Rod Dreher: "Cheer Up, Conservatives" [CBD]

In Cheer Up, Conservatives, Rod Dreher praises a David Brooks column (yeah, suspicious), but goes on to express some interesting points, none of which cheered me particularly.

But here he makes an excellent point, and one which could be expanded to the embrace of some populist stances....

I am a social and religious conservative who cannot be a libertarian on principle, because I am a conservative. Yet I find that I have to be a libertarian for pragmatic reasons, because I want my little platoon left alone by the government.

But then he goes on to say:

And I am an embittered ex-Republican who is trying to bring himself around to realizing that as awful as the GOP is, they, and their judicial appointments, are the only thing standing between my little platoon and some pretty unfortunate outcomes. So yeah, I'll take good cheer where I can find it.

Huh?

At least it's short, and worth a few seconds to see how self-described conservatives are viewing the current...difficulties.

Posted by: Open Blogger at 04:45 PM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 Oh, boy.

Posted by: just wait, you won't believe what happens next at March 26, 2016 03:46 PM (IQI2h)

2 The GOP is a fake.

Relying on it to protect anything of value is a foolish waste of time and energy.

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 03:46 PM (MQEz6)

3 Is my little platoon anything like my little pony?

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at March 26, 2016 03:47 PM (FkBIv)

4 Perhaps the republic has not hit bottom yet. Hard to believe.

Posted by: redenzo at March 26, 2016 03:49 PM (WCnJW)

5 An internal server error occurred. Please try again later.

Anybody else seeing this periodically?

Posted by: DaveA at March 26, 2016 03:49 PM (DL2i+)

6
they, and their judicial appointments, are the only thing standing between my little platoon and some pretty unfortunate outcomes.

Yeah, that line stopped working in 2011.

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 03:51 PM (imIws)

7 5 An internal server error occurred. Please try again later.

Anybody else seeing this periodically?
Posted by: DaveA at March 26, 2016 03:49 PM (DL2i+)

----------------

Sorry about that. I was on a coffee break.

Posted by: NSA guy at March 26, 2016 03:51 PM (kTF2Z)

8 I'm fine

Posted by: Skip at March 26, 2016 03:52 PM (fizMZ)

9 Paul Ryan was on TV earlier today. Why that silly twit thinks anyone would want to listen to anything the guy bested in a debate by the uber moron Joe Biden has to say, I don't know.

Posted by: Aviator at March 26, 2016 03:52 PM (c7vUv)

10 David Brooks is the dirty needle a crazy junkie just threw at you.

Go ahead, pick it up and inject the contents into your eye.

Such a rush.

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 03:53 PM (MQEz6)

11 Posted by: Aviator at March 26, 2016 03:52 PM (c7vUv)

Is he still wearing his hipster-douchebag beard?

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 26, 2016 03:53 PM (Zu3d9)

12 Sorry about that. I was on a coffee break.
Posted by: NSA guy

Dangit Bob, don't make me read jwest,
you won't like it when I read jwest.

Posted by: DaveA at March 26, 2016 03:53 PM (DL2i+)

13
Can someone please list all the Unfortunate Outcomes the GOP has stood in the way of? Just name one, please.

(And if you say the confiscation of guns, you are a fool.)

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 03:53 PM (imIws)

14 Platoon - Burke, I think it's from.

Talk about cold comfort.....jeez! this is like being grateful you only got knifed once.

Posted by: Kaspar Gutman at March 26, 2016 03:53 PM (86Dni)

15 Justice Roberts gave your little platoon the ACA. So what the fuck are you talking about.

Posted by: redenzo at March 26, 2016 03:53 PM (WCnJW)

16 I was talking to my 15 year old son about this very thing earlier. He said that they couldn't take our guns because of the second amendment. I told him that we are one more liberal justice away from losing that. Would you turn in your guns, dad? No.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 26, 2016 03:54 PM (kTF2Z)

17 Happens after I post from PaleMoon+++

Posted by: DaveA at March 26, 2016 03:54 PM (DL2i+)

18
I don't get Paul Ryan's delusion, either. The man says absolutely nothing when he appears on TV yet many words come out of his mouth.

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 03:54 PM (imIws)

19 Posted by: Kaspar Gutman at March 26, 2016 03:53 PM (86Dni)

Look at the brain on Kaspar!

Yeah....but nowadays I think "tribe" is, unfortunately, more correct.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 26, 2016 03:55 PM (Zu3d9)

20 " I told him that we are one more liberal justice away from losing that. Would you turn in your guns, dad? No."

Time to show him the liberal dissents in recent gun cases.

Posted by: Lauren at March 26, 2016 03:56 PM (kq8V8)

21
Rod Dreher: Conservatives, please join me in eating yet another Shit Sandwich Of Broken Promises. And drink some Urine Of Betrayal with me. Because things could be worse!

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 03:56 PM (imIws)

22 Happens after I post from PaleMoon+++

Posted by: DaveA at March 26, 2016 03:54 PM (DL2i+)

Patient: Doctor, my wrist hurts when I do this.

Doctor: So don't do this!

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 26, 2016 03:56 PM (Zu3d9)

23 Restart w/o addons doesn't clear it.

Posted by: DaveA at March 26, 2016 03:56 PM (DL2i+)

24 5 An internal server error occurred. Please try again later.

Anybody else seeing this periodically?
-----------
Off and on since '08...

Posted by: BunkerinTheBurbs at March 26, 2016 03:57 PM (bA+CL)

25 > Paul Ryan was on TV earlier today. Why that silly twit thinks anyone would want to listen to anything the guy bested in a debate by the uber moron Joe Biden has to say, I don't know.

Posted by: Aviator at March 26, 2016 03:52 PM (c7vUv)

He's getting face-time now, so he can be the "surprise" winner of the 3rd ballot at RNC Cleveland.

Posted by: just wait, you won't believe what happens next at March 26, 2016 03:57 PM (IQI2h)

26 >>Is he still wearing his hipster-douchebag beard?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo

Couldn't tell, all the spittle on the screen from my screaming at the TV blurred the picture a bit.

Posted by: Aviator at March 26, 2016 03:57 PM (c7vUv)

27 I think he is talking about the SCOTUS vacancy.
We are headed for civil war if a Dem takes the WH.

Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 03:57 PM (hVdx9)

28 Humans are tribal animals....reversion to the mean and all that.

Posted by: Kaspar Gutman at March 26, 2016 03:57 PM (86Dni)

Posted by: DaveA at March 26, 2016 03:57 PM (DL2i+)

30 Yo! I am listening to Milo's new podcast via BB. I am pondering... how far will he ascend with a wider audience vs say Ben Shapiro who is connected and well-published and principled, but in the wake of bruise-gate, he kinda drew a line with a few, me included.

Bonus: I find Milo interesting and the flagrant talk is wincing, but he's evolving so this next year will be interesting to see how or if he evolves a bit. Also, he did a great podcast on the 21st with Adam Corolla and did a sit down vid-cast at BB with Dave Rubin on Islamic issues and politics. I'll get links for you if interested and you can't find them. I found both via google.

Posted by: Yip at March 26, 2016 03:57 PM (e7T6D)

31 Like this bit of terrifying bullshit. From McDonald V City of Chicago

"Justice Breyer wrote, "In sum, the Framers did not write the Second Amendment in order to protect a private right of armed self defense. There has been, and is, no consensus that the right is, or was, 'fundamental.'"

Posted by: Lauren at March 26, 2016 03:58 PM (kq8V8)

32 With the 'pen and phone' precedent, what does the Court achieve? Separation of Powers has been thrown out the window.

Posted by: Kasich the Barbarian, Son of Mailman at March 26, 2016 03:58 PM (uyrlv)

33
Re: Second Amendment rights

So it's either from my cold dead hands or another couple of leftist Court justices, which ever comes...last?

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 03:58 PM (imIws)

34 Time to show him the liberal dissents in recent gun cases.

-------------

Which is why I would vote for a bucket of dog vomit over Hilary.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 26, 2016 03:58 PM (kTF2Z)

35 If a Court can take away our Second Amendment rights, then we don't have them in the first place.

Worrying about such legal decisions means you do not understand the Second Amendment at all.

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 03:59 PM (MQEz6)

36 Posted by: Aviator at March 26, 2016 03:57 PM (c7vUv)

You should have been in my house last night.

Apparently everything is still Bush's fault.

If I kill someone who is profoundly stupid and ignorant, is it considered murder, or a public service?

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 26, 2016 03:59 PM (Zu3d9)

37 I waited weeks for my secret decoder ring and all I got was a stupid commercial.

Posted by: Dewey at March 26, 2016 03:59 PM (hHXBG)

38 Which is why I would vote for a bucket of dog vomit over Hilary.

Posted by: Duke Lowell
****

Types...deletes...

Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:00 PM (hVdx9)

39 Huh?

At least it's short, and worth a few seconds to see how self-described conservatives are viewing the current...difficulties.
The "Huh?" factor goes away when you realize that Crunchy-Con Dreher is barely any more conservative than David Brooks.

Know your pundits...

Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at March 26, 2016 04:01 PM (LUlyE)

40 >>He's getting face-time now, so he can be the "surprise" winner of the 3rd ballot at RNC Cleveland.
Posted by: just wait, you won't believe what happens next

One of the reasons I was pissed off seeing him on TV.

Posted by: Aviator at March 26, 2016 04:01 PM (c7vUv)

41
Is my little platoon anything like my little pony?

yes, except for the rifles, mortars and squad automatic weapons

Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at March 26, 2016 04:01 PM (lKyWE)

42 Dog vomit vote, the GOD has that covered....

Posted by: Thegarbone at March 26, 2016 04:01 PM (9dH/8)

43
16
I was talking to my 15 year old son about this very thing earlier. He
said that they couldn't take our guns because of the second amendment. I
told him that we are one more liberal justice away from losing that.
Would you turn in your guns, dad? No.

Posted by: Duke Lowell

I had that same discussion with my brother. He said he wouldn't. I would. If the sheriff is going door to door, ala East Germany, once you keep your firearm you are done. You are a criminal in the eyes of the state,... so if you ever use said firearm off to serious jail you go regardless of the reason. Take my guns, I'll get a nice laser sword and stock up on wasp spray.... oh, and a hickory axe handle. It's a toughy of a topic, for sure, even though I'm making light of it. I don't think we'll ever see it.

Posted by: Yip at March 26, 2016 04:02 PM (e7T6D)

44 P... GOP

Posted by: Thegarbone at March 26, 2016 04:02 PM (9dH/8)

45 as awful as the GOP is, they, and their judicial appointments, are the
only thing standing between my little platoon and some pretty
unfortunate outcomes
---
If anyone not in the Yay, Government! segment of the country thought the GOP was standing, Cruz or Jindal (or Walker maybe) would have the nomination sewn up by now and the other guy wouldn't have run in the first place.

Posted by: Methos, AoS commenter since 2006, apparently also non-voting democrat at March 26, 2016 04:03 PM (ZbV+0)

46
If a Court can take away our Second Amendment rights, then we don't have them in the first place.

Word.

If your inalienable rights hinge on 5 people wearing a silly black robe, you deserve no rights.

inalienable: unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor.

We're not talking about a license to drive, here. We're talking about FREEDOM and SERFDOM.

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 04:03 PM (imIws)

47 >>If I kill someone who is profoundly stupid and ignorant, is it considered murder, or a public service?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo

I think that depends on wether the body is found or not. How much quick lime do you have on hand?

Posted by: Aviator at March 26, 2016 04:03 PM (c7vUv)

48 Rod Dreher sounds like Danny Kaye trying to pass furniture polish as "Yakov's Golden Elixir" (Safe for work link: song from "The Inspector General")

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1yM2babqZs

Posted by: shadowofashade at March 26, 2016 04:04 PM (owQDO)

49 I am beginning to think our Republic, like the Roman, is at the same point where it became an empire. Too much of the population is mistrustful of those who sought the power to govern. They are corrupt and ineffectual in there governance. It is all about them, and their desires. We want a Caesar to cross the Rubicon and take the power from those that are governing, and set things right.

Posted by: Paladin at March 26, 2016 04:04 PM (E1aoU)

50 Not too hard to understand.. if Trump wins the nomination, we will likely get President Hillary Clinton for at least 4 years.. (one polls out of 29 polls show him winning) She will likely get to name 3-4 Supreme Court justices..

His little platoon - kids most likely - and all of your kids will lose as many freedoms as the commie judges Hillary names can steal from you... 4 years.. 8 years from now, it will be too late to salvage.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at March 26, 2016 04:04 PM (UpGcq)

51 You don't have to be religious per say to be either libertarian or conservative.

I have some libertarian views. But Consider myself more of a conservative

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 26, 2016 04:04 PM (voOPb)

52 To be honest, I was a bit skeptical on Bucket Of Dog Vomit at first, but the more I read up on his positions, I feel comfortable casting my lot with him. Dog Vomit/Rancid Rotting Meat 2016

Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 26, 2016 04:04 PM (kTF2Z)

53 it is a bit confusing on his part.

I am a social and religious conservative who cannot be a libertarian on principle, because I am a conservative. Yet I find that I have to be a libertarian for pragmatic reasons, because I want my little platoon left alone by the government.

The heart of US conservatism (aka classical liberalism) is libertarian in nature. The classical liberal view of government is that it is a necessary evil and one that must be constrained.

It would be exceeding difficult to describe a conservatism that wants to use the force of government to enforce social conservatism. It would be the very caricature of conservatism the Left projects on the Right; a statist theocracy.

RE: Crunchy cons
We are conservatives who stand outside the conservative mainstream; therefore, we can see things that matter more clearly.

This is the exact reason why we are at a crossroads. This kind of unearned arrogance need to be killed in its sleep. It is contempt in full.

No, Mr. Dreher and Co, you are not better than any other conservative. And, no we're not going to show you any deference or kneel before your credentials.

Culture is more important than politics and economics.

Only in the sense that culture provides the terrain for the others, only to the extent that conservatives should be exercising influence in the secular realm, and not trying to leverage government to change culture.

Small, Local, Old, and Particular are almost always better than Big, Global, New, and Abstract.

Huh? The US Revolution was as Big, Global, New, and Abstract as it gets.

Again, Croonchy Conz seem to be internalizing the caricature the Left projects on the Right as stupid, backwards, paranoid, and unable to cope with human advancement.

To be specific, 'new' isn't a problem for conservatives; it's the obsession with novelty and impulsiveness that's the problem. Change for change's sake is the problem, not creation.

Beauty is more important than efficiency.

Ok, I'm done. That not even remotely associated with conservatism in a politics.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at March 26, 2016 04:04 PM (A/3fN)

54 So im trying to Imagine the whole white house on that private server.

Posted by: Skip at March 26, 2016 04:05 PM (fizMZ)

55 Posted by: Aviator at March 26, 2016 04:03 PM (c7vUv)

Alas...not enough.

It will be more than one body.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 26, 2016 04:05 PM (Zu3d9)

56 "once you keep your firearm you are done. You are a criminal in the eyes of the state,... so if you ever use said firearm off to serious jail you go regardless of the reason"

A) What guns? Tragic boating accident and all that.
B) Better judged by 12 than carried by 6
C) When they come for your guns you need your guns.

Posted by: Lauren at March 26, 2016 04:05 PM (kq8V8)

57
Don't dogs eat their vomit?

Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at March 26, 2016 04:05 PM (lKyWE)

58
The "Huh?" factor goes away when you realize that Crunchy-Con Dreher is barely any more conservative than David Brooks.

Know your pundits...

THIS.

Posted by: Alamo at March 26, 2016 04:05 PM (E/XIS)

59 If a Court can take away our Second Amendment rights, then we don't have them in the first place.

Worrying about such legal decisions means you do not understand the Second Amendment at all.

Posted by: eman
****

So you are saying the SC pick doesn't concern you at all?

Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:06 PM (hVdx9)

60 47 >>If I kill someone who is profoundly stupid and ignorant, is it considered murder, or a public service?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo

I think that depends on wether the body is found or not. How much quick lime do you have on hand?
Posted by: Aviator at March 26, 2016 04:03 PM (c7vUv)

My favorite line of the Serenity Prayer is the line of, "And the wisdom to know where to hide the bodies"

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 26, 2016 04:06 PM (voOPb)

61 I noticed that yet another GOPe Senator wants to hold hearings on Merrick Garland (or is it Garland Merrick?), this time Jerry Moran in Kansas.

Moran was quoted as saying something like he'd rather upset his constituents by confirming someone who was lousy than upset them by not doing his job.

What a tool.

Posted by: Furious George at March 26, 2016 04:06 PM (3GAnN)

62 Happens after I post from PaleMoon+++

Posted by: DaveA at March 26, 2016 03:54 PM (DL2i+)]/i]

Try clearing your cache and cookies.

Posted by: DangerGirl and her 1.21 gigawatt Sanity Prod at March 26, 2016 04:06 PM (+eR2D)

63 Worrying about such legal decisions means you do not understand the Second Amendment at all.
---
Or any of the other 9.

Posted by: Methos, AoS commenter since 2006, apparently also non-voting democrat at March 26, 2016 04:07 PM (ZbV+0)

64 59 If a Court can take away our Second Amendment rights, then we don't have them in the first place.

Worrying about such legal decisions means you do not understand the Second Amendment at all.

Posted by: eman
****

So you are saying the SC pick doesn't concern you at all?
Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:06 PM (hVdx9)

Yes. Not one bit.

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:08 PM (MQEz6)

65 Dreher has also been pushing the "Bendictine option" of withdrawing from society & forming conservative kibbutzes.

Posted by: Josephistan at March 26, 2016 04:08 PM (7qAYi)

66
Moran was quoted as saying something like he'd rather upset his constituents by confirming someone who was lousy than upset them by not doing his job.

WTF

Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at March 26, 2016 04:08 PM (lKyWE)

67 4 Perhaps the republic has not hit bottom yet. Hard to believe.
Posted by: redenzo at March 26, 2016 03:49 PM (WCnJW)

The Republic died 100 years ago. Now we're waiting for our "democracy" to hit bottom.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 04:09 PM (sdi6R)

68 Even Republican nominated Supreme Court justices can and will let us down, a Democrat one will no questions asked.

Posted by: Skip at March 26, 2016 04:09 PM (fizMZ)

69 The left seems to be increasingly moving away from liberalism. PC speech codes, imposing Obamacare on religious institutions, coercive cake baking, etc. So why are they rejecting liberalism? Because liberalism is about reconciling religious factions, and since there are no religious factions on the left, there is no need for liberalism. Liberalism was a half-measure that's outlived its usefulness. As society becomes increasingly irreligious, it will become increasingly illiberal. Of course there are Muslims, will they embrace liberalism and religious liberty? No, because liberalism is a package deal of religious liberty and individual liberty. Muslims will get a multicultural carve-out, which makes sense, because multiculturalism and illiberalism also go hand in hand.

Posted by: bjk at March 26, 2016 04:09 PM (j1muo)

70 Alas...not enough.

It will be more than one body.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo
****

Carbon monoxide leak...accidental of course...

Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:09 PM (hVdx9)

71 Roberts made one horrible ruling that I consider enough to cancel out what I have to admit is a pretty conservative record of rulings. A less vengeful person might overlook his ACA ruling because of the rest of his record. I'm not that person.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 26, 2016 04:09 PM (Bc1aB)

72 An internal server error occurred. Please try again later.

Anybody else seeing this periodically?
Posted by: DaveA at March 26, 2016 03:49 PM (DL2i+)

Sometimes the hamsters get tired. Hit the tip jar so ace can afford spare hamsters.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 26, 2016 04:09 PM (1D4Ef)

73
It doesn't matter. The Republicans lost Congress last October when they raised, with a overwhelming majority of Democrats, obama's debt ceiling through March 2017.

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 04:10 PM (imIws)

74 Yes. Not one bit.

Posted by: eman
****

Then you are deluded beyond reaching.

Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:10 PM (hVdx9)

75
Roberts made one horrible ruling that I consider enough to cancel out what I have to admit is a pretty conservative record of rulings

Way more than just one. Roberts has made several bad rulings.

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 04:10 PM (imIws)

76 The heart of US conservatism (aka classical liberalism) is libertarian in nature. The classical liberal view of government is that it is a necessary evil and one that must be constrained.

It would be exceeding difficult to describe a conservatism that wants to use the force of government to enforce social conservatism. It would be the very caricature of conservatism the Left projects on the Right; a statist theocracy.
..............
the libertarian view would never try to force its views on abortion, drug use.. many things. That is one of the biggest government features of social conservatism.

"Big Government" to conservatives, is only stuff they don't agree with. Social conservatives loves them some big government when they can force their views on all of the above and more.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at March 26, 2016 04:11 PM (UpGcq)

77 Even Republican nominated Supreme Court justices can and will let us down, a Democrat one will no questions asked.

Posted by: Skip
****

Republican picks can and have let us down.
A dem pick will rule against us guaranteed.

Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:11 PM (hVdx9)

78 Worrying about such legal decisions means you do not understand the Second Amendment at all.
---
Or any of the other 9.

Posted by: Methos, AoS commenter since 2006, apparently also non-voting democrat at March 26, 2016 04:07 PM (ZbV+0)

Yeah, I hate words like "existential," but that's the sort of word that fits here. Existential crisis. Either we are or we aren't.

And dagnabbit, it sure appears we aren't. Which means, blood on the street. I don't see how it can be avoided now.

Posted by: BurtTC at March 26, 2016 04:12 PM (TOk1P)

79 65, It's the Benedict Option, and has some good points in that we need to form communities of like minded individuals and families in difficult times, though the "Bendictine Option" also works. Especially in a Vieux Carre cocktail.

Posted by: Skookumchuk at March 26, 2016 04:12 PM (/WPPJ)

80 Yes. Not one bit.
Posted by: eman
****
Then you are deluded beyond reaching.
Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:10 PM (hVdx9)

It has some impact in the current system ... but if what's left of the Republic doesn't see some change in direction, the bias of the SCOTUS will be the least of our problems.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 26, 2016 04:12 PM (1D4Ef)

81 Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at March 26, 2016 04:11 PM (UpGcq)

Making drugs and partial birth abortion legal is forcing their views on me.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 26, 2016 04:12 PM (Bc1aB)

82 Pretty sure the founders didn't intentionally make Anthony Kennedy the most powerful person in the nation.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 26, 2016 04:13 PM (kTF2Z)

83
74 Yes. Not one bit.

Posted by: eman
****

Then you are deluded beyond reaching.
Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:10 PM (hVdx9)

Or you do not understand the meaning of rights and freedom.

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:13 PM (MQEz6)

84 Worrying about such legal decisions means you do not understand the Second Amendment at all.
---
Or any of the other 9.

Posted by: Methos, AoS
****

You are clearly not well acquainted with reality.

Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:14 PM (hVdx9)

85 A dem pick will rule against us guaranteed.

Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:11 PM (hVdx9)

Please read your own words carefully.

Ruled.

These are not questions of liberty anymore. If you are subject to the whims of a handful of others, you are not free.

Posted by: BurtTC at March 26, 2016 04:14 PM (TOk1P)

86 "the libertarian view would never try to force its views on abortion,"

Wrong. Libertarianism, at its core, says your right to wave your arms around stops when your fist hits another's face.

Abortion is wrong because it violates that principle. There's no libertarian contradiction in opposing it.

Posted by: Lauren at March 26, 2016 04:14 PM (kq8V8)

87 Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 04:10 PM (imIws)

Name one.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 26, 2016 04:15 PM (Bc1aB)

88 RE: Crunchy cons
We are conservatives who stand outside the conservative mainstream; therefore, we can see things that matter more clearly.

This is the exact reason why we are at a crossroads. This kind of unearned arrogance need to be killed in its sleep. It is contempt in full.

This. Beautifully stated.

Posted by: OregonMuse at March 26, 2016 04:15 PM (mcEz5)

89 I come here for a quick break from work and wind up in the middle of fights ha?

So be it

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 26, 2016 04:15 PM (DUoqb)

90
Moran was quoted as saying something like he'd rather upset his constituents by confirming someone who was lousy than upset them by not doing his job.

One does incredible damage, the other hurts his self-esteem.

Fuck that guy.

Posted by: Kasich the Barbarian, Son of Mailman at March 26, 2016 04:16 PM (uyrlv)

91 Time to show him the liberal dissents in recent gun cases.

Posted by: Lauren at March 26, 2016 03:56 PM (kq8V

So before 2008 and the Heller decision, was it illegal to own guns in this country?

I swear, the mythologizing on this has gotten worse than liberals and Roe. We won on gun rights because we won the issue politically. Politicians were terrified of restricting gun rights long before the Supreme Court declared it a right.

The NRA, unlike the GOP, was not content with losing with dignity. That's the lesson I'd really like to see taken to heart.

Posted by: Jake (not officially a regular) at March 26, 2016 04:16 PM (xiCT2)

92 >>the libertarian view would never try to force its views on abortion, drug use.. many things.
------
True libertarian is not much different that an anarchist. The modern ones are no different than social conservatives having their pet views

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 26, 2016 04:17 PM (voOPb)

93 Making drugs and partial birth abortion legal is forcing their views on me.
Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck
.............
Not handled anywhere in the Constitution - so it is up to the states to make those choices.

And I agree - if they can get the Supreme Court to rule on this stuff at a federal level - some of which they have - they ARE forcing their views on us.

It's not right for anyone to do it. I am simply arguing that libertarianism take a minimalist view - i.e. if it ain't in the Constitution, the feds have no business regulating it or legislating it.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at March 26, 2016 04:17 PM (UpGcq)

94 Beauty is more important than efficiency.
Ok, I'm done. That not even remotely associated with conservatism in a politics.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at March 26, 2016 04:04 PM (A/3fN)

Which is why I stopped reading Dreher years ago. He's got an idiosyncratic collection of hobby-horses that he's bundled together and calls "conservative", like that "crunchy con" bullshit. I've got better commentators to read.

Posted by: OregonMuse at March 26, 2016 04:18 PM (mcEz5)

95 I think that if a federal law ever came to be that directed police departments to actively seek out and confiscate guns we would see cities, counties,and even some states flat out ignore it. Then what? Can't us the military and there aren't enough federal agents to do the job.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 26, 2016 04:18 PM (kTF2Z)

96 Which is why I would vote for a bucket of dog vomit over Hilary.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 26, 2016 03:58 PM (kTF2Z)

Whoa! Whoa! Whoa!

Let's not be hasty here.

Is that smooth dog vomit or

the chunky kind with those little chewy bits that are so nice and tender and full of flavor?

Cuz that's good eatin'.

Again.

Posted by: Dog at March 26, 2016 04:18 PM (2rmvw)

97 The last time the Democrats were disappointed in one of their Supreme Court picks was Byron White.

Since White was appointed, the Stupid Party has sent the following justices to the Supreme Court so that they "could grow in office":

Harry "I Used to Represent the Mayo Clinic" Blackmun;
John Paul "Grampa Simpson" Stevens;
Sandra Day "Lighten Up Sandy Baby" O'Connor;
Anthony "Flip A Coin" Kennedy;
David "Why Yes, Please Condemn My House" Souter; and
John "It's A Tax" Roberts.

Posted by: Furious George at March 26, 2016 04:18 PM (3GAnN)

98 My favorite line of the Serenity Prayer is the line of, "And the wisdom to know where to hide the bodies"

Mine is where I don't throw up more often than the dog - YMMV.

Posted by: DaveA at March 26, 2016 04:19 PM (DL2i+)

99 The Cuban people had an inalienable right to bear arms and self defense.
That was taken away.
Thinking it can't or won't be here is the height of insanity and delusional thinking.

Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:19 PM (hVdx9)

100
Name one.

I'll give you TWO just from 2012 besides the one where Roberts sided with obamacare:

1. Roberts sided with the Leftits on the Stolen Valor act.

2. Roberts sided with the Leftists in favor of striking down Arizona's law to protect its borders.

Roberts has consistently sided with the Leftists.

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 04:20 PM (imIws)

101 You are clearly not well acquainted with reality.

Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:14 PM (hVdx9)

The reality is our Rights come from God and are absolute. We therefore are duty-bound to defend them at any cost against any enemy.
That is what being an American is all about. I will leave it to lesser peoples to obey government and its silly laws and rulings.

Posted by: Methos, AoS commenter since 2006, apparently also non-voting democrat at March 26, 2016 04:20 PM (ZbV+0)

102 Can't use the military and there aren't enough federal agents to do the job.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 26, 2016 04:18 PM (kTF2Z)

It's a tax! I'll allow it.

Posted by: Dread Justice Roberts at March 26, 2016 04:20 PM (TOk1P)

103 "it ain't in the Constitution, the feds have no business regulating it or legislating it."

And the right to life is item #1 so...

Posted by: Lauren at March 26, 2016 04:20 PM (kq8V8)

104 94, Oregon Muse. Yup. It's tedious after a while. The Benedict Option I broadly think is a good idea, but the rest is a bit of a mess.

Posted by: Skookumchuk at March 26, 2016 04:20 PM (/WPPJ)

105 OK, 100+ comments.

Did you know...

Cecil B. DeMille's epic "The 10 Commandments", circa 1956, is 4 hours and 44 minutes long?

Starts in about an hour and a half on my local broadcast station- time to pick up some chips, salsa, beer.

Later, y'all.

Posted by: just wait, you won't believe what happens next at March 26, 2016 04:21 PM (IQI2h)

106 Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at March 26, 2016 04:17 PM (UpGcq)

Where did you get the idea that Libertarianism means State Rights advocacy?

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 26, 2016 04:21 PM (Bc1aB)

107 Somehow I managed to avoid the barrel. I have no idea, but I guess it's my lucky day.

Posted by: DangerGirl and her 1.21 gigawatt Sanity Prod at March 26, 2016 04:21 PM (+eR2D)

108 the libertarian view would never try to force its views on abortion, drug use.. many things. That is one of the biggest government features of social conservatism.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry

Abortion is considered murder in the social conservative framework.

If you are trying to push the idea that libertarians are ok with murder, well, good luck.

Drug use; This is the closest you will get to a point. But you will still have to overcome the fact that there are strong utilitarian arguments against permitting drug use; loss of productivity, related crimes, and knock-on effects in culture, education, etc.

So, no, social conservatism does not rely on a statist framework if you are honest.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at March 26, 2016 04:22 PM (A/3fN)

109
99 The Cuban people had an inalienable right to bear arms and self defense.
That was taken away.
Thinking it can't or won't be here is the height of insanity and delusional thinking.
Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:19 PM (hVdx9)

It would take a combination of force and surrendering to force.

So, resist or cross your fingers and hope your rulers are nice to you.

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:22 PM (MQEz6)

110 >>>Can't us the military and there aren't enough federal agents to do the job.

Can't or won't Duke?

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 26, 2016 04:22 PM (voOPb)

111
It seems that many of you here are not really aware what's going on.

Bills in Congress are being passed with a majority of Democrats on a regular basis. There are about 100 Republicans who consistently vote with the minority Democrats (thus making a majority) to advance the obama status-quo. Our Republican "control" on Congress is a joke.

And Roberts has sided with the Left on many cases, big and small.

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 04:23 PM (imIws)

112 @100
Roberts has consistently sided with the Leftists.
Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only!
___________

Ahem. The proper term description is that he has grown in office.

Posted by: Your Betters In the Media at March 26, 2016 04:23 PM (3GAnN)

113 The reality is our Rights come from God and are absolute.

Posted by: Methos, AoS commenter since 2006, apparently also non-voting democrat at March 26, 2016 04:20 PM (ZbV+0)

Exactly right. Which is why the Constitution does not say "we give you this right", but rather "this right shall not be abridged." This is an acknowledgment that rights exist prior to the formation of any government.

Posted by: OregonMuse at March 26, 2016 04:24 PM (mcEz5)

114 The Cuban people had an inalienable right to bear arms and self defense.

That was taken away.

Thinking it can't or won't be here is the height of insanity and delusional thinking.
---

Because they allowed it. Because they surrendered.

Posted by: Methos, AoS commenter since 2006, apparently also non-voting democrat at March 26, 2016 04:24 PM (ZbV+0)

115 DangerGirl , it's because you're awesome you don't end up in barrel

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 26, 2016 04:24 PM (voOPb)

116 "Justice Roberts gave your little platoon the ACA."

And actually went so far as to _rewrite_ Congress's legislation in order to achieve that end. A power of textual revision constitutionally reserved to the SCOTUS somewhere in, um, the "Good and Plenty Clause". Now with extra emanations and penumbras.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I am shocked -- shocked!!! -- to learn that a judicial nominee put forth by the Bush family turned out to be a liberal Big Government enabler once installed with lifetime tenure on the bench.

Who could have seen that shocking plot twist coming? I mean, there's absolutely no precedent for anything like it, ever.

Posted by: torquewrench at March 26, 2016 04:24 PM (noWW6)

117 "I am a social and religious conservative who cannot be a libertarian on
principle, because I am a conservative. Yet I find that I have to be a
libertarian for pragmatic reasons, because I want my little platoon left
alone by the government."

(surface)
I am a right-wing funny-d-mentalist conservative who will NEVER place pragmatism above principle. Mr. Dreher and others of his ilk who claim to be my brethren are part of the reason we have come to this end of our Republic.
(submerge)

Posted by: goozer at March 26, 2016 04:25 PM (C8JO8)

118
113 The reality is our Rights come from God and are absolute.

Posted by: Methos, AoS commenter since 2006, apparently also non-voting democrat at March 26, 2016 04:20 PM (ZbV+0)

Exactly right. Which is why the Constitution says "we give you this right", but rather "this right shall not be abridged." This is an acknowledgment that rights exist prior to the formation of any government.
Posted by: OregonMuse at March 26, 2016 04:24 PM (mcEz5)

You do not have to believe in God in order to inow you are born with your rights.

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:25 PM (MQEz6)

119 OT, but doomy-

"a security guard who worked at a Belgian nuclear plant was murdered and his pass was stolen, Belgian media reported on Saturday."

Posted by: Lauren at March 26, 2016 04:26 PM (kq8V8)

120 The Cuban people had an inalienable right to bear arms and self defense.

That was taken away.

Thinking it can't or won't be here is the height of insanity and delusional thinking.

Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:19 PM (hVdx9)

If they had an "inalienable right," then it can't, by its very nature as "inalienable," be taken away.

I think what you mean to say is men can oppress each other. And be subject to the whims of their masters, if they choose to live under the yoke. Which doesn't change their inalienable rights.

So if you have a court in THIS country that can and does rule over you, then it's not really a court. It's a 9 person slaveholder committee.

Posted by: Dread Justice Roberts at March 26, 2016 04:26 PM (TOk1P)

121 And it can make people leave their socks on!

Bastards...

Posted by: BurtTC at March 26, 2016 04:27 PM (TOk1P)

122 It would take a combination of force and surrendering to force.

So, resist or cross your fingers and hope your rulers are nice to you.

Posted by: eman
****
And some of us are trying to prevent it from coming to violence where the outcome is hardly guaranteed in our favor.
It absolutely can happen here.

Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:27 PM (hVdx9)

123 US Defense Secretary Ash Carter used his personal email account for government business for nearly a year, until December2015, when news reports revealed the practice, according to hundreds of Carter emails released by the Defense Department.

Sigh.. Makes me want to puke

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 26, 2016 04:28 PM (DUoqb)

124 You do not have to believe in God in order to inow you are born with your rights.
Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:25 PM (MQEz6)

True. This is why they're called "natural" rights. The main point being they exist outside of the state.

Posted by: OregonMuse at March 26, 2016 04:28 PM (mcEz5)

125 110 >>>Can't us the military and there aren't enough federal agents to do the job.

Can't or won't Duke?
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 26, 2016 04:22 PM (voOPb)

---------------

According to posse comitatus they can't. However, since in this situation the constitution would have been violated, a little federal law won't stand in their way.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 26, 2016 04:29 PM (kTF2Z)

126
122 It would take a combination of force and surrendering to force.

So, resist or cross your fingers and hope your rulers are nice to you.

Posted by: eman
****
And some of us are trying to prevent it from coming to violence where the outcome is hardly guaranteed in our favor.
It absolutely can happen here.
Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:27 PM (hVdx9)

I doubt anyone here wants violence. What we all have to be careful about is being so hateful of violence we will convince ourselves that servitude is better.

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:29 PM (MQEz6)

127 The Pentagon has long banned the use of personal email for official business. Carters use of his personal email account, starting when he took office in February 2015, was especially remarkable given the burst of public criticism that followed disclosures in March that Hillary Clinton had used a private email account exclusively to conduct government business while she was secretary of state.

Is there anyone in this Admin who is not incompetent, criminal, and/or stupid?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 26, 2016 04:29 PM (DUoqb)

128 DangerGirl , it's because you're awesome you don't end up in barrel

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 26, 2016 04:24 PM (voOPb)

Well thank you very much, you're very kind. *hugs*

Posted by: DangerGirl and her 1.21 gigawatt Sanity Prod at March 26, 2016 04:30 PM (+eR2D)

129 "I noticed that yet another GOPe Senator wants to hold hearings on
Merrick Garland (or is it Garland Merrick?), this time Jerry Moran in
Kansas."

I hadn't heard that. I gather there's already talk of primarying him. Good.

Posted by: torquewrench at March 26, 2016 04:31 PM (noWW6)

130 NGU

Nope, next question

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 26, 2016 04:31 PM (voOPb)

131 Stockholm Syndrome. The new American Way.

Posted by: s at March 26, 2016 04:32 PM (HCXGq)

132 "I noticed that yet another GOPe Senator wants to hold hearings on
Merrick Garland (or is it Garland Merrick?), this time Jerry Moran in
Kansas."

I hadn't heard that. I gather there's already talk of primarying him. Good.
Posted by: torquewrench at March 26, 2016 04:31 PM (noWW6)

I am "assuming" that certain Republicans in problematic States are being given "permission" to act like they want a vote or at least a hearing to help them in their re-elections...or they just might be assholes, or both

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 26, 2016 04:33 PM (DUoqb)

133 You do not have to believe in God in order to inow you are born with your rights.
---
Maybe. If you've got another Creator that endowed you with absolute Rights and we have a common enemy, I don't greatly need to argue the point.

Those of us who do know God, do need to believe the Rights we claim came from Him, if we're going to be at all consistent internally.

Posted by: Methos, AoS commenter since 2006, apparently also non-voting democrat at March 26, 2016 04:33 PM (ZbV+0)

134 I'm becoming more and more convinced that Trump is a Hillary stalking horse. Every bizarre twist makes that scenario more believable.

Posted by: Oldbuffalo at March 26, 2016 04:33 PM (Gs24m)

135 >> I'm becoming more and more convinced that Trump is a Hillary stalking horse. Every bizarre twist makes that scenario more believable.
Posted by: Oldbuffalo

Neigh!

Posted by: The Donald at March 26, 2016 04:35 PM (c7vUv)

136 On the gun confiscation angle, now the VA is onboard with reporting Vets. Good article over at guns.com article of the 25th. This is their soft grab right now. Redefine who is able to own. The soft march. Insidious. The left will not stop until and unless they are defeated. We're one election away from Austrailia-type gun laws.... they'll probably pass restrictions based on urban areas or population density first and work from that... also restrictions based on caliber, etc. Interesting times.

Posted by: Yip at March 26, 2016 04:35 PM (e7T6D)

137 Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 04:20 PM (imIws)

I would have to agree these two decisions are not what I would have wanted from Roberts. Though he is consistent in his obvious philosophy that congress needs to write the laws leave no ambiguity that it follows the Constitution. In the case of the Stolen Valor Act, Congress rewrote it to comply with the Courts recommendations.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 26, 2016 04:35 PM (Bc1aB)

138 Is there anyone in ~~this Admin~~ the Federal Government who is not incompetent, criminal, and/or stupid?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 26, 2016 04:29 PM (DUoqb)

FIFY

Posted by: DangerGirl and her 1.21 gigawatt Sanity Prod at March 26, 2016 04:36 PM (+eR2D)

139 I'm becoming more and more convinced that Trump is a Hillary stalking horse. Every bizarre twist makes that scenario more believable.
Posted by: Oldbuffalo at March 26, 2016 04:33 PM (Gs24m)

*****

Really? He is going to an awful lot of time, trouble and expense just say screw it, don'tcha think?

Posted by: Tim in GA at March 26, 2016 04:36 PM (5MsUm)

140 My little platoon got routed years ago,I have since become French.

Posted by: Gene Kelly at March 26, 2016 04:36 PM (xZc4z)

141
These Republicans -- they bend like the willow tree.

There are 2 types of Republicans. Those who buckle under the slightest pressure for their own personal gain, and those who secretly work for the other side for their own personal gain.

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 04:36 PM (imIws)

142 -

If they had an "inalienable right," then it can't, by its very nature as "inalienable," be taken away.

Posted by: Dread Justice Roberts at March 26, 2016 04:26 PM (TOk1P)

------------------------------

No, the right is inalienable. The degree to which those rights are infringed determines how free you are. In fact, the idea of inalienable rights is one of the basic ideas of the founding of this nation. You are confusing the right and the ability to enjoy it under a particular governnment.

Posted by: irright at March 26, 2016 04:37 PM (XfEYT)

143 And I am an embittered ex-Republican who is trying to bring himself around to realizing that as awful as the GOP is, they, and their judicial appointments, are the only thing standing between my little platoon and some pretty unfortunate outcomes.

That really doesn't cheer me up.

Posted by: AD at March 26, 2016 04:37 PM (QWY55)

144 DG I still have so e faith in the military.

But that's starting to slip away by the day with the social engineering going on

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 26, 2016 04:37 PM (voOPb)

145 Trump is a Hillary stalking horse.

Maybe Winning just got good to him.

Posted by: DaveA at March 26, 2016 04:38 PM (DL2i+)

146 You do not have to believe in God in order to inow you are born with your rights.
Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:25 PM (MQEz6)

There's no basis for human rights without objective right and wrong, and a rational basis for objective right and wrong without God has not been found.

Coming from a Christian America, we are inculcated we are born with certain rights ... but I don't think the full set of natural rights you're born with is obvious.

The duty and rights between a parent and child is obvious. Some of the other stuff, like a jury trial (because justice), would need more mapping.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 26, 2016 04:38 PM (1D4Ef)

147 52 To be honest, I was a bit skeptical on Bucket Of Dog Vomit at first, but the more I read up on his positions, I feel comfortable casting my lot with him. Dog Vomit/Rancid Rotting Meat 2016
Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 26, 2016 04:04 PM (kTF2Z)

Fuck you, loser! I'm voting for Turd Sandwich!

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 04:39 PM (sdi6R)

148 Really? He is going to an awful lot of time, trouble and expense just say screw it, don'tcha think?

There could riches and power beyond his wildest dreams if he paves the way for her. Crony Capitalism on steroids.

Posted by: Oldbuffalo at March 26, 2016 04:39 PM (Gs24m)

149 (Repost from a dead thread yesterday, for those who missed it

TEN THINGS I KNOW ABOUT DONALD TRUMP

1. Trump is the right-wingiest right-winger in the history of right-wingdom, a veritable fascist and Nazi and racist. I know this because the media and the Democrats tell me so.

2. Trump is basically a liberal, who doesn't even know or understand what conservatism or the Constitution are, and who has supported Planned Parenthood, sexual libertinism, immigrant labor, and all sorts of liberal and leftist positions at various points throughout his career. I know this because conservatives tell me so.

3. Trump is a rigid totalitarian who always tries (and often succeeds) to bully and get his way on every issue, no matter how trivial. He is unbending and vicious.

4. Trump constantly flip-flops on every imaginable issue, and has no real solid beliefs, and just says whatever randomly occurs to him, off-the-cuff, depending on which audience he's speaking to. He easily changes his opinions from one side of an issue to another if he thinks it will benefit him politically.

5. Trumpmania is sweeping the nation, and he is drawing the most enthusiasm and the greatest numbers of voters of any candidate (including Democratic candidates) in almost every state, and he generates billions of dollars in free media coverage on a daily basis, and has the highest name recognition of any candidate by a wide margin, and appeals to people of all ideological types, including and especially those we are disgusted by ideology and politics altogether, which are the actual largest demographic (liberals and conservatives respectively actually both being fringe groups compared to the Great Unaligned and Uncaring Middle). As such, he is very likely to sweep many rust-belt and swing states where people vote for fame and momentum and not for ideology or party.

6. Trump will get wiped out by Hillary in a general election, because polls say most people just hate his guts.

7. Trump is a successful businessman, and his success shows he knows how to get things done and run large organizations.

8. Trump is a failed businessman, who inherited his wealth and has made innumerable disastrous business deals.

9. If I vote for Trump, I am a racist, fascist, Nazi, white-supremacist, jackbooted hatemongering ignorant thug.

10. If I don't vote for Trump, I am ushering Western Civilization into a new Dark Ages of socialism and toxic coercive political correctness that will destroy the United States and extinguish human kind's hope for freedom for decades, if not centuries.

Posted by: zombie at March 26, 2016 04:40 PM (jBuUi)

150 >>This is their soft grab right now. Redefine who is able to own. The soft march.

Especially telling is who they are targeting: people who would be the biggest challenge in any kind of resistance to government action, or who would be good at putting up a fight is, say, all these immigrants and racial hatred stirring leads leads to ugliness.

Posted by: Lizzy at March 26, 2016 04:40 PM (NOIQH)

151 If/whether/when everyone is done going stompy-foot puffy-cheeks over how vulgar and base [] is - in between calling him a small-dicked racist little Lord Fauntleroy whose daddy paid for his whores and who's married to a whore and he can't complain about that because Cruz wasn't associated with that one PAC but you just know [] was behind the NE story...

[] voters will still be voting to secure the border, unfuck the economy, take it to ISIS, and reject and defeat SJW speech codes.

Your augury on the true intentions and motive of the candidates is welcome and noted. But it's those issues I'm voting for. And if you're right, and it's all a lie for those of us who are ignorant, gullible, and easily led, then the real crime is that we're wasting all this time talking about it, isn't it?

You're welcome aboard the train. Worst comes to worst you can just lie about it in public.

Posted by: Phone of kari at March 26, 2016 04:40 PM (f7Fqj)

152 He's getting face-time now, so he can be the "surprise" winner of the 3rd ballot at RNC Cleveland.

Posted by: just wait, you won't believe what happens next at March 26, 2016 03:57 PM (IQI2h)

Oh for crying out loud... that is not going to happen. It will be Cruz or Trump because they are the only ones who will likely meet requirements for consideration (assuming no one meet the 1237 threshold for a win before the convention). The rules have never allowed what you guys are fantasizing about and there is no precedent for them being changed to allow that.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 26, 2016 04:41 PM (NPofj)

153 Excellent, zombie! I missed it the first time.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 04:42 PM (sdi6R)

154 Aaaaaaand Zombie wins by 4-dimensional checkmate

Posted by: Phone of kari at March 26, 2016 04:42 PM (f7Fqj)

155 You're welcome aboard the train. Worst comes to worst you can just lie about it in public.

Posted by: Phone of kari at March 26, 2016 04:40 PM (f7Fqj)

NO thanks.

Posted by: redbanzai at March 26, 2016 04:42 PM (NPofj)

156 Test

Posted by: DaveA at March 26, 2016 04:42 PM (DL2i+)

157 134 I'm becoming more and more convinced that Trump is a Hillary stalking horse. Every bizarre twist makes that scenario more believable.
Posted by: Oldbuffalo at March 26, 2016 04:33 PM (Gs24m)

-----------

Don, we want you to win the nom and then throw it to Hilary. Sure you'll be forever remembered as the biggest loser in presidential election history, but you don't really care what people say about you, right?

Yeah, no.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 26, 2016 04:42 PM (kTF2Z)

158 The quoted author uses conservative in a relatively peculiar way. A reasonable libertarian wants the government to leave you alone. That was conservative 100 years ago but I suppose it is radical today.

*shrugs*

Posted by: Nom de Blog at March 26, 2016 04:43 PM (HeZ0H)

159 If they had an "inalienable right," then it can't, by its very nature as "inalienable," be taken away.
Posted by: Dread Justice Roberts at March 26, 2016 04:26 PM (TOk1P)
------------------------------
No, the right is inalienable. The degree to which those rights are infringed determines how free you are. In fact, the idea of inalienable rights is one of the basic ideas of the founding of this nation. You are confusing the right and the ability to enjoy it under a particular governnment.
Posted by: irright at March 26, 2016 04:37 PM (XfEYT)

The concept that you don't have rights that can be taken away in essence argues that there is no such thing as rights at all. It argues that the only right you have is that which you own by your might.

For an alternative concept - consider that inalienable rights are what you are justified in defending to the point of death.

A neutral observer to your struggle for your right would find an obligation to stay neutral, or to come to your aid.

He would not find a duty to kill you.

A little bit of a handwave there on the concept of a neutral observer ... but I think it works for this discussion.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 26, 2016 04:43 PM (1D4Ef)

160 MH, I still do as well. But, with, as you said, the current social engineering happening, along with the current generation of young people, I'm not so sure how long that will last.

I mean...my stepson came home this week on leave from the Navy. He is 29, raised in a highly conservative family. He and Mr. D are discussing politics and the kid actually, unbelievably says, "Bernie Sanders has some great ideas..."

His dad goes, "Like what? They're communist ideas."

Kid says, "Whatever."

I mumble under my breath, "Oh. My. God."

My hope for the future is slowly seeping away.

Posted by: DangerGirl and her 1.21 gigawatt Sanity Prod at March 26, 2016 04:43 PM (+eR2D)

161 Bravo zombie Bravo !

Posted by: Skip at March 26, 2016 04:43 PM (fizMZ)

162
146 You do not have to believe in God in order to inow you are born with your rights.
Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:25 PM (MQEz6)

There's no basis for human rights without objective right and wrong, and a rational basis for objective right and wrong without God has not been found.

Coming from a Christian America, we are inculcated we are born with certain rights ... but I don't think the full set of natural rights you're born with is obvious.

The duty and rights between a parent and child is obvious. Some of the other stuff, like a jury trial (because justice), would need more mapping.
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 26, 2016 04:38 PM (1D4Ef)

You cannot use your belief in God to show you have found objective right and wrong. The thing you say is objective is subject to what you believe.

I prefer to say we are self-aware creatures and that is enough to endow us with our rights.

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:43 PM (MQEz6)

163 Well, Bernie took the Alaska caucus today. Apparently the three or four democrats who still live here think we should go socialist. Good luck with that.

We don't need permits to concealed carry up here. You may pry my paycheck from my cold dead hand, Bernie baby.

Posted by: tcn in AK at March 26, 2016 04:44 PM (+YMhA)

164 Posted by: zombie at March 26, 2016 04:40 PM (jBuUi)

THAT'S OUR HITLER!

Posted by: Max Bialystock at March 26, 2016 04:44 PM (uyrlv)

165 Try clearing your cache and cookies.

Posted by: DangerGirl
Thanks DG, that seems to have fixed it.

Posted by: DaveA at March 26, 2016 04:44 PM (DL2i+)

166 >>The rules have never allowed what you guys are fantasizing about and there is no precedent for them being changed to allow that.
Posted by: redbanzai

So...What's your point?

Posted by: GOPe at March 26, 2016 04:44 PM (c7vUv)

167 redbanzai, about those rules?

They are politicians not Hoyle

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 26, 2016 04:44 PM (voOPb)

168
By my quick count just now, the Republican-controlled Senate (as of January 2015) has confirmed over 2 dozen federal judges nominated by obama.

Not only that, but if you look at the confirmation votes of these obama hack leftist judges, the votes are often nearly unanimous!

Do Not Fear losing the Senate or even the House.
You cannot lose something you do not have.

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 04:45 PM (imIws)

169 I prefer to say we are self-aware creatures and that is enough to endow us with our rights.

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:43 PM (MQEz6)

What is your idea of right vs. wrong? From whence does it come?

Posted by: tcn in AK at March 26, 2016 04:45 PM (+YMhA)

170
Fuck you, loser! I'm voting for Turd Sandwich!
Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 04:39 PM (sdi6R)

-----------

Too many scandals in his past. Sorry.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 26, 2016 04:45 PM (kTF2Z)

171 Oh and I realized today that leftists are openly celebrating the divine omen of good fortune for Bernie because they're pagans.

"Augury is the practice from ancient Roman religion of interpreting omens from the observed flight of birds. When the individual, known as the augur, interpreted these signs, it is referred to as "taking the auspices"."

Party of science and the "reality based community" indeed.

Posted by: Phone of kari at March 26, 2016 04:45 PM (f7Fqj)

172 Am I the only one who, after reading Dreher's "Cheer Up, Conservatives" piece, found myself whistling the "Always Look On The Bright Side Of Life" ditty from Monty Python's _Life of Brian_?

The one they're all singing as they're crucified and dying slow agonizing deaths?

Posted by: torquewrench at March 26, 2016 04:46 PM (noWW6)

173 zombie I'll be more than happy to tell you which items on your list are accurate and why.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at March 26, 2016 04:46 PM (Bc1aB)

174 >>My hope for the future is slowly seeping away

Ouch, 29 year old adult in the service? Holy crap

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 26, 2016 04:47 PM (voOPb)

175 It would have been better if the bird had pooped on Bernie's head.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at March 26, 2016 04:47 PM (FkBIv)

176
Am I the only one who, after reading Dreher's "Cheer Up, Conservatives" piece, found myself whistling the "Always Look On The Bright Side Of Life" ditty from Monty Python's _Life of Brian_?

Heh.

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 04:47 PM (imIws)

177 OT: Weird. So at DM, Gary Shandlings doc refuses to sign death certificate due to questions.... ok. It's very sad about Shandling and I respect a doctor being skeptical and want to make sure.

But... I'm dumbfounded once again how a Supreme Court justice could die without witnesses and alone, and yet a Democrat Judge can handle everything over the phone and no autopsy because hey, no problem! That still burns me.

Posted by: Yip at March 26, 2016 04:48 PM (e7T6D)

178
169 I prefer to say we are self-aware creatures and that is enough to endow us with our rights.

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:43 PM (MQEz6)

What is your idea of right vs. wrong? From whence does it come?
Posted by: tcn in AK at March 26, 2016 04:45 PM (+YMhA)

It comes from people. Human beings have been working on these ideas for tens of thousands of years.

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:50 PM (MQEz6)

179 You cannot use your belief in God to show you have found objective right and wrong. The thing you say is objective is subject to what you believe.

I prefer to say we are self-aware creatures and that is enough to endow us with our rights.

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:43 PM (MQEz6)

Objective right and wrong exist.

That is a rational concept in a universe ordered under its creator, God.

It is not so rational a concept in a random universe that popped into existence without a creator. No meaning, no moral preference, good and evil are just like ice cream flavors.

Let's explore the self-awareness standard you suggest. If humans prove capable of inventing computer AI ... what obligations does the human inventor owe his self-aware AI creation?

Does he have a duty to keep the computer "alive"? "happy"? Who enforces that duty?

Is wiping the computer's memory an act of murder? Even if the inventor can restore it from backups?

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 26, 2016 04:50 PM (1D4Ef)

180 "By my quick count just now, the Republican-controlled Senate (as of
January 2015) has confirmed over 2 dozen federal judges nominated by
obama. Not only that, but if you look at the confirmation votes of these
obama hack leftist judges, the votes are often nearly unanimous!"

Mark Levin points out that if you look closely at these judges, they are (a) typically still young, with decades of judicial activism in front of them, and (b) frankly politically radical, often far further left than Ruth Baader-Meinhof.

If a Republican president had put forth such a string of youthful, intensely right-wing judicial nominees, the Democrats would have fought tooth and nail against every one of them, conducted extensive oppo research on each, brought all legislative business to a standstill, and screamed to every media outlet about fascist court-packing.

PARTY OF STUPID. For whom we must vote, um, why again exactly?

Posted by: torquewrench at March 26, 2016 04:50 PM (noWW6)

181 Look at the present case of the 2nd A. All kinds of goverments great and small tread all over it. Barrel size, amount of rounds in it, scary quotient, it's endless. And more laws can be made tomorrow on it.
1st A. rights are going even faster, hate speach laws are going straight at it. Many universities have places it doesn't exist, sometimes only it is permitted is in a small square in some common area.

Posted by: Skip at March 26, 2016 04:50 PM (fizMZ)

182 Ouch, 29 year old adult in the service? Holy crap

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 26, 2016 04:47 PM (voOPb)

Yeah, he's in a "should fucking know better" category.

Posted by: DangerGirl and her 1.21 gigawatt Sanity Prod at March 26, 2016 04:51 PM (+eR2D)

183 "2. Trump is basically a liberal, who doesn't even know or understand
what conservatism or the Constitution are, and who has supported Planned
Parenthood, sexual libertinism, immigrant labor, and all sorts of
liberal and leftist positions at various points throughout his career. I
know this because conservatives tell me so."

Zombie, you don't have to rely on conservatives to tell you this about Trump. Trump himself will tell you and has told you several times on national tv... including at the last two debates.

See here for instance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3zT6F3_1ns

Posted by: redbanzai at March 26, 2016 04:51 PM (NPofj)

184 The only thing you can rely on the GOP to protect is the jobs on K street for themselves, their spouses, kids, mistresses/boy toys, and the consultant gigs for the same constituency. If they cared about the hearts and minds of their registered voters, they would've repealed Obamacare, etc, and Boner and Cantor would still have jobs. They should've blocked Kagan on conflict of interest grounds and Sotomayor on the grounds of being a lousy judge who was reversed 70% of the time on appeal.

They are not the last bastion protecting me and mine, they are sellouts and co-conspirators with the Dims.

Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes now franchising Lulu Snackbars at March 26, 2016 04:52 PM (kXoT0)

185 Libeals just seem to be able to be better at finding a reasonable compromise between their "ideal" and pragmatism.

And they usually they get most of what they want.

This was a "gimme" election that we blew because too many were thinking with the wrong side of our brain.

Now we will likely lose the Court for several generations and it won't matter who we vote for.

Hope that middle finger to the other side "tribe" within our party felt good. I just don't think that feeling is going to last for the next 30 years.

Posted by: Cramer at March 26, 2016 04:53 PM (A3kYV)

186
the Democrats would have fought tooth and nail against every one of them

And it would be in the news cycles. Each judge would become a hot issue for debate. And yet all these obama judges get confirmed under the radar.

I used to think the Republicans to be inept at playing politics. Now I know the truth about Republicans.

It sucks for many of us here that we now have to endure 6 months of caterwauling about how we're gonna lose the Senate. "We" never had the Senate, dummkopfs!

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 04:55 PM (imIws)

187 179 You cannot use your belief in God to show you have found objective right and wrong. The thing you say is objective is subject to what you believe.

I prefer to say we are self-aware creatures and that is enough to endow us with our rights.

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:43 PM (MQEz6)

Objective right and wrong exist.

That is a rational concept in a universe ordered under its creator, God.

It is not so rational a concept in a random universe that popped into existence without a creator. No meaning, no moral preference, good and evil are just like ice cream flavors.

Let's explore the self-awareness standard you suggest. If humans prove capable of inventing computer AI ... what obligations does the human inventor owe his self-aware AI creation?

Does he have a duty to keep the computer "alive"? "happy"? Who enforces that duty?

Is wiping the computer's memory an act of murder? Even if the inventor can restore it from backups?
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 26, 2016 04:50 PM (1D4Ef)

What do these questions have to do with the nature of our rights?

If we do not know the answers to these questions, does that suggest our rights are supernatural in origin?

Look, we don't agree on where our rights come from, so what?

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:56 PM (MQEz6)

188
Rod Dreher: I plan on lying back and thinking of England; I suggest you do the same.

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 04:57 PM (imIws)

189 >>>These are not questions of liberty anymore. If you are subject to the whims of a handful of others, you are not free.
.....

THIS.

We ARE NOT free. Every four years we get in a tizzy about electing the next Savior and that entire idea, in and of itself, regardless of preferred candidate or ideology, is entirely the opposite of a free people with a representative government.

We've completely forgotten that the Presidency was designed to be an incredibly weak position. It was pretty much the head diplomat. The only real power the office was supposed to have was veto power, which is significant, but even that has limits that can be overridden by the People (not Congress- The People. The House is supposed to represent The People and the Senate the States, more stuff that is entirely forgotten and disregarded).

We The People have overwhelming ceded our rights to a handful of imbeciles that would be unemployed and destitute if we didn't keep electing them.

The fundamental problem now is that, if you ask virtually anyone, they don't really want to be free. Freedom means being responsible for yourself. It means being free to do the best you can with what life dealt you. It means being free to fail and free to take risks that lead to failure... or in remote circumstances, success.

No one wants freedom anymore. People was security without compromising convenience. More than anything they want fairness. Freedom is none of these things.

This is why elections invariably turn out as they do and we have the government we have. No one wants freedom anymore...

...except, perhaps, a few people who hang around here.

We've got tough choices to make and none of them have to do with SCOTUS, POTUS, or Congress.

Posted by: Damiano at March 26, 2016 04:57 PM (XItbt)

190 as awful as the GOP is, they, and their judicial appointments, are the only thing standing between my little platoon and some pretty unfortunate outcomes

The import of this realization should be that judges are way too big for their britches.

Pour encourager les autres.

Posted by: Grump928(C) notes that we are so fucking boned at March 26, 2016 04:57 PM (rwI+c)

191 I second eman. The SC pick doesn't matter because the SC is close to lawless anyways. Both Obamacare decisions proved that. The SC will not rule according to the Constitution. So, what does it matter? They'll issue an anti-gun ruling sooner or later and the GOPe will go yammering about law of the land.

Posted by: WOPR - Nationalist at March 26, 2016 04:58 PM (LTDSy)

192 Bernie the old Bolshavik wins Alaska, leads in Washington

Posted by: Skip at March 26, 2016 04:59 PM (fizMZ)

193
For me, this election is the closest thing I can get to pitchforks and torches.

The Reckoning.

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 04:59 PM (imIws)

194 This was a "gimme" election that we blew
...
Hope that middle finger to the other side "tribe" within our party felt good. I just don't think that feeling is going to last for the next 30 years.
Posted by: Cramer at March 26, 2016 04:53 PM (A3kYV)

Oh my god is it November 9th?!?!?! Where has the time gone?!?!

It was a middle finger to liberalism and Vichy republicans. Now, ask yourself: are you a liberal/Vichy republican? Or just hopelessly self-centered and assuming this was all about you?

Posted by: Phone of kari at March 26, 2016 04:59 PM (f7Fqj)

195 I'm on my way to the airport to visit family in Paris. I arrive CDG at 9am tomorrow, Easter Sunday. Not the time or day I booked, but security concerns have bumped flights and I was given an ultimatum.

Prayers for the hajis to keep their fucking hands to themselves for a week, please.

Posted by: Phone of kari at March 26, 2016 05:02 PM (f7Fqj)

196
If all goes right, and by right I mean very very wrong, there will be no more GOP after this election. (I can outline how it will all transpire, if you like.)

Then we can start anew.

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 05:02 PM (imIws)

197 Another American confirmed to have died in Brussels, was previously listed as missing.

Posted by: Skip at March 26, 2016 05:03 PM (fizMZ)

198 If we want to rebuild our Republic, we have to break the Democrat/gope cycle.

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 05:03 PM (MQEz6)

199 154 Aaaaaaand Zombie wins by 4-dimensional checkmate

Posted by: Phone of kari at March 26, 2016 04:42 PM (f7Fqj)

Watch it, bud. The chess thread is not until tomorrow.

Posted by: OregonMuse at March 26, 2016 05:04 PM (mcEz5)

200 Justin Shults is the deceased

Posted by: Skip at March 26, 2016 05:04 PM (fizMZ)

201 Peggy Noonan and David Brooks can eat a bag of dicks.

Posted by: Hadoop at March 26, 2016 05:05 PM (2X7pN)

202

A chess/monopoly/boggle thread would be nice.

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 05:05 PM (imIws)

203 I like it when they rob Peter to pay Paul.

Posted by: Paul at March 26, 2016 05:05 PM (FkBIv)

204
I want to be the hat!

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 05:05 PM (imIws)

205 It's also worth noting that Congress has voluntarily ceded its power to the Executive and Judiciary branches. They created scores of regulatory agencies and give them no oversight, they've stopped passing real budgets, and they habitually rubber-stamp any judicial nominee that comes along.

Nobody did this to them. They have emasculated themselves. No 1934-style Enabling Act was necessary. Future historians will marvel at it.

It's almost as if they like enjoying the perks of their jobs without having to do any actual work.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 05:05 PM (sdi6R)

206 We lose this election and we lose the Supreme Court, it's damn near over. Some things are unfixable with out extreme measures that I shudder to think about

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 26, 2016 05:05 PM (DUoqb)

207 Justin Shults is the deceased
Posted by: Skip at March 26, 2016 05:04 PM (fizMZ)

His wife's car has been found at the airport but she remains missing.
I think all, including her family, know what this means.

Posted by: Jen the original at March 26, 2016 05:06 PM (ph1j2)

208 This was a "gimme" election that we blew
Posted by: Cramer at March 26, 2016 04:53 PM (A3kYV)

No, 2012 was the gimme election, horrible economy, ACA was a disaster, etc. The GOPe gave up Mitt who couldn't run against the ACA because (as he has said recently) supports it because it is basically RomneyCare at the national level. This year was never a gimme year because the GOPe has screwed it's base over so many times that to demand loyalty now takes some chutzpah. Remember, the GOPe chosen one was Jeb. So, let me know who really sabotaged this year?

Trump didn't take off until it became obvious all of the other GOPe candidates were pretty much variations of the same theme.

Posted by: WOPR - Nationalist at March 26, 2016 05:06 PM (LTDSy)

209
*reluctantly dances the lambada*

Posted by: B. Obama at March 26, 2016 05:07 PM (iugoO)

210 What do these questions have to do with the nature of our rights?

If we do not know the answers to these questions, does that suggest our rights are supernatural in origin?

Look, we don't agree on where our rights come from, so what?
Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:56 PM (MQEz6)

If you can't explain where your rights come from, how do you argue the matter with someone who says you don't have rights and that you are his slave?

The Leftist assault on our rights started with undermining the concept of rights. They create fake rights to "education, jobs", and having muddled the matter, use those fake rights to destroy the right to life and property.

If you can't explain where your rights come from, how do you counter the fake rights?

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 26, 2016 05:07 PM (1D4Ef)

211 His wife's car has been found at the airport but she remains missing.

I think all, including her family, know what this means.

Vegas junket?

Posted by: Hadoop at March 26, 2016 05:08 PM (2X7pN)

212 With the amount of injured in would pray there is hope of being in a hospital maybe unresponsive.

Posted by: Skip at March 26, 2016 05:08 PM (fizMZ)

213 Show me your Pasodoble!

Posted by: Raul Castro at March 26, 2016 05:08 PM (rwI+c)

214 Have a safe flight Kari. Can't imagine flying to Europe right now. Of course, lots of folks are and .. odds are in your favor.

Posted by: Yip at March 26, 2016 05:08 PM (e7T6D)

215
Elections are overrated. That's my new philosophy.

535 scumbag politicians, 9 silly people in robes, and 1 criminal tinpot dictator.

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 05:09 PM (imIws)

216 "Trump himself will tell you and has told you several times on national tv... including at the last two debates."

I exist in a state of serene confidence that if Trump tells me something in a TV debate, either he will completely refute it himself in his own statements in the very next debate, or Trump flunkies on Twitter will be separately walking back his comments within 12 hours of his having made them.

He's a man for all seasons. And all issues. By being on all sides of them sequentially. Make America Incoherent Again!

Posted by: torquewrench at March 26, 2016 05:09 PM (noWW6)

217 It was a middle finger to liberalism and Vichy republicans. Now, ask yourself: are you a liberal/Vichy republican? Or just hopelessly self-centered and assuming this was all about you?
Posted by: Phone of kari

I don't know how this is a blow to "vichy" Republicans when we've (nearly) nominated a guy that wants socialized medicine and praises Planned Parenthood as a great organization.

Even the most RINO Establishment hack doesn't go there.

If we were nominating some sort of principled conservative I could at least sympathize with a quixotic bid that fails.

I'm a border hawk, but I can't buy into the idea that Donald Trump losing 40 states is going to get us any sort of victory.

My guess is an Amnesty bill will be passed in the first 100 days of Hillary's Presidency.

Posted by: Cramer at March 26, 2016 05:10 PM (A3kYV)

218 What is it with Brooks and haberdashery? One day I sense we're going to be reading about him like we did David Carradine in a Bankok closet, only with a designer necktie.

Posted by: Fritz at March 26, 2016 05:10 PM (UzPAd)

219 No, 2012 was the gimme election, horrible economy, ACA was a disaster, etc. The GOPe gave up Mitt who couldn't run against the ACA because (as he has said recently) supports it because it is basically RomneyCare at the national level. This year was never a gimme year because the GOPe has screwed it's base over so many times that to demand loyalty now takes some chutzpah. Remember, the GOPe chosen one was Jeb. So, let me know who really sabotaged this year?

Trump didn't take off until it became obvious all of the other GOPe candidates were pretty much variations of the same theme.
Posted by: WOPR - Nationalist at March 26, 2016 05:06 PM (LTDSy)

*****

This has been the pattern the last few GE cycles. 2008 - Warhawk McCain when the Country was sick of war. 2012 - Mitt Romneycare when Commiecare was the issue. 2016 - "Act of Love" Yeb when illegals were the #1 issue.

Why, it's almost as if they plwn to lose.

Posted by: Tim in GA at March 26, 2016 05:11 PM (5MsUm)

220 That poor Kentucky couple were evidently standing right next to one of the bombs... is my guess. Very sad. Wrong place, wrong time.... and completely predictable to authorities, but .. some folks gotta die because the left refuses to deal with the reality of their policies.

Posted by: Yip at March 26, 2016 05:11 PM (e7T6D)

221 Even the most RINO Establishment hack doesn't go there.

They did. They protected PP's funding. Words are not actions.

Trump cannot betray us on PP until he is president and political power. The GOPe, OTOH, has continuously failure theatered on abortion and PP.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 26, 2016 05:12 PM (1D4Ef)

222 199
Watch it, bud. The chess thread is not until tomorrow.
Posted by: OregonMuse at March 26, 2016 05:04 PM (mcEz5)

How about a Go thread? I know nothing whatsoever about that game, except that a Go grandmaster was recently defeated by a computer for the first time. It was apparently a big deal in China, with lots of people following the match.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 05:12 PM (sdi6R)

223 "Bernie the old Bolshavik wins Alaska, leads in Washington"

Wouldn't it be something to have an election cycle with TWO contested conventions? I'm going to have to buy an entire 55 gallon drum of popcorn.

Posted by: torquewrench at March 26, 2016 05:13 PM (noWW6)

224 208.

I blame the American voters more than I blame Mitt Romney.

Okay, the guy was bland and moderate. So what? Most Presidents are. Obama was a tyrant and the American people should have recognized that.

The idea that nominating the opposite of Mitt Romney means electoral victory is the type of reasoning a child uses.

Posted by: Cramer at March 26, 2016 05:13 PM (A3kYV)

225
To all my friends here who hate Trump:

Trump is only 1/10000th of The Problem. He shouldn't be your top priority. Getting rid of Trump solves nothing. You have much bigger things to worry about.

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 05:13 PM (imIws)

226 My friendsh, you have nothing to fear from a Hillary Clinton presidency.

Posted by: John McShitsandwich at March 26, 2016 05:14 PM (0IhFx)

227 He's a man for all seasons. And all issues. By being on all sides of them sequentially. Make America Incoherent Again!
Posted by: torquewrench at March 26, 2016 05:09 PM (noWW6)

Hey now, America has been and still is incoherent. No need for Trump to restore it.

Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce means they can interfere with you planting stuff on your own farm for your own use.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 26, 2016 05:14 PM (1D4Ef)

228
This has been the pattern the last few GE cycles. 2008 - Warhawk McCain when the Country was sick of war. 2012 - Mitt Romneycare when Commiecare was the issue. 2016 - "Act of Love" Yeb when illegals were the #1 issue.

Why, it's almost as if they plwn to lose.
Posted by: Tim in GA at March 26, 2016 05:11 PM (5MsUm)

See, by pre-emptively surrendering to the Left on the issue, they set the stage for the next pre-emptive surrender.

That's strategery right there.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 26, 2016 05:15 PM (1D4Ef)

229 Trump won't betray on PP, IMO. He's playing the word game the left uses. He said he's for funding them for everything but abortion. The left pretends that PP does all sorts of shit besides a handful of abortions. We all know different. Trump is taking them at their word and petards are being ordered for the hoistings. He's using all of the left's incoherence against them. Your mileage may vary.

Posted by: Yip at March 26, 2016 05:16 PM (e7T6D)

230 They did. They protected PP's funding. Words are not actions.

Trump cannot betray us on PP until he is president and political power. The GOPe, OTOH, has continuously failure theatered on abortion and PP.
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens

Not shutting the government down over a program is not the same as supporting something.

We deserve Donald Trump because too many on our side are stuck on bumper sticker slogans.

Trump is the perfect candidate for low IQ people.

So the way to punish the GOP over Planned Parenthood funding is clearly to nominate a pro-choice Republican that says Planned Parenthood is a great organization?

Trump has already said he would NOT shut down the government over Planned Parenthood or ObamaCare

Posted by: Cramer at March 26, 2016 05:17 PM (A3kYV)

231 The other day my power was out so and I imagined a bit of what my personal "I have a dream" speech would be today.

I dream of a day when people will realize that the smothering, scolding nanny mode of government master is just as cruel and tyrannical as the slave driver master.

Posted by: PaleRider at March 26, 2016 05:17 PM (3kUGE)

232 It seems that have more than queers and steers in Oklahoma, they also have shooters from 3 point range

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 26, 2016 05:17 PM (DUoqb)

233 Wow, just looking at forecasts... looks like April will be wetter and cooler than usual ( not normal, cause what is that really? ). I like it. Hard to argue Global warming when no one can start on they're April tan or work much in the yard. Heh.

Posted by: Yip at March 26, 2016 05:18 PM (e7T6D)

234 If all goes right, and by right I mean very very wrong, there will be no more GOP after this election. (I can outline how it will all transpire, if you like.)

Then we can start anew.

Posted by: cucumbah watah
****

There will be no more America if Hillary wins. You seem to be missing this point.

Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 05:18 PM (hVdx9)

235 There will be no more America if Hillary wins. You seem to be missing this point.
Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 05:18 PM (hVdx9)

A lot of people are missing that point

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 26, 2016 05:19 PM (DUoqb)

236 If you're grasping at straws, here's a straw you could grasp. Caveat lectur: Hot Air.

http://tinyurl.com/gw8ro2w

P.S. I see no info on his political philosophy, judicial philosophy etc.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 26, 2016 05:19 PM (Nwg0u)

237 The GOP should beg General James Mattis to take the nomination at a contested convention. BEG.

Posted by: Stickety at March 26, 2016 05:20 PM (1o3cX)

238 Cramer you don't believe him. I get it. He's totally unprincipled.

I do believe him. That he says those things on healthcare and PP so he's a wash to the left and the right (our congressional majorities are de facto in favor of those things too) and he can wage the fight where it matters: on the border and the economy.

If you're right, we're fucked either way. If I'm right we have a fighting chance.

Posted by: Phone of kari at March 26, 2016 05:20 PM (f7Fqj)

239 How about a Go thread? I know nothing whatsoever about that game, except that a Go grandmaster was recently defeated by a computer for the first time. It was apparently a big deal in China, with lots of people following the match.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 05:12 PM (sdi6R)

This story is one of the items in the chess thread tomorrow.

Posted by: OregonMuse at March 26, 2016 05:20 PM (mcEz5)

240 The GOP should beg General James Mattis to take the nomination at a contested convention. BEG.
Posted by: Stickety at March 26, 2016 05:20 PM (1o3cX)

yeah be careful

I "assume" he is a good conservative but assuming that about Military types can be dangerous

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 26, 2016 05:21 PM (DUoqb)

241 49
I am beginning to think our Republic, like the Roman, is at the same
point where it became an empire. Too much of the population is
mistrustful of those who sought the power to govern. They are corrupt
and ineffectual in there governance. It is all about them, and their
desires. We want a Caesar to cross the Rubicon and take the power from
those that are governing, and set things right.

Posted by: Paladin at March 26, 2016 04:04 PM (E1aoU)

Ceasars never quiet finish the job, and so they never have to give the power back. Collapse is better than Ceasar. Something other than a dictator might come from chaos, not the most likely outcome but it's better than empire.

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 26, 2016 05:23 PM (eLfAH)

242 >>> This story is one of the items in the chess thread tomorrow.

Woo hoo!

Posted by: fluffy at March 26, 2016 05:23 PM (2hcmo)

243 There is no more staus quo after November, period. The DNC and the GOPe are busting apart regardless of who gets elected. Things that can't go on don't, and we've reached it. If Hillary gets elected, I do not expect the millions of folks in the normal parts of the country are just going to sit on their hands and say oh well. That defies logic. History has hints of what is to come.

I predict right now, whether Trump or Hillary wins, the constitutional convention of States movement will explode and there will be a huge push regardless for States rights because neither side's losers will trust the new administration/Government.

And that is a win. States rights is the only stabilizing and safe way forward and I can foresee an article 5 convention within 3 years and that's a good thing.

Posted by: Yip at March 26, 2016 05:23 PM (e7T6D)

244
There will be no more America if Hillary wins. You seem to be missing this point.
Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale

We can join the EU.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at March 26, 2016 05:24 PM (FkBIv)

245 "Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce means they can
interfere with you planting stuff on your own farm for your own use."

The Clinton administration argued in front of the SCOTUS that the federal "Gun-Free Schools Act" passed Constitutional muster because of the interstate commerce clause.

You see, if a child on a school playground is shot and killed by a gun, that child won't ever grow up, when presumably in later adult life they would have had the opportunity afforded to them to participate in interstate commerce.

Ruth Baader-Meinhof thought this line of reasoning was very persuasive.

Posted by: torquewrench at March 26, 2016 05:24 PM (noWW6)

246
Some insist on seeing the Republicans as their last bulwark. I do not. What's more, it's the Republicans themselves who are orchestrating their own downfall.

A lot of treachery and deceit planned in the next few months..

Posted by: cucumbah watah for customah only! at March 26, 2016 05:24 PM (imIws)

247 GENERAL JAMES MATHIS:
"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them. Actually it's quite fun to fight them, you know. It's a hell of a hoot. It's fun to shoot some people. I'll be right up there with you. I like brawling."

Posted by: Stickety at March 26, 2016 05:24 PM (1o3cX)

248 Cramer you don't believe him. I get it. He's totally unprincipled.

I do believe him. That he says those things on healthcare and PP so he's a wash to the left and the right (our congressional majorities are de facto in favor of those things too) and he can wage the fight where it matters: on the border and the economy.

If you're right, we're fucked either way. If I'm right we have a fighting chance.
Posted by: Phone of kari

____________

It's not a matter of "believing" him, I think Trump is deep down a liberal New York Republican and saw an opening on Border Control and so he exploited it.

Just like before he saw an opening with the Birther stuff that no Republican was willing to touch.

He goes from one gimmick to another.

I'm going to vote for him if he's the nominee because even a con man is better than Hillary. But he keeps making it harder and harder.

Trump's behavior to me screams the man is going to get so far down in the polls that I could see him conceding the election before its over.

So what value is a 40 plus state landslide loss?
Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan will still have their jobs.

Posted by: Cramer at March 26, 2016 05:25 PM (A3kYV)

249 We can join the EU.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr
****

You're killin' me Smalls.

Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 05:25 PM (hVdx9)

250 Woo hoo!

Posted by: fluffy at March 26, 2016 05:23 PM (2hcmo)

Fluf, are you a Go player?

Posted by: OregonMuse at March 26, 2016 05:25 PM (mcEz5)

251 I need to stop reading The Bomber War and find my chess book.

Posted by: Skip at March 26, 2016 05:26 PM (fizMZ)

252 We have a government that believes it must rule us because we cannot rule ourselves. They want to restrain us because they believe we cannot be trusted to restrain ourselves. They want to tell us what to do because they believe otherwise we will not know.

Are they wrong?

This country was founded upon the principle that citizens would live soberly, wisely, judiciously, responsibly, sustaining themselves and their families, and would operate within an agreed-upon moral code. That code was the key that kept us free. I'm not sure we can be free any longer. We have thrown away the key.

Posted by: grammie winger, clinging to the old rugged cross at March 26, 2016 05:27 PM (dFi94)

253 We demand a tic-tac-toe thread.

Posted by: #DumbLivesMatter at March 26, 2016 05:27 PM (uyrlv)

254 I am guessing that Mattis is significantly more conservative than Hillary. Considering the fact that Trump or Cruz has absolutely zero chance of winning, I would be willing to take a bet on a General.

Posted by: Stickety at March 26, 2016 05:27 PM (1o3cX)

255 If Hillary gets elected, I do not expect the millions of folks in the normal parts of the country are just going to sit on their hands and say oh well.

I do, sadly.

Posted by: Grump928(C) says Free Soothie! at March 26, 2016 05:27 PM (rwI+c)

256 64 59 If a Court can take away our Second Amendment rights, then we don't have them in the first place.

Worrying about such legal decisions means you do not understand the Second Amendment at all.

Posted by: eman
****

So you are saying the SC pick doesn't concern you at all?
Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 04:06 PM (hVdx9)

Yes. Not one bit.

:::::::::
The SC pick is no longer the carrot it used to be to get my vote. After Justice Roberts I no longer have faith in the GOPe, plus the GOPe also approved Kagan and sotomyer, so they have shown themselves to be worthless.

Posted by: Chillin the most at March 26, 2016 05:27 PM (BI43k)

257 251 I need to stop reading The Bomber War and find my chess book.

Posted by: Skip at March 26, 2016 05:26 PM (fizMZ)

What chess book are you reading?

Posted by: OregonMuse at March 26, 2016 05:27 PM (mcEz5)

258 Posted by: torquewrench at March 26, 2016 05:24 PM (noWW6)

That one's news to me. *eyetwitch*

And that's why it doesn't matter to me how unConstitutional Trump might potentially be. The Left and Obama broke it quite effectively.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 26, 2016 05:27 PM (1D4Ef)

259 Not a Go player, just enthused about the chess thread.

Posted by: fluffy at March 26, 2016 05:28 PM (2hcmo)

260 GENERAL JAMES MATHIS:
"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them. Actually it's quite fun to fight them, you know. It's a hell of a hoot. It's fun to shoot some people. I'll be right up there with you. I like brawling."
Posted by: Stickety at March 26, 2016 05:24 PM (1o3cX)

Our strategy to go after this army is very, very simple. First were going to cut it off, and then were going to kill it, Powell said, while also promising to rip up the {Iraqi} air force in its entirety.

Military types says a lot of things. Be careful translating that to the political world

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 26, 2016 05:28 PM (DUoqb)

261 So, another "we have to elect republicans so's we can has judjes" article. I'm looking forward to the sequel, "it's the most important election evar" and then the inevitable third part of the trilogy "Hillary thanks you for your support".

Posted by: boulder terlit hobo at March 26, 2016 05:28 PM (6FqZa)

262 Way more than just one. Roberts has made several bad rulings.

-
And two Godzilla-sized bad rulings.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 26, 2016 05:29 PM (Nwg0u)

263 210 What do these questions have to do with the nature of our rights?

If we do not know the answers to these questions, does that suggest our rights are supernatural in origin?

Look, we don't agree on where our rights come from, so what?
Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 04:56 PM (MQEz6)

If you can't explain where your rights come from, how do you argue the matter with someone who says you don't have rights and that you are his slave?

The Leftist assault on our rights started with undermining the concept of rights. They create fake rights to "education, jobs", and having muddled the matter, use those fake rights to destroy the right to life and property.

If you can't explain where your rights come from, how do you counter the fake rights?
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 26, 2016 05:07 PM (1D4Ef)

I have explained it. They come from our nature. We are self-aware.

Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 05:30 PM (MQEz6)

264 Of course, this thread is not complete without the Simpsons' classic 1996 election piece:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v7XXSt9XRM

I can't find the whole thing on YouTube; only fragments. It remains one of the most cutting commentaries ever on American electoral politics.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 05:30 PM (sdi6R)

265 It's not a matter of "believing" him, I think Trump
is deep down a liberal New York Republican and saw an opening on Border
Control and so he exploited it.

Posted by: Cramer at March 26, 2016 05:25 PM (A3kYV)

You're right Trump has exploited an incredibly huge vacuum created by the GOP. Thanks for pointing out how the GOP has failed for nearly 2 decades now, and how that failure has created Trump. If they had bothered to represent their constituents there wouldn't be a Trump, and we wouldn't have this civil war in the GOP.

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 26, 2016 05:31 PM (eLfAH)

266 If Hillary gets elected, I do not expect the millions of folks in the normal parts of the country are just going to sit on their hands and say oh well.

I do, sadly.
Posted by: Grump928(C)

If they sat on their hands for Obama, they will for Hillary. Hell we couldn't get people to give an hour of their time to stand in line and vote.

The Clintons are actually far more centrist than Obama, but we will get left-wing judicial appointments. Most people just don't pay attention.

People will eat shit sandwiches for a long time.

Posted by: Cramer at March 26, 2016 05:31 PM (A3kYV)

267 I have explained it. They come from our nature. We are self-aware.
Posted by: eman at March 26, 2016 05:30 PM (MQEz6)

That's more of an assertion than an explanation. Ah well, that's a pretty big rabbit trail.

Posted by: ReactionaryMonster Bravely supporting kittens at March 26, 2016 05:34 PM (1D4Ef)

268 I can't find the whole thing on YouTube; only fragments. It remains one of the most cutting commentaries ever on American electoral politics.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 05:30 PM (sdi6R)

I voted for Kang.

Posted by: OregonMuse at March 26, 2016 05:35 PM (mcEz5)

269 nood

Posted by: OregonMuse at March 26, 2016 05:37 PM (mcEz5)

270 I voted for Kang.

Posted by: OregonMuse
****

Pffft. Dumbass.
I voted for Kodos.

Posted by: Tilikum Armored Killer Assault Whale at March 26, 2016 05:37 PM (hVdx9)

271 Maybe the gulf between conservatives and progs ain't as wide as we've assumed, based on this NY Observer article (a lefty rag I assume):

http://preview.tinyurl.com/j6bnhlc

To know this author's politics, he states in the article that Hugo Chavez was the best thing ever for South America, with the exception of Che, who was even moar wunnerful.

Now on to the various meats in the article. He describes the Hillary Criminal Conspiracy, er, Clinton Foundation in some detail. He lambasts the highly politicized and corrupt DOJ as a travesty. He calls out various other corrupt Dem officials (is there any other kind) but of course does manage to mention Bush too.

It's an interesting read from a flaming socialist.

Posted by: GnuBreed TC>>DT>>>>HC/BS at March 26, 2016 05:37 PM (gyKtp)

272 types, deletes

types, deletes

Posted by: Yip at March 26, 2016 05:38 PM (e7T6D)

273 I don't know anybody who voted for Kodos.

Posted by: Pauline Kael at March 26, 2016 05:38 PM (FkBIv)

274 Nature abhors a vacuum....

Leadership here and in Europe are examples of vacuums that will be filled either by the vote, which is being set up to fail, or by violence, which always produces lots of unintended consequences, good and bad.

We must come together and defeat Hillary no matter who runs on the other ticket.

Posted by: Hairyback Guy at March 26, 2016 05:39 PM (ej1L0)

275 None of this snuck up on them. It started with the tea party. Did they take notice and change? Nope. When Cantor lost there should have been massive alarm bells going off in the gope. Nope. They took the mid terms as an endorsement of their "leadership." We wanted them to stop the lawlessness and they immediately to impeachment and shut down off the table. Then they orchestrated failure theater after failure theater. That is why Trump exists.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 26, 2016 05:39 PM (kTF2Z)

276 "If [the Republican establishment] had bothered to represent their constituents there wouldn't be a
Trump, and we wouldn't have this civil war in the GOP. "

I'm not a Trumpkin -- I have no dog in the hunt this election cycle -- but I agree in full with this sentiment.

What's really funny is the GOP establishment freaking out and dourly predicting that Trump would lose the general election.

Yes, the same bunch of people who brought you Poppy Bush, Bob Dole, John McCain, and the Mittbot 3000 are actually saying this with concerned expressions on their faces. A general election loss! That would be terrible! Wouldn't be prudent! Can't have that!

Posted by: torquewrench at March 26, 2016 05:39 PM (noWW6)

277 I agree most won't do anything but go along with whatever Hildabeast has to offer.
She will go after her enemy's but most common people will hardly notice.
Illegals will pour in faster than now but another couple percent won't be noticed.
As long as government subsitaries continue most won't raise a eyebrow.

Posted by: Skip at March 26, 2016 05:40 PM (fizMZ)

278 265
It's not a matter of "believing" him, I think Trump

is deep down a liberal New York Republican and saw an opening on Border

Control and so he exploited it.

Posted by: Cramer at March 26, 2016 05:25 PM (A3kYV)

I agree. Trump is a fake.
Relying on him to protect anything of value is a foolish waste of time and energy.

His obvious and severe mental illness makes him dangerous.

Posted by: Bob at March 26, 2016 05:41 PM (aRUb8)

279 Oh there is very little reason to cheer.

Right now the question is whether Christians will merely face ruinous fines for being a Christian come say 2018 (Trump), or whether the government will be imprisoning them (Clinton).

Posted by: 18-1 at March 26, 2016 05:43 PM (pibXr)

280 274
Nature abhors a vacuum....

Posted by: Hairyback Guy at March 26, 2016 05:39 PM (ej1L0)

This is off topic, but that saying has always struck me as funny. If nature abhors a vacuum then why is the majority of the universe an actual vacuum?

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 26, 2016 05:44 PM (eLfAH)

281 Yes, the same bunch of people who brought you Poppy Bush, Bob Dole, John McCain, and the Mittbot 3000 are actually saying this with concerned expressions on their faces. A general election loss! That would be terrible! Wouldn't be prudent! Can't have that!
Posted by: torquewrench

_______________

I agree with the sentiment, but there is a big difference between losing and getting wiped out.

Trump has run for President basically every cycle for the last 20 plus years and then quits when it no longer looks attainable.

Can you imagine what it would do down ballot if Trump concedes before Election Day? All the local races, ballot initiatives, Governors, legislatures, Congressman, etc.

Even Trump supporters have to concede its a real possibility he pulls a stunt like that.

He's certainly not going to give any sort of concession speech on Election Night.

Posted by: Cramer at March 26, 2016 05:44 PM (A3kYV)

282 278
His obvious and severe mental illness makes him dangerous.

Posted by: Bob at March 26, 2016 05:41 PM (aRUb

Dangerous to whom? The GOPe certainly seems to be freaking out over him.

Do you think he's more dangerous than Hillary?

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 05:45 PM (sdi6R)

283 This country was founded upon the principle that citizens would live soberly, wisely, judiciously, responsibly, sustaining themselves and their families, and would operate within an agreed-upon moral code. That code was the key that kept us free. I'm not sure we can be free any longer. We have thrown away the key.

***

Yep. But on the upside...

"As it was in the days of Noah..."

Posted by: doomed, but saved just the same at March 26, 2016 05:45 PM (bGLSw)

284
The Constitution affirms that those inalienable rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights are just that--inalienable.

The 2nd Amendment is the final guarantor of ALL of them.

If you attempt to abridge that right , one of 2 things are going to happen.

Either I will kill you or you will kill me.

Posted by: irongrampa at March 26, 2016 05:46 PM (P/8aq)

285 I think even the Apostle Paul agrees with eman, that man by nature knows right and wrong. The construct of religion is good, but we need to keep thinking and can improve on much of it. The NT opened the "Judeo/Christian" concepts to we Philistines and Gentiles ... Romans 2

13(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
14For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another

16In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men ...

Posted by: Illiniwek at March 26, 2016 05:47 PM (N8i7l)

286 284
The Constitution affirms that those inalienable rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights are just that--inalienable.

The 2nd Amendment is the final guarantor of ALL of them.

If you attempt to abridge that right , one of 2 things are going to happen.

Either I will kill you or you will kill me.
Posted by: irongrampa at March 26, 2016 05:46 PM (P/8aq)

Yep. Millions of people didn't purchase guns and ammo over the last eight years with the intention of turning them in when ordered to. The Supreme Court isn't going to affect that.

I'm glad you're still around, irongrampa. I was afraid you'd left the other day.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 05:50 PM (sdi6R)

287 @ 286

I strictly pick and choose when and where I post/read now.

Unhappy about that,but there it is.

Posted by: irongrampa at March 26, 2016 05:55 PM (P/8aq)

288 @276 torquewrench

You are so spot on

Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 26, 2016 06:00 PM (voOPb)

289 239 How about a Go thread? I know nothing whatsoever about that game, except that a Go grandmaster was recently defeated by a computer for the first time. It was apparently a big deal in China, with lots of people following the match.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 05:12 PM (sdi6R)

This story is one of the items in the chess thread tomorrow.
Posted by: OregonMuse

Oregon, if you're still here:

There were a ton of factual errors in all the international reporting about the Go computer-v-human match, repeated in almost every article on it.

The first ubiquitous error is the constant claim that Go is "more complicated" than chess and has "more possible moves" than chess, neither of which is true. The number of possible moves in chess games is essentially infinite, which cannot be said for Go. And while go does indeed have a larger board (19x19 versus 8x8 for chess) each Go piece can be placed only once, and they don't move at all once placed - whereas chess pieces all move in a wide variety of ways and each piece can move as many times as you want it to. Overall, when you actually calculate the possibilities, chess potential beats Go potential by many orders of magnitude.

Second false claim is that Go is "harder" than chess to understand for humans and especially for computers. This is also false. Go only seems harder because it has been studied much much less than chess, so less analysis has been put into it. Also, computer programmers have been working on how to win at chess since the 1950s, whereas the amount of effort put into Go programs has been tiny in comparison. If we had been working on how to crack Go since the '50s, the game would have been entirely solved by now (as checkers has been).

As for human understanding: Go only seems "difficult" and "mysterious" to westerners (including western journalists) because we as a culture are almost entirely unfamiliar with it. In China, the game seems easy and natural for children to learn, and for adults to grasp its strategies.

In reality, Go is comparatively monotonous and essentially simplistic, as there is only ever one action to take (place a stone at an intersection) and only ever one goal (surround territory). The strategy and the game-play are relentlessly unchanging.

Chess, in contrast, has a huge number of possible strategies, and even a wide variety of "goals" (subservient to the ultimate goals of either checkmating your opponent or to avoid being checkmated by him).

Third falsehood is that this was a shocking breakthrough. Not really. The Go computer victory was a nice breakthrough, but it was not unexpected; in fact, it was more noteworthy that a Go computer hasn't surpassed human capabilities up until now; there has been enough computing power and programming skill to make it happen since the '90s. The only reason it didn't happen until this year is that few people ever put much time and effort into it.

Give it three to five years and Go programs will be completely unbeatable.

Posted by: zombie at March 26, 2016 06:02 PM (jBuUi)

290 I know this is heresy, but I think the real problem is that LIVs are allowed to vote and to have their votes counted. First, their is no constitutional right to vote. Back when universal sufferage was all the rage, there was no mass media to manipulate the LIVs. Now a meme, no matter how false, becomes revealed truth. See, e.g., Ted Cruz is a rolling stone and global warming.

If, as a part of the voting process, the voter has to answer, say, three out of five objective questions accurately before his vote is counted, we would get elections determined by a far more informed electorate.

There are several benefits. 1) It would diminish the ability of candidates to lie their way into office. Imagine if a qualifying question were, "How many degrees centigrade has the average global temperature risen in the last twenty years to the nearest degree? A) less than 1 degree B) 2 degrees C) 3 degrees D) more than 3 degrees." 2) It would diminish the gimme-my-sweet-sweet-free-government-money vote. 3) It would eliminate the benefit of suppressing education in favor of brainwashing.

You could have 1000 questions of which a random five would need be answered by each voter with no more than two wrong. Questions could include history (who was president during the Civil War?), the constitution (which amendment provides for the right to remain silent?), current events (to the nearest trillion dollars, what is the national debt?), general knowledge (what is the Pythagorean theorem?) and the candidates (which candidate has promised to build a wall to slow illegal immigration?).

I know that this would be essentily impossible to implement but I suspect it is the only way our Republic can be saved.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 26, 2016 06:04 PM (Nwg0u)

291 Dreher's always made me say, "What?"

He's betwixt and between.

Posted by: Lily at March 26, 2016 06:06 PM (Qm82t)

292 Dangerous to whom? The GOPe certainly seems to be freaking out over him.

Do you think he's more dangerous than Hillary?

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 05:45 PM (sdi6R)

Dangerous to the Republic. I seriously doubt if he has even the vaguest understanding of the Constitution. He seems to see the Republic and it's citizens much as Obama or Clinton sees it...they don't work for the Republic..the Republic and the people should work for them. We are tools to their ends. Trump's juvenile understanding of the Republic is obvious, at least to me. I believe he sees the United States of America as a sort of business, and if he could just hire and fire as he sees fit...*poof*..America is great again. Not because of the system or it's people...because of HIM.

Posted by: Mimzey at March 26, 2016 06:08 PM (aRUb8)

293 Nature abhors a vacuum....

Posted by: Hairyback Guy at March 26, 2016 05:39 PM (ej1L0)

This is off topic, but that saying has always struck me as funny. If nature abhors a vacuum then why is the majority of the universe an actual vacuum?

-
And how did we elect President Hoover?

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 26, 2016 06:08 PM (Nwg0u)

294 Go is "more complicated" than chess

-
I can Stop any time I want.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at March 26, 2016 06:10 PM (Nwg0u)

295 We need the GOP to appoint some judges to protect us from the other judges appointed by the GOP

Posted by: Just Sayin' at March 26, 2016 06:13 PM (2kjDY)

296 "Wouldn't it be something to have an election cycle with TWO contested conventions?"

I think the Dems are signaling buyer's remorse with Hillary. If indictments are coming, it sure would be convenient for them to have an excuse to not nominate her, and a contested convention would let them do just that. Not that they'd name Bernie, either.

Hillary's superdelegates could bolt for any reason at all; just because they've been for Hillary doesn't mean they stay that way.

Posted by: Trumps of Doom at March 26, 2016 06:16 PM (/GueG)

297 Thanks for that comment, zombie. Like I said earlier, I don't know anything about go, and had heard that it is more difficult than chess. What you said makes sense, particularly the part about not devoting much time and computer power to defeating it since it's largely unknown in the West compared to chess.

I have read that chess and go both descended from a common ancestor, probably originating in India. I don't know if that is true.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 06:18 PM (sdi6R)

298 292
Dangerous to the Republic.
Posted by: Mimzey at March 26, 2016 06:08 PM (aRUb

You seem to be under the misapprehension that we are still a Republic governed by the Constitution. That ship sailed a long time ago.

https://mises.org/library/revolution-was

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 06:23 PM (sdi6R)

299 You seem to be under the misapprehension that we are
still a Republic governed by the Constitution. That ship sailed a long
time ago.

https://mises.org/library/revolution-was

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 06:23 PM (sdi6R)

And you seem to have a critical defeatist acceptance that returning to it is impossible.
If this is true...what is your solution? A dictator....but a GOOD dictator?Is that actually your "plan" to move forward??

Posted by: Mimzey at March 26, 2016 06:26 PM (aRUb8)

300 A reason to vote for Trump:
Democrats are the most serious threat to America in the world.

Posted by: Ralph at March 26, 2016 06:30 PM (UubSE)

301 Democrats are the most serious threat to America in the world.

Posted by: Ralph at March 26, 2016 06:30 PM (UubSE)

In your opinion, what is the nature of their threat? What mechanisms and tactics would they use to damage America?

Posted by: Mimzey at March 26, 2016 06:33 PM (aRUb8)

302 It would be a sad day (and maybe my last), but whatever LEO came to collect my guns would be faced with, shall we say, utter non compliance.

Posted by: navybrat at March 26, 2016 06:34 PM (8QGte)

303 299
And you seem to have a critical defeatist acceptance that returning to it is impossible.
Posted by: Mimzey at March 26, 2016 06:26 PM (aRUb

I don't know. I don't have a good answer.

We have a quasi socialist/fascist government that utterly disregards the Constitution and whose members are beyond any law. We are also 19 trillion dollars in debt.

We voted our way into this.

We cannot vote our way out.

Draw your own conclusion.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 06:40 PM (sdi6R)

304 The Democrat agenda is a socialist agenda.
And socialism doesn't work. Why doesn't it work? Socialism doesn't work because it's an unnatural act perpitrated on other human beings by predators. An analog is of socialism is homosexuality. Homosexuality can't procreate it must recruit socialism doesn't create wealth it steals from the wealthy.

Theft, that's the basis of the Democrat party; theft from the producers no matter what mechanism or tactic they use.

Posted by: Ralph at March 26, 2016 06:45 PM (UubSE)

305 Trump is a last-ditch, desperation "Hail Mary" 99-yard pass with 1 second left on the clock.

If this doesn't work, the guns come out.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 06:46 PM (sdi6R)

306 We voted our way into this.

We cannot vote our way out.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 06:40 PM (sdi6R)

Why not? Obama was voted in. Look at what he has done. Why wouldn't it...or couldn't it.. work the other way?

Posted by: Mimzey at March 26, 2016 06:48 PM (aRUb8)

307 306
Why not? Obama was voted in. Look at what he has done. Why wouldn't it...or couldn't it.. work the other way?
Posted by: Mimzey at March 26, 2016 06:48 PM (aRUb

It would require a 100-year conservative "long march through the institutions", and that isn't happening.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 06:53 PM (sdi6R)

308 It would require a 100-year conservative "long march through the institutions", and that isn't happening.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 06:53 PM (sdi6R)

I disagree. The Marxist, and in particular Gramsci's "long march thru the institutions" was to undermine a strong, established system and instill another. It took decades of deceit, clever lies based in trust, and a distraction of spirit. To get back to that established system would be much easier. The paths are long established and the map already written. It's called the Constitution. I believe that the majority of people can just sense that the path we're on is wrong and destructive. The meme that the majority of the American people are A-OK with leftist value systems is just that..a meme...a lie. To give up now, when success is a couple of layer of the onion away, would be tragic. They will try and convince you that the end has already happen to to give up.I won't.

Posted by: Mimzey at March 26, 2016 07:13 PM (aRUb8)

309 Either I will kill you or you will kill me.

Posted by: irongrampa at March 26, 2016 05:46 PM (P/8aq)

I don't mean to be disrespectful, but the problem with that is in your handle itself, Grandpa. The question isn't whether you'll did and kill for it, but whether your grand children will.

Posted by: DFCtomm at March 26, 2016 07:29 PM (eLfAH)

310 Good answer, Mimzey, but I don't think the majority of the people know about or understand the Constitution. Young people by the millions are being taught that it was the product of "white privilege" and is inherently "racist", and thus should be discarded.

Even Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said that foreign countries should regard the South African constitution as a model, rather than the American one. While white South Africans are being murdered and their property confiscated. She should have been impeached for that, if Congress was worth a damn.

Building is hard. Destroying is easy, and the Left is very good at destroying. I don't think that going back is as simple as you think.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 07:31 PM (sdi6R)

311 Sometimes.....you just don't want to scroll up and see what the topic is.....before you say.."Donald Trump"

Posted by: Mr.KnowItAll at March 26, 2016 07:33 PM (VDc7u)

312 The irony and cognitive dissonance here is superlative.

Posted by: ChocoCheese at March 26, 2016 07:38 PM (OvUux)

313 Building is hard. Destroying is easy, and the Left
is very good at destroying. I don't think that going back is as simple
as you think.

Posted by: rickl at March 26, 2016 07:31 PM (sdi6R)

It's already been built.I disagree, somewhat, DESTROYING is difficult. It's taking the Marxists over 100 years and they're only half way there. Culture is one thing...propaganda is another...but when people can feel the wrong of what they are forced to accept, trampling that hollow army is less effort that one may think. The same concept applies with words and ideas. An example may be, listening to a true believer leftist bloviate on about social theory.....and then you intelligently ask some questions and don't allow a change of subject. The lefties ALWAYS are stopped in an awkward posture of suddenly realizing that they don't really know what they're talking about or trying to explain. They crumble..and in that crumbling, they MUST be experiencing a self doubt. If they honestly try to reinforce their position by following a logical process, they will run into a wall of their own weaknesses. At this point the true believers will just dig in their heels. The majority..I believe..will change.

Don't throw it away.

Posted by: Mimzey at March 26, 2016 07:42 PM (aRUb8)

314 "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

The amendment does not create the God-given right to defend yourself and your community, it reports it--and forbids government from infringing upon it.

I still remember the first time i heard a liberal leftsplain' it to me:

"The militia is the State Guard and the State Guard is the National Guard and the National Guard is the Federal Guard and the Federal Guard is the Federal Government--therefore it protects the right of the Fedddle Gummint to have all the guns." Ah, the whiff of gunpowder and horseshit in the morning.

It's said that liberals like the militia part and conservatives like the bear arms part. But there is no Free State without a free people and no free people without an ability to stand up to a State. And an unfree state will always be insecure.

Yes, we've lost many liberties, but we'd already be in American Gulags if the American people were unarmed.

Posted by: The Wolf Who Cried Boy at March 26, 2016 08:08 PM (Ndje9)

315 The Lefties will be with us always. They will never go away.

The GOP, in it's PURPOSEFUL failings, is a clear and present danger to the state.

They must be destroyed.

Posted by: Pastorius at March 26, 2016 08:14 PM (gMAUH)

316 Trump. Because there are no alternatives. None

Posted by: Trumpette at March 26, 2016 08:16 PM (biinB)

317 316
Trump. Because there are no alternatives. None

Posted by: Trumpette at March 26, 2016 08:16 PM (biinB)

Thats not a convincing argument. Actually, there is always more than acting from blind desperation.

Posted by: Mimzey at March 26, 2016 08:26 PM (aRUb8)

318 Rod Dreher is an asshole.

Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at March 26, 2016 08:27 PM (EUMr7)

319 Hubby just brought home a ruger .44 maxnium super red hawk. It's as long as my arm.

Posted by: WI-granny at March 26, 2016 08:31 PM (OYvRq)

320 What's really funny is the GOP establishment freaking out and dourly predicting that Trump would lose the general election.

----- Cruz wouldn't do ANY better is the sad part. Bible thumping christer anti abortion cutting S Security, warmongering racist homophobe.

You all know what awaits anyone the GOP nominates this cycle.

Posted by: Tradd at March 26, 2016 08:35 PM (EQcBC)

321 Posted by: Tradd at March 26, 2016 08:35 PM (EQcBC)

You sound concerned.

Posted by: Mimzey at March 26, 2016 08:55 PM (aRUb8)

322 316
Trump. Because there are no alternatives. None

Posted by: Trumpette at March 26, 2016 08:16 PM (biinB)

Thats not a convincing argument. Actually, there is always more than acting from blind desperation.
Posted by: Mimzey at March 26, 2016 08:26 PM
(aRUb

_______________
Nate Silver thinks some red states will turn blue if Trump is the nominee. That's just wonderful!

Posted by: redridinghood at March 26, 2016 08:57 PM (7GQM/)

323 Nate Silver thinks some red states will turn blue if Trump is the nominee. That's just wonderful!

Posted by: redridinghood at March 26, 2016 08:57 PM (7GQM/)

Don't hold your breath....it'll just make you blue.

Posted by: Mimzey at March 26, 2016 09:36 PM (aRUb8)

324 Posted by: Mimzey at March 26, 2016 09:36 PM (aRUb

..........
This election season has already made me blue and I don't even have to hold my breath. Trump just has to open his mouth and Hillary wins in a landslide.

Posted by: redridinghood at March 26, 2016 09:56 PM (7GQM/)

Processing 0.06, elapsed 0.0689 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0205 seconds, 333 records returned.
Page size 201 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.