's been fun, but I'm out of here

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 07:42 PM (aiB0J)

811 The government can't protect itself, and that's what you don't seem to grasp.

Posted by: DFCtomm at August 11, 2016 07:32 PM (aiB0J)
Sorry, but I don't grasp your point.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:43 PM (5115x)

812 Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:39 PM (zc3Db)

Actually if you include the Constitution as a part of the corpus known as "the law", then yeah it is. But whatever.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:44 PM (5115x)

813 chemjeff. I've gone back and read 711 three times. What do you mean by "some other matter"? Traffic stop? Loitering? Etc.

LE wouldn't be out of line to ask for ID in such cases.

It's not like we are advocating for The US Gestapo to yank people of the sidewalk and ask them for papers.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 07:46 PM (9HX7k)

814 Actually if you include the Constitution as a part of the corpus known as "the law", then yeah it is. But whatever.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:44 PM (5115x)

No, it isn't. Natural born citizens are not defined in the Constitution. The 14th amendment extends natural born citizen status to others but even without that amendment there were still Americans, were there not?

Congress was given the power to define naturalization. Natural born citizens exist irrespective of any such legislation.

Give it up, jeff.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:48 PM (zc3Db)

815 LE wouldn't be out of line to ask for ID in such cases.

Ask for ID is not the same as ask for proof of citizenship.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:51 PM (5115x)

816 Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:48 PM (zc3Db)

Fine. Whatever. Could you just answer my question?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:51 PM (5115x)

817 The 14th amendment extends natural born citizen status

I meant "citizen status", not natural born.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:52 PM (zc3Db)

818 Fine. Whatever. Could you just answer my question?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:51 PM (5115x)

I have. You brought up objections which I then easily addressed, too.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:53 PM (zc3Db)

819 One shouldn't have a US ID if they're not a citizen or recognized.

No US ID? Prove why you are here.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 07:54 PM (9HX7k)

820 I have. You brought up objections which I then easily addressed, too.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:53 PM (zc3Db)
No you didn't. You continued to deflect and mock but you never address the question.
Why should I, a citizen, have to show proof of citizenship whenever I come into contact with law enforcement?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:55 PM (5115x)

821 Ace;

I'm for having honest open debate because principles do matter. But implied is that after that debate, we vote and let the best idea win.

And that's not happening. Most of the Left don't care how they win. For example, even liberal Californians repeatedly voted for traditional marriage, and judges kept telling them they were to stupid to decide. And one of the many reasons we oppose massive immigration is because it is being used to replace voters Democrats don't like. If we convince a million voters our ideas are better, they'll let in two million who just want free stuff. And "Racist!"(tm).

We're in a dogfight for the Republic. Or maybe just survival at this point. Maybe some name-calling is in order, too.

Posted by: The Gipper Lives at August 11, 2016 07:55 PM (Ndje9)

822 Why should I, a citizen, have to show proof of citizenship whenever I come into contact with law enforcement?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:55 PM (5115x)

Do you show ID?

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:56 PM (zc3Db)

823
No US ID? Prove why you are here.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 07:54 PM (9HX7k)
And that is what I am talking about when it comes to inverting the burden of proof.

Currently, LE has to demonstrate that you don't legitimately belong here.
But with the stepped-up immigration enforcement that some are advocating, then the burden of proof inverts - it is now my obligation to demonstrate why I am legitimately supposed to be here.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:56 PM (5115x)

824 Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 07:56 PM (zc3Db)

ID is not the same as proof of citizenship. And under many circumstances I am not obliged to provide ID in any case.

https://www.flexyourrights.org/faqs/when-can-police-ask-for-id/

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:58 PM (5115x)

825 "As if being a commie wasn't bad enough, now I'm dreadful and most dreadfully problematic because I'm a Christ-follower" grammie winger

no, it is not the Christianity that is the problem, it is the wrong belief that "NOT rendering unto Caesar the things that are Caeser's" will somehow make the Christian even more perfect than others.

Get it? It is when ego takes over ... pride goes before a fall ... type of thing. Man has a civil responsibility, which the founders defined pretty well. So electing Hillary "on principle" knowing that brings great harm ... is NOT principled.

Posted by: illiniwek at August 11, 2016 07:59 PM (l6e0e)

826 Currently, LE has to demonstrate that you don't legitimately belong here.

No. Currently LE is being forced NOT to check and, further, NOT to report illegals to the feral government (see the Barky/Mexico case against Arizona).

Try and get your facts straight, jeff.

But with the stepped-up immigration enforcement that some are advocating, then the burden of proof inverts - it is now my obligation to demonstrate why I am legitimately supposed to be here.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:56 PM (5115x)

LOL. "Stepped up enforcement" meaning just actually enforcing the law, like we used to do. Were you constantly harassed to prove your citizenship status when you were growing up?

Jeff, you are the red-herring king!

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 08:00 PM (zc3Db)

827 ID is not the same as proof of citizenship. And under many circumstances I am not obliged to provide ID in any case.

https://www.flexyourrights.org/faqs/when-can-police-ask-for-id/

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:58 PM (5115x)
So is this wrong? Should the police have the authority to demand proof of citizenship from anyone?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 08:01 PM (5115x)

828 Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 07:58 PM (5115x)

Good. Back to my question @813.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 08:01 PM (9HX7k)

829 "Stepped up enforcement" meaning just actually enforcing the law,

Well evidently the old ways of enforcing the law aren't working. Many here want to give LEO the power to demand proof of citizenship whenever they come into contact with someone. Is this what you want?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 08:03 PM (5115x)

830 "Remember that the officer's decision to detain you will not always hold up in court. Reasonable suspicion is a vague legal standard, and police often make mistakes. So if you're searched or arrested following an officer's ID request, you may contact an attorney to discuss the incident and explore your legal options."

Fat chance of getting any relief other than eventual release. On the bright side, three hots and a cot and the chance at some sex.

Posted by: Grump928(C) says Free Soothie! at August 11, 2016 08:03 PM (rwI+c)

831 Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 08:00 PM (zc3Db)

I figured out who chemjeff really is.

Henry Louis Gates

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 08:03 PM (9HX7k)

832 Good. Back to my question @813.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 08:01 PM (9HX7k)
Yes, "some other matter" means any time that you come into contact with LEO. Speeding, loitering, whatever.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 08:04 PM (5115x)

833 Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 08:04 PM (5115x)

So you get pulled for speeding. You don't show your drivers license?

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 08:05 PM (9HX7k)

834 No. Currently LE is being forced NOT to check and, further, NOT to
report illegals to the feral government (see the Barky/Mexico case
against Arizona).

Umm, what?

"All justices agreed to uphold the provision of the law allowing Arizona
state police to investigate the immigration status of an individual
stopped, detained, or arrested if there is reasonable suspicion that
individual is in the country illegally. However, Justice Kennedy
specified in the majority opinion that state police may not detain the
individual for a prolonged amount of time for not carrying immigration
documents; and that cases of racial profiling are allowed to proceed
through the courts, if such cases happen to arise later on"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_v._United_States

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 08:08 PM (5115x)

835
So you get pulled for speeding. You don't show your drivers license?

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 08:05 PM (9HX7k)
For speeding on a public highway, yes, you are required to show your drivers' license, because that is legally required for driving a car on public roads.
But for, say, loitering, or some other minor offense, I don't necessarily have to have ID or show ID.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 08:09 PM (5115x)

836 After all, I don't have to have a "walker's license" for walking on public sidewalks.

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 08:12 PM (5115x)

837 Well, ya know, I fetched the wife'n we'uns crawled t'other way under that rusty ass fence down Ciudadad Juarez way where the jobs went. But you know what? AMERICANS CAN'T WORK IN MESKO! Kind of a one way street there pilgrim...

Posted by: Richard McEnroe at August 11, 2016 08:14 PM (/h17O)

838 Henry Louis Gates

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 08:03 PM (9HX7k)

Heh

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 11, 2016 08:16 PM (zc3Db)

839 We're discussing two different things. The court (which is another problem altogether) cite "suspicion of being here illegally" and "profiling".

If Juan Amigo is speeding in the dark on a country road and gets pulled over and has no ID, he should be taken to jail until he can prove his identity.

If he is a citizen it should be easy enough to do. If here with no "papers" - green card etc - he should get a one way ticket to wherever.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 08:16 PM (9HX7k)

840 "I think that's a canard. I googled some Jewish theos discussing this and it's no way as clear cut as that."
grump

thx for at least looking it up grump ... but I think it is that clear. It fits with Genesis. I think there is even another OT place. One thing I learned in my decade of "seeking" ... theos will pervert, even change text to push their theology. I learned enuff to read the OT interlinears ... there is no trick there.

But I will say I don't now believe the Bible is perfect anyway, and the flood did not cover the highest mountain ... etc. So I love that there is great "stuff" there ... but when it is used as a cudgel against us, I bring out this type talk.

Sadly ... cuz I want churches to keep doing "their thing", but not the Cruz dominionist type thing, or any other Jesus figure claiming God powers.

Posted by: illiniwek at August 11, 2016 08:18 PM (l6e0e)

841 @835

Replace speeding on a country road with drinking a forty on the sidewalk.

How does that turn out?

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 08:18 PM (9HX7k)

842 Posted by: illiniwek at August 11, 2016 08:18 PM (l6e0e)

OT is a little tough for me.

I try to read the Greek of the NT.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 08:20 PM (9HX7k)

843 If Juan Amigo is speeding in the dark on a country
road and gets pulled over and has no ID, he should be taken to jail
until he can prove his identity.

If he is a citizen it should be easy enough to do. If here with no
"papers" - green card etc - he should get a one way ticket to wherever.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 08:16 PM (9HX7k)
That's not the issue.
What if John Smith, Proud American Citizen, is speeding in the dark on a country road and gets pulled over and has no ID? Should he be taken to jail on suspicion of not being a legal resident?

Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 08:24 PM (5115x)

844 Posted by: chemjeff at August 11, 2016 08:24 PM (5115x)

Nope. In NC he would be carted in for driving without a license.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 08:29 PM (9HX7k)

845 "What if John Smith, Proud American Citizen, is speeding in the dark on a country road and gets pulled over and has no ID? Should he be taken to jail on suspicion of not being a legal resident?"

Sure. Why not? You just stated he was guilty of two violations of the motor vehicle code.

@ illinek Which is it? We owe the US government obedience as to Christ or the US government under Hillary is wicked evil? They don't go together.

Posted by: Chris_Balsz at August 11, 2016 08:31 PM (EioIi)

846 It's been fun chemjeff. No name calling.

Well I did call you one.

Finally, if they're here illegally, I'd just like for them to go home. If however they come to the LE system, they should be sent home. That ain't happening now.

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 08:32 PM (9HX7k)

847 Well said, Ace, but you do not fully appreciate the hospital-privilege requirement Texas tried to recently impose on abortionists.

I am an ophthalmologist who performs cataract surgery. I, like many of my colleagues in other states, must have hospital admitting privileges in order to perform out-patient cataract surgery in our ambulatory surgical center (ASC). If I was not on staff at a local hospital, I would not be permitted to operate in our ASC, or any other ASC for that matter. If I am required to maintain hospital privileges in order to perform bloodless, minimally invasive CATARACT surgery, surely it makes sense to demand it of a surgeon performing a far more invasive procedure that carries much higher levels of risk to the patient. Explain to me why OB/GYNs are exempted from an obligation every other surgeon must demonstrate? Answer: According to Leftist ideology, abortion is an unalienable right that must have minimal if any restrictions, regardless of commonsense and established practice.

I am guilty of going along with extreme so-con pro-life positions despite my relatively pro-choice beliefs. But your example of requiring hospital admitting privileges is not an extreme law. It is standard of care for every other surgical field in medicine. OB/GYNs deserve no special dispensations unless the mandate is lifted for the rest of us.

Posted by: Krtek at August 11, 2016 08:50 PM (tD/9D)

848 There is merit to what you say. But I'm not sure how it would work in national politics. Nor how it jives with the argument that the Establishment didn't listen to Conservatives. For instance, Bush pushed for immigration reform, a position with reasonably strong support in the party back then. Rubio and gang picked the effort up. There are lots of conservatives like me who favor some kind reform that provides a pathway to some longtime residents. But I also agree we need to seriously stem the ongoing influx or the problem will obviously persist. I think the Big Wall is not a solution and largely a pipe dream. A problem is that ANY compromise solution is painted as dangerous and stupid. In my view that is where Rubio got caught. So "Conservatives" chose a liberal ignoramus. If most Republicans do favor some kind of immigration reform and make it painfully clear, where do you go?

Posted by: Crispian at August 11, 2016 08:59 PM (PCr/G)

849 Great post Ace, though not sure how helpful this advice would be in practice outside of averting a very unlikely black swan event like the Trump candidacy. If you're not a pre-established mega-celebrity like Schwarzenegger or Trump, you'll always be very vulnerable to shallow voters jumping to hasty conclusions from little information.

I can tell you from anecdotal experience that the number of people who cited Cruz's Trump-assigned reputation as "Lyin' Ted" as their reason for deciding on Trump in the primaries is, at the very least, greater than zero. I've heard full length left-wing folk songs on college radio on the topic of Romney's binders full of women. Any truth that requires a nuanced and thoughtful understanding to be seen in a good or neutral light will only be a drag in most public elections. If that weren't the case, we wouldn't be seeing this absurd recent spate of blank slate candidates like Obama and Trump being fast-tracked to the highest office in the nation with no useful prior experience.

By all means, we should still be doing exactly as you suggest, if only on (eww!) principle. But the expectation that it pays off later is far too idealistic.

Posted by: reform highlander at August 11, 2016 09:03 PM (xf3KI)

850 " Not to oversimplify, but how much of this tolerance of illegals and inviting others is to prop up SS etc?

Posted by: Golfman at August 11, 2016 06:23 PM (9HX7k)

NONE; it is hard to prop up SS by adding people who do not pay taxes or SS since they are unemployed and drawing welfare. " vic

right
especially if they bring their 55 year old parents in, and all their cousins with syphilis or TB, and they were the healthiest and brightest of the bunch in the first place, and none were raised with "principles".

Posted by: illiniwek at August 11, 2016 09:08 PM (l6e0e)

851 "By all means, we should still be doing exactly as you suggest, if only on (eww!) principle. But the expectation that it pays off later is far too idealistic."
reform highlander

But you assume binders full of women influenced the same way as lyin Ted. Ted DID lie. Revealing truth is much more effective and simple, than building and maintaining a lie. 2+2=5, or border control=racism, is easier to expose as a lie, than Trump claiming Hillary lied about the Benghazi video.

The GOPe has pretended to support border control, and the left is facing an ever growing mountain of lies. There is no easy path for the GOPe, but there is a path for Sessions, Trump, any that have been telling Truth.

I guess the problem is too many think Cruz was telling the truth? On TPP, or borders, or God calling him.

The truth is only Trump took the risk and pushed populist measures that put America First, which all establishment will fight wholeheartedly. Cruz only tried to copy him, while keeping one foot in safe zone.

Posted by: illiniwek at August 11, 2016 09:23 PM (l6e0e)

852 @ 501 DFCtomm "but name me one that will pay the mother X amount of money when the adoption papers are signed. "

As others have already pointed out, this is hugely, extremely illegal.
Trying to do this *will* immediately land you in jail. The buying and selling of persons is called "human trafficking".
So, now that we've established that you don't even have the first clue about the topic, kindly stop informing us what we "must" do, and fornicate yourself. Preferably, with a cactus.

Posted by: Luke at August 11, 2016 09:30 PM (JItWQ)

853 Late to the party as usual.

Read the whole thing Ace, good synopsis, especially about the abortion stance (social conservatives).

If it's any consolation I'm voting for Trump come hell or high water even though I don't think he can win. For me it is "scorched earth" time, burn it down. If Hillary is elected I go native.

Posted by: tonynoboloney at August 11, 2016 09:36 PM (Yba/s)

854 If a position is indefensible, it is either:

(a) admit it is indefensible; or
(b) Yeah-yeah.

Abortion without exception is indefensible.

Yeah-yeah.

Open borders and mass migration are indefensible.

Yeah-yeah.

It was nice the two groups got to know one another before the divorce became final. Make no mistake, whether Trump wins or loses one of those groups will be gone November 9th.

Sharp post, ace.

Posted by: Trump poisoned my cat at August 11, 2016 09:37 PM (pq97T)

855 @ illinek Which is it? We owe the US government obedience as to Christ or the US government under Hillary is wicked evil? They don't go together.
chris ..b

to me it is simply separating religious conviction from pragmatic civic/civil duties. Romans 13 doesn't make sense to me, if it is about government. Not all governments are of God ... but how does losing elections over abortion help?

I don't think all religious convictions (first week abortion) can fit into government mandates (but "thou shalt not kill" probably does, except it should read "murder") ... and pragmatically, voting third party knowing it will elect Hillary is not "standing on principle".

BUT there is a point is the render to Caesar thing. Though again, I don't believe all the Bible is so absolute, as many think it is perfect.

In those olden days there was little choice but to be subservient to government, or tribe leader, even slaves had rules in the Bible. I think our founders upgraded us greatly, with the Bible as primmer ... but that is not a "Biblical" opinion.

I brought up the verse to say (to the strict Bible person) that even Jesus recognized earthly powers, versus spiritual truths, in some decisions.

And when I use the term "religious" it is not the same as "Christian". The Christian makes free will well informed decisions, the "religious" is controlled by dogma ... such as in the "PC Religion". But sadly in many Christian churches corrupted dogma rules, though average joes barely show up, and deep thought is not required.

I wish I had it all figured out ... give me another thirty years?

Posted by: illiniwek at August 11, 2016 09:47 PM (l6e0e)

856 Thanks for yet another thoughtful post. I need to let these ideas marinate a bit before spouting off. I tend to agree with all of it though.

Posted by: Floyd Winston at August 11, 2016 09:58 PM (0CKeS)

857 The group here i assume wants some fiscal sanity. I'd like a balanced budget that came from smaller spending not raising taxes (not that you could raise taxes enough to balance at this point). It sounds nice in theory.

If we had a balanced budget, I suspect this group would regress into name calling on which programs get cut more than others.

Military spending is another sacred cow we must not talk about. Thou shalt not cut funding for the military.

I'd like the military to be strong and in fewer global programs. I don't think there is anything worth saving in the middle east. Pull them out. Japan and Europe can take care of themselves, pull them out.

I'd like rules of engagement changed. If you have to go to war, don't destroy the army - destroy the culture that gave rise to the army. That's what happened in WWII, not since.

But if i say things like that you will call me names like Ron Paul.

Posted by: Floyd Winston at August 11, 2016 10:06 PM (0CKeS)

858 " Not to oversimplify, but how much of this tolerance of illegals and inviting others is to prop up SS etc?

Posted by: Golfman

IMO the tolerance of illegals is at the wishes of business and of government workers as much as SS. If all the illegals, or even 25% of them, left California, for instance, most of our teachers would lose their jobs because the schools would be empty. Housing prices would collapse after so many people leave, which is nice for newcomers but terrible for people who bought in the last ten years. Towns would thin out or be abandoned, like in Japan. Yes, eventually it would all sort out, but it would be extremely painful.

Many decades ago the boomers obeyed their betters and had small or no families, so other people had to be brought in to keep demand up.

Posted by: PJ at August 11, 2016 10:11 PM (cHuNI)

859 Really glad I didn't TL;DR this. Good read. I don't know where we go from here, but good read all the same.

Posted by: Rusty Nail at August 11, 2016 11:45 PM (S2VsH)

860 Politicians don't lie to constituents to smooth over differences. They lie because they know if they told the truth, they'd be thrown out of office.
You can't hit an enemy you don't know is there, and that's what politicians are counting on.

Posted by: Matt_SE at August 11, 2016 11:49 PM (ECsmS)

861 20% of Republicans aren't refusing to vote for Trump because they love them some illegal immigration. It's because Trump's character is in the gutter. That's why these voters could swallow hard and vote for McCain or Romney, but not Trump: the previous two were seen as decent men.

These voters are betting that Hillary is survivable, which seems likely after already surviving two terms of Obama. They have doubts that Trump is survivable.

The irony in all this is, it's the non-Trump voters who are accused of not listening to the base. In this case, the constant maligning of the non-Trump voters is coming from the Trump camp, who refuse to understand their cause for concern.

Posted by: Matt_SE at August 12, 2016 12:00 AM (ECsmS)

862 McCain decent?

Go fuck yourself.

I managed to swallow my pride and vote for Mittens in the general election, but I felt dirty afterwards. I didn't vote for the Trumpocolypse in the primary, but I won't feel less dirty voting for him in the general than I did voting for Mittens in the general.

Posted by: Richard Cranium at August 12, 2016 12:17 AM (ATlQg)

863 Romney is probably decent (not only are there scads of personal accounts, but he's Mormon...how bad could he be?). McCain is probably not.

I didn't say they were decent, I said they SEEMED decent (or verbatim "they were SEEN as decent.")

The problem with Trump, and why he'll never be able to bridge the divide between the two camps, is because the two camps demand opposite behavior from him. I think he's inclined to behave like a jerk because that's what he is.
Fine for people who like that, but not a winning electoral strategy.

Posted by: Matt_SE at August 12, 2016 12:40 AM (ECsmS)

864 I really don't understand the vehement opposition to Trump as president, even by Ace. Look 'people', we currently have a DOJ and IRS and EPA and DOE so partisan and corrupt, that if it isn't 'contained' America will never be 'as designed' by its founders 'a bastion of freedom' ever again.. If that is 'OK' with you, good luck in life, and hope you have lots of corrupt, connected friends, because only then will you be 'just fine'. Trump is, by far, not 'perfect', but he is the only one EVER who has the balls to challenge the obvious corruption that has infested our 'American' institutions for multiple decades. My biggest fear is that he will be 'wacked', because I know the left, and they will not 'chance' an actual political 'victory'. God bless America, and don't ever doubt its resolve!

Posted by: TheFoundersParty at August 12, 2016 02:34 AM (QAVtQ)

865 Late to the comments here, but then I don't live here. Excellent points Ace, many of which, especially in regard to abortion, I have been saying for 15-20 years. I wonder how much of this Ace has discussed with a certain coblogger with whom I once tangled on this same issue. Not about the morality of abortion, but how one would write a strict anti-abortion law and how it could ever get passed in the current political environment. If such a thing is truly desired, in a democratic republic one needs to first move that needle waaaaay beyond 17%. You need to change the people before you can change the government. Otherwise it is all a waste of time at best and a political poison pill at worst.

Posted by: Wtp at August 12, 2016 07:08 AM (ym/QJ)

866 What if John Smith, Proud American Citizen, is speeding in the dark on a
country road and gets pulled over and has no ID? Should he be taken to
jail on suspicion of not being a legal resident?

That's not even a reasonable hypothetical.

Posted by: dagny at August 12, 2016 08:50 AM (eSQgj)

867 I don't totally agree with you. Simply saying "The Establishment" is NOT an all encompassing thing that covers how I feel. I am more on the side of The Establishment than I am of Trump. I am part of the 60% of the party that was against this clown. I don't have anything in common with there morons in the Primaries that purposefully voted for an idiot they knew would lose.

Posted by: rexbatt at August 12, 2016 09:27 AM (woA40)

868 Your choice, but that's how we lose and the left is
ascendant and then NONE of your goals are even in the wheel house of
possibilities forever.

Posted by: dagny at August 11, 2016 05:00 PM (eSQgj)
Ok, so your alternative is we push the GOP more authoritarian; and support liberals in the GOP so I STILL never get any of my goals in the "wheel of possibility" forever...
AND I have to suck up to liberals and authoritarians and pretend to support them while still getting jack shit forever?If I'm going to get fucked either way, and you want me to praise you while you fuck me over? Yeah, that's not a winning plan to get my support.

Posted by: gekkobear at August 12, 2016 11:00 AM (2iR3c)

869 "Military spending is another sacred cow we must not talk about. Thou shalt not cut funding for the military. "

I used to be that way and now want the military cut to the bone. The United States, read this slowly, NEVER will project power abroad successfully again. More to the point, it shouldn't even try. A Banana Empire we are. Cut off the head.

Posted by: dreck at August 12, 2016 12:37 PM (6gR7l)

870 WOW!
I thought only a few understood that the GOP had not run a conservative since 1984! But it seem very many have understood the hard left turn the Republican party made in 1988!

Why does America need 2 liberal parties?
Answer - we do not need 2 progressive parties! good by GOP!

Posted by: an Ol ex Jarhead at August 13, 2016 09:04 PM (pZCCu)

871 I believe psyops are practiced by every tv "news" org, I believe our CIA organizes and implements the psyop gameplan, to keep us angry, demoralized, and feeling helpless, I believe they use blackmail, and intimidation to bring new politicians to heel, I believe both parties combined in the 80's to rule and not represent, they see Europe, they know the consequences of the policies they enforce, and thanks to all media in their control, they control both sides of the argument, it's not incompetence or lack of ability that has one party seem ineffective and the other unstoppable, it's a coordinated act, while the real agenda goes unseen and un impeded, I saw Fox News subtly kill impeachment talk in the crib, then when trumps campaign started and had no momentum, I saw Fox News m Kelley act uncharacteristically during an early debate and create a rally point for the angry, unheard voters and breath life into trumps campaign, all of a sudden people believed he was an outsider. I've never known a Marxist to pal around with non Marxist, this was my concern with trump early on, then fox put their full weight behind him when they saw that Rubio wasn't happening, I believe trump was intended to help Rubio, but the monster they created got out of control, so plan b was initiated, have trump impede his own momentum and run a lackadaisical campaign, he's endorsed every insider he claimed to want to stop, after 8 years of Obama we have allowed the news to manipulate us into electing the only candidate unprofessional enough to lose to Clinton, and as they take our rights, freedoms and peace of mind, they stall for time by immediately going to the next election as soon as this ones over, when we know by their actions whom needs ousted. Yet between this and next election the media will create enough doubt and misinformation to keep the insidious in office, I propose a simple chart on a candidates stated principles and promises before election, and actual stance taken while in office, forget speeches, commercials, just their actions and lies told is all the criteria needed, and as for the media, they must burn and be obliterated completely, they are not a free press, they are bought and paid for and reek of Intel community training and techniques

Posted by: Csha at August 18, 2016 02:28 PM (LlSyg)

872 One point I strongly disagree with - wanting a secure border and being more selective about who we admit into our country is not racist, it is completely rational. Repeating the mindless propaganda from the statists doesn't make the "college educated" (as you call them) more enlightened - it makes them suicidal. Believing that we somehow "owe" people outside the United States citizenship is the kind of communitarian self-flagellation we desperately need to disabuse ourselves of.

Posted by: Cory at August 22, 2016 09:45 PM (YXrG5)

873 I probably shouldn't have read all the comments to make this point, because this point almost certainly won't have been made regardless. It doesn't even seem to be on anyone's radar.

This election season has convinced me, more than any other election before, that our current voting system is seriously flawed. Trump vs. Clinton, really? That's the best we can do?

Of course, this is a direct result of our system being susceptible to spoilers. We Republicans allegedly *have* to vote for Trump, because if we vote for someone we "like" (Johnson, really? That's the best the Libertarians can do?!?), Hillary will win. Similarly, those Democrats *have* to vote for Hillary, because if they vote for someone they "like" (I understand that Dr. Stein was charged with vandalism, because apparently she needed to do something wacky illegal in order to become as Presidential as the other three candidates...), then Trump will win.

Unless we revolt, en mass, and just get behind what's his name, that Republican-ish candidate who just threw his hat in at the last minute, and is now on the ballot in TWO states (woo-hoo!), who at best will likely act as a spoiler to Johnson, throwing Utah to Trump....

I would propose that all this mess can be avoided by changing our system to one where we could list our preferences, and then have immediate runoffs until one candidate gets a plurality. In such a system, I can theoretically list Petersen, Cruz, Rubio, Walker, and Johnson, and leave off Trump and Hillary because they are just too icky...and if Petersen can't get enough votes, then perhaps we'll get a Cruz or Rubio to win.

But I would further propose that our current "first past the post" system is also the cause of the "yeah, yeah" problem that Ace describes. When a relaxed-pro-life candidate Alice has to hide her stance in order to attract a hard-pro-life voter, who would be happy to settle for Alice if hard-core-pro-life Bob can't get enough votes (and who, in turn, has to hide his hard-core-pro-life stance to attract the fiscal conservatives), yeah-yeah-ing is almost certainly the result, *regardless* of party stance....

Posted by: Alpheus at September 07, 2016 08:08 PM (Lu2sD)

Processing 0.12, elapsed 0.1527 seconds.
14 queries taking 0.0534 seconds, 881 records returned.
Page size 610 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.