Invictus

Out of the night that covers me,
Black as the Pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever gods may be
For my unconquerable soul.

In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.

Beyond this place of wrath and tears
Looms but the Horror of the shade,
And yet the menace of the years
Finds, and shall find, me unafraid.

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll.
I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.

William Ernest Henley

In this entertainment driven superficial culture that we live in all we need is a back slapping, big grinning, articulate used car salesman/woman that embodies conservative principles.

then we need to employ the greatest direct response copywriters to do the research, create the bullet points and then base the campaign around that.

That’s all!

Wow..I just shared this poem a few days ago. I thought it was relatively unknown. One of my absolute favorites! Thank You!

A living constitution is interpreted through penumbra and emanation instead of its original intent.

Yeah, I know, but the original intent simply doesn’t cover all possible contingencies in the modern world. I know that this argument has been used to justify really bizarre “constitutional” rulings like Roe vs. Wade, but a certain amount of interpretation and adaptation is necessary. I mean…if you take the 2nd amendment seriously, the true intent was to ensure that the citizenry retains the means to violently resist federal troops in the case of tyranny. This is a noble goal, but one that is very difficult to square with the rise of the modern military-industrial complex, which our forefathers could not have forseen.

I am a military man, and know full well what would become of present-day citizens’ militias if they ever came into conflict with actual regular army troops. The only way to preserve the intent of the 2nd amendment would be to sell high-tech weaponry to private citizens. Is that a good idea? I’m not trying to argue for gun control here (hell no), but this is a good example of why the constitution does have to be “interpreted” a bit at the margins, and maybe the intent of the founders isn’t always 100% compatible with modern life.

Modern life notwithstanding. The US Constitution served us well until activist judges decided it needed to be modernized. It opened the floodgates for all kinds of invented rights.

Truth is, over the last generation or so, Democrats have become Socialists and mainstream Republicans have become Democrats. We like to believe we have a center-right nation (after all, that’s how we answer the polls, right?) but last Tuesday the real poll told us otherwise. Some say we’re approaching a turning point in America but we have already passed it.

What “rustyoldgarand” and undoubtedly many others fail to understand is that there are two types of political systems – rule by law and rule by government. Under the Constitution, we had a set of laws, like the Second Amendment, that guaranteed our rights. We also had guidelines for what the Federal government should and should not be able to regulate and control, which served to keep the government small. The job of the Supremes was to review cases in the light of what the Founding Fathers meant when they wrote the Constitution. You can search for what Justice Scalia says on this topic. Once the concept of a “living Constitution” entered the arena, the Constitution was systematically “interpreted” out of existence. The commerce clause, for example, meant to prevent states from emposing economic embargoes, taxes, and so forth on each other, was “interpreted” to cover everything including how much water your toilet needs to flush and what kind of light bulbs you may use. When you have rule of law, you do not need to worry about your religious freedoms, your right to bear arms, and so forth. With a “living Constitution” you do, and under obama and the radical left you had better be worried.

Mitt lost because he was not conservative enough.

Please tell me what religious doctrine Romney was trying to legislate?

“The Liberals now have a REAL problem. They have NO IDEA what they are doing” Problem is that they will kill us while we wait for them to fall by their own sword.

Had to learn it for my fraternity.

Good grief, another idiot comes out of the woodwork. Just like clockwork, you people are.

First read this: http://www.redstate.com/2012/11/09/it-is-time-to-throw-the-social-conservatives-out-of-the-gop/

Second, answer rogershru2′s question.

Third, STFU about things you don’t understand.

There are at least two issues here: (1) Most of the changes ‘to’ the Constitution have not been via the amendment process. Rather it has been via the SCOTUS and its abuse of its position and the invention of jurisprudential doctrine that simply make no sense; most recently that the SCOTUS is, somehow, bound to interpret laws passed by the Congress as Constitutional if there is any possible way to do so. Hence the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate is Constitutional according to Chief Justice John Roberts, the ONLY justice on the court to adopt that position.

(2) Not all amendments to the Constitution have had as their purpose “to secure the blessings of liberty…” but, rather to advance the cloud of tyranny. The best example of this, the 18th, later cancelled by the 21st is a perfect example of how a cause can be promoted and celebrated to extremely harmful effect.

More later.

Stop looking for the perfect conservative. You won’t find them. This is why we were left with Romney…he’s all that was left after the others got eliminated from the primaries by candidates who weren’t perfect. Same thing that happened in 2008 as well. We crucify great conservatives for idiotic reasons and then we wonder why we get such crap candidates. The secret to getting the GOP nomination is keeping your mouth shut until everyone else gets slaughtered by our party’s TRUE CONSERVATIVES!!!11!

It was already apparent they didn’t/don’t know and that didn’t stop the sheeple from re-electing Hopey McChange the healthcare clown.

celedor, I hope you meant “not have” in third paragraph first line. right after “did”.

Switzerland does. At the end of WW I everyone was allowed to take their 03 Springfield home. Why would arming the citizenry with state of the art small arms be bad?

When the GOP STOPS selecting the candidate for the people and begin TRUSTING the base perhaps the Republicans will win again.
Those wanting to change the philosophy of the Republican Party need to reacquaint themselves with Barry Goldwater. They should read his “The Conscience of a Conservative”.
The GOP Leaders have veered away from the heart of the people. They like to talk about the Liberals only hang with other Liberals that agree with them, but the GOP Leaders are doing the same thing.
Romney is a good man but he couldn’t talk the talk and couldn’t fit himself into the mold the GOP cast for him.
I wish we had an Independent Party in my State. I would kick the Republican Party to the wayside and tell them when they stopped treating their base like the Socialist Dems treat theirs then they might begin winning elections.

I think the other respondents to your comment are missing the point.

It doesn’t matter what a conservative candidate would do. As was correctly pointed out during this election multiple times, the Republicans controlled everything in 2003 and 2004, and Roe vs Wade was not overturned. If it didn’t happen then, it’s not going to happen.

But… too many people out there are half asleep and believe what they hear on TV that Republicans are going to wage a “war on women” and other such nonsense.

When you defend social conservatism, you feed the troll. Plain and simple.

And until there is a united message, that can overcome the bias out there against us in the press, these issues cannot be front and center in any campaign. Todd Akin screwed up royally; Richard Murdock said something that most of us would have said and was destroyed over it. If that doesn’t make you see the forest for the trees, I don’t know what will.

“We will also continue to clean up the Right”

Alright, then: You can start with a vigorous call for new Republican Congressional Leadership. The Weeper of the House, John Boehnor (whom, it should be noted, didn’t help much in getting the vote out for Romney in his own state) needs to be kicked out the door.

Boehner is an unmitigated fraud. He will grandstand, and pound his chest, burping up “conservative” comments to quell us “knuckledraggers” (-Boehner’s own word for Constitutionalist), but when it’s time to actually write bills and forward them to the Senate, bills that might actually put some teeth into his public statements, he folds like a cheap tent. His opening bid is always “we won’t shut down the Government”, when that is precisely what needs to be done to stop this insane spending and borrowing.

THE DEBT IS GOING TO DESTROY THIS COUNTRY unless we find some real, honest-to-goodness leaders. To hell with 2016: We don’t have that much time.

So you like Social Security, a program which was (as you obviously understand) nowhere near “insurance”. The Social Security Act was passed with a “retirement” age of 65 at a time when the average age of death for males was 60, and females not quite 62. The Roosevelt Administration and Congress never intended for the program to pay out much of anything. It was, to be honest, a way to snooker the public out of more money without “raising taxes” on those who were not “rich”. Medical science has screwed that up for the government and John Q. Public now faces the consequences. Personally, I think the Founders had a better plan than either of the Progressive Roosevelts.

Nonsense. Pro-life is the actual libertarian position. Pro choice denies the liberty of the child in favor of the mother, which is fundamentally contrary to the libertarian philosophy.

Amen. I agree completely. Enough said.

Erick, you remind me of a stone faced poker player who stubbonly thinks they have a winning hand. You are blind to the fact that the game is rigged, the other players know the cards your holding and the dealer is happy to give you a few winning hands, just enough so you’ll feel confident in remaining at the table only to be taken to the cleaners.

Conservatism, the brand, needs re-packaged and updated. The message is stale because the product isn’t attractive in it’s current form. That doesn’t mean the content needs to change, it just needs to appear fresher, more with it. You can’t get that look by staring at the faces of Boehner, McConnell, et al. I maintain that congressional numbers are so low because the faces of Reid and Pelosi aren’t any better.

Obama beat Romney because he’s considered by single womem to be sexier. He won re-election because he could jive talk to the inner city crowd, dance on Ellen, acknowledged he smoked a few J’s in his youth and plays well to the MTV crowd. He’s seen with the glitteratti and skips security briefings like most kids skip class. They can relate so he gets the vote. Romney could have screamed at him all day long about Benghazi, the fiscal cliff, unemployment or anything else but to no avail. The game was rigged. The media was the corrupt dealer of and if you know your Marshall McLuhan, they more than embedded themselves into the message.
You’re caught up in the mine is bigger than yours argument when it has nothing to do with whether the M&Ms today are better than those in Reagan’s day. Same candy but it needs new packaging, new visibility on the shelf, better lighting, catchy commercials, and it would help if less time was spent pointing to the contents label. Everything can be argued to death as being good/bad for you. Think marketing and you’ll understand why iPads and iPhones are winning and yes, the Democrats.

For the record, I discount anyone’s opinion who declares that someone else’s opinion is ‘hate’ unless they know that person in person. Disagreements are not ‘hate’ because someone else declares it so. This is the infancy of the downfall of free speech.

Small arms, alone, would not be enough to build a militarily effective militia in the present day and age. In fact, Antonin Scalia suggested that man-portable rocket launchers (I believe he was talking about AA stuff like the stinger) may, indeed, be constitutionally protected, though I forget the exact context of the quote. I don’t want this to break down into some intricate discussion of military tactics on american soil – that would be entirely too morbid for my liking – but suffice it to say, I am not of the opinion that even the best small arms would be enough to overcome federal troops in the event of civil war.
But if we’re just talking about small arms, I have nothing against allowing citizens whatever they want (the criminals are already well-armed), but there is a big difference between an M4 and a javelin missile.

Thanks for that.

“Mitt lost because he was not conservative enough.” Mitt’s problem was he never was a conservative to begin with. Whether he truly came to believe in conservatism, or just tried to adopt the language to get the nomination and elected is something only he, and those around him, can tell. In either case, he was unable to convince even all Republicans to come out and vote for him.

that isn’t correct. Even with the militia was the bulwark of the republic heavy arms were kept in armories. Citizens only kept sidearms.

Mitt Romney never had a conservative mindset.
He never responded to attacks on conservatism.

Attack: Republicans want to cut funding to Planned Parenthood.
Mitt: I can not think of good reasons to do this, so I will avoid letting this become an issue.
Conservatives: Planned Parenthood is a liberal slush fund, that does NOT give mammograms, and funnels government funds into Political Action committies.

Attack: Republicans wish to ban all Abortions.
Mitt: I will not move on Abortion.
Conservatives: Right now children are being aborted, the Republican party will not stop with efforts to increase parental notification, increase adoption availibility and medical support for pregnant women, and prevent liberals from trying to convince our children that abortion is the only alternative.
The man just did not think like a conservative, he could not formualte in his brain why conservatives support such ideas.
In the end, Mitt Romney gave Conservative White, Hispanic and Black voters zero reason to vote for him.

America lost because obama is president. America lost because Republicans are quitters. America lost because Republicans took their ball and went home and now they are bragging about it.

america lost.

I’m a member of Reason.com (a website where liberty is discussed within the context of conservatism and liberalism) and I disagree. Let me just say that your point has been brought up and swatted down by asking questions such as these: why are all unborn entitled to steal nutrients from the mother’s body via the umbilical cord? Why are all unborn entitled to grow/develop in someone else’s body?

Among other things, you can’t possibly argue that forcing a rape victim to adjust her lifestyle so that she can incubate, feed (via umbilical cord), and carry the child to term is an example of “liberty”. Which is why government control over a person’s body is such a slippery slope.

RBD…Someone else agrees with you:
“If in the opinion of the people the distribution or modification of the
constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an
amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no
change by usurpation; for though this in one instance may be the instrument of
good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The
precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or
transient benefit which the use can at any time yield.”

George Washington’s Farewell Address

Who says they would have to *overcome* federal troops? Are you sure about that?

When I talk about “negative” rights, I am not speaking in the pejorative. The concept of negative and positive rights is a philosophical distinction which drifts into the theories of guys like John Locke, and later Madison and Jefferson. Suffice it to say, our founding fathers understood the state as mainly the guarantor of freedom _from_ oppression, in all its various forms (illegal search and seizure, taxation without representation, etc.). Specifically, our republic was founded on the idea that no man has the right to demand anything of his neighbor without his consent.
What we are allowed to do in a positive sense is…well, everything else. In fact, James Madison felt so strongly about this that he opposed the Bill of Rights because he thought that it was not necessary to lay out what rights a citizen possesses, because we are naturally endowed with _all_ rights which the state does not specifically take away.

WTH are you talking about?

Probably not the best analogy for Romney.

Negative. It means that they both have the right to life. Nobody is promoting taking the life of the mother. But somehow it’s ok to take the life of the baby. That’s decidedly not equal. Pro life values the life of both mother and child. The only liberty it takes from the mother is the liberty to murder another for personal convenience.

And it’s looking better and better. Way to build a coalition, bro.

Tell you a worse way to build a coalition, “bro” – to antagonize and drive out 50% of your party’s base. If you like that picture, Gary Johnson and the Libertarian Party awaits you.

So you view the infant as a parasite the mother has the right to dispose of out of convenience. Ok. Got it. You deny that mothering or fathering a child obligates you to care for them. Ok. Got that too.

The liberals make it look that way. Be nice NOT to play into their game.

We don’t like surrendering our core beliefs. Pretty simple, actually. But if you and the rest of the libertarians wish to walk, so be it.

How did he play into their game, again? He did not run on a socially (or fiscally, I grant you) conservative campaign.

Very good! “Invictus” I believe? Here’s a brief excerpt from the words of “Wish you were here” by Pink Floyd that are also apprpriate
“So… you think you can tell..
Heaven from Hell…
Blue skies from pain.
Can you tell a green field
from a cold steel rail…
a smile from a veil
do you think you can tell?
Did they get you to trade?
Your heros for ghosts?
Hot ashes for trees?
Hot air for a cool breeze?
Cold comfort for change?
Did you exchange,
a walk on part in a war
for a lead role in a cage?”
Like many rockers, Pink Floyd leaned far left, but as the results of the poat war splitup of Europe should have demonstrated, the Utopia promised by Socialism turned into the environmental nightmare of East Germany, and the workers paradise became something that some people would risk being shot to escape. To give up, to throw in the towel, to give ground, would be to answer ‘yes’ to all the questions in that song.

I’m all for this. Let ‘em go.

Being born is a privilege, not a right? Do I have the right to life today? Do you? If yes, then so does that child. The circumstances of the child being created are not relevant to whether that child has a right to life. Just because something awful happened, rape, doesn’t mean something just as awful has to happen, murder. Well, unless you mean capital punishment for the rapist, which is at least arguable. It sounds like you’re more than anything upset with the biology of human reproduction.

Erick, i also have been trying to tell my alleged conservative friends that Mitt Romney had a better chance of being elected Pope of the cahtolic church than President. he is a nice, humble and honest person hence the problem. The problems isn’t that conservtismis dead it is that the Republican Party is BROKE! It has been ever since Reagan left office. Both of the Bush’s, Bob Dole, John McCain and now Mitt Romney have been horrible choices for the Party. GW Bush only won by accident Al gore and John Kerry were even worst choies at the time.

We have tried now for the last five years to fix the Broken repub,lican party only to be told just last week by John Boehner in not so many words that we were not welcome in the Party. I knew a third party before the election was a mistake but now that it is over it is time to seriously think about starting a Thrid party for conservatism and to invite all conservaties regardlyess of current party to join us. We have nothng to lose now.

Obama is going to use Boehner to make it appear that the Republicans hav ebeen the road block to moving Forward. this wil enable the Dem’s to take the House back in the mid-terms.

I have a strong regard for not allowing the left to flush the formerly best nation on earth. Pompously posing with your principles as America gurgles through the big brother rhetoric treatment plant is slight recompense.

I feel you may be correct. Unfortunately most people don’t correct poor judgement until the pain becomes too much to bear.

That’s half of it.

The other is that we didn’t have a good message. Trying selling tax cuts as a solution to someone who doesn’t have a job. It’s a tough sell to say the least.

Pres. Obama’s about “that’s the solution to everything – a tax cut” stung hard, very hard.

What’s your next place to cave? “Green”? The mush-brained college students love them some ecology, too. Maybe we should be all for green jobs and less fossil fuels and government subsidized Volts and all that other really kewl green stuff. Why, they’ll LOVE us when we do that. And while we’re at it, we should go all in on full funding of things like free school breakfast, lunch and dinner. And government-funded day care. And 100,000 more teachers. Maybe we should start being like them and hating Israel too, because those poor Palestinians need us to take care of them and protect them from bad ol’ Bibi. Why, we could do all sorts of really nifty things so they left won’t be mean and hate us any more. But by golly, we’ll keep those taxes low. You know, because fiscal conservatism is THE MOST IMPORTANT THING EVAH!

No thanks, I’d rather not be a liberal. Even if I have more money.

No.

It’s not just the SC justices it’s also the rest of the judiciary.

The only thing I can think is that EE wants to start a third party, building off the anger of losing this election and the general fury in Conservative circles at everything that’s going to happen in the next few months. Sometime around mid May, after the Fiscal Cliff debacle and negotiations, and a few more months of Obama in office with newly restored gusto, we’re going to see the launch of the (C) party. Redstate is going to be ConState.

Their opening salvo is going to be the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence:

“When in the Course of *HUMAN EVENTS* it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.” – emphasis mine.

Redstate and Human Events are going to issue their own Declaration of Independence from the Republican Party and start their own effort to run candidates nationwide. That’s the only thing I can gather at this point.

nah…its the “i can’t get my way, i’ll take my ball and go home” mentality. Like there are no consequences whatsoever. Gee, people should kiss my ass or I hope romney loses. Gee, I told you so!

It’s ironic that personal responsibility is a core tenet of conservatism yet look at all these conservative elites pointing a finger at a bad candidate, a bad campaign, or a bad Orca program.

the real question looking at the person in the mirror in the morning: What the eff did you do to defeat Obama?????

And I don’t believe, Erick, that you should give up the fight, your fight (for no two people find themselves thinking the exact same way even if they label themselves “conservative), but your fight has been a lose for a long while now, in the same way you claim other’s battles have been losers in your estimation.
Looking at the other contestants for the job, there wasn’t a single person in the GOP primaries this season who not only could have but would have defeated Barack Obama. I still maintain the Romney failure was more a failure of ground game technique (your team has to make personal contact with your prospective voters and their system didn’t do that) coupled with the inability (money and campaign laws) or the unwillingness to fight early in Ohio against the attacks, attacks the media made sure went national as they willingly parroted the narrative the Obama campaign was pushing in Ohio against Mitt) and oh, yeah, the media….whole other story, as everywhere one looks, there was free advertising for Obama and free attacks on Mitt. So far, no candidate has found a formula to fight that.
It might look to you as if Newt was able to turn that around for a time by biting back at the media, but that was an illusion. I hope you didn’t fall for that. Most Americans despise Newt, fair or not. It’s kind of like watching a boxing match and seeing one side never get called for excessive clinching or for hitting below the belt so that when one call goes against the one getting the breaks, there’s a temporary yell of support for the other, but it’s transient, temporary.
In fact, the mere mention of boxing reminds me that Obama is indeed much like Ali. Ali was talented (and Obama does have talents, just not the kind we’d like to see in a POTUS), but he was a creature of his own self-promotion and the shameless promotion of those who road his coattails like Cosell. Then, the rest of the sports media jumped on the bandwagon, then the main stream media did the same until we thought we were looking at not only a skilled boxer but a shaper of culture. The thing is, Ali was horrid to others, including the talented Frazier, and he himself promoting stereotyping and racism in his mocking of Sonny Liston, yet ironically and sadly no one called him on in during those days of civil right’s struggles. Only decades later has some of the shine worn off, but he’s still basically untouchable for criticism by the msm. They like to create gods.
We didn’t offer a god of a candidate, and I hope we never do. I’d will cling to the notion there may yet again be a sense about Americans that allows them not to be blinded by shameless packaging and self-promotion and failure.
In the end, we have to understand that people hate change. There was a sense (an incorrect one promoted by the media) that the economy was/is getting better. That, I fear, was one big reason turn out didn’t increase.
I have always been sad that a guy like Gingrich, superior to all candidates of either party in being able to concisely, with both logic and emotion, present compelling arguments that resonate effectively, bounces manically from such effective communication one day to such bitter and sarcastic spewings the next.
I am rambling from subject to subject, but lastly, I think your statement that you refuse to change your position is admirable (although it might be wrong, esp. your insistence that a candidate must be one who demands Roe v. Wade be overturned–or am I wrong about your position on that ? Please consider being pleased with one who will present the case against 3rd term abortion) but admirable or not, I think your two posts now that scream “I told you so” are about the worse thing I’ve seen you write.
Good persuaders and leaders know those are never effective motivators; in fact, they are the words of pettiness. Of course, maybe I don’t really know what the purpose of your blog is, then….echo chamber or a means to persuade.

There can be a 3rd party, it’s called the remodeled Republican Party. Look into joining your local precinct. Read everything ColdWarrior posts.

Our house has great structure, it just needs some cosmetic updating on messaging, strategy etc…. No need to try and build an entire new house.

My point for them is if they actually examined their own views, to be consistent, they would be anti abortion. They are so intent on changing our position to be more like them. They should understand that they own philosophy agrees with the republican position on abortion.

that torqued me as well. RS is becoming a one way street, “conservative voices” have overtakin the grass roots push.

Criticism of the RS change right before the election was greeted with accept it or hit the highway crap.

well, the same applies in reverse, if you don’t like someone’s comments, you don’t have to read them. haha.

I wish they would do it, too, Bill. Boy, do I ever wish they would do it.

Want to know what a liberal told me over the weekend? Anyone who believes in free-market capitalism and supports the private sector does so due to greed and is inherently evil. These evil capitalists will not give up their accustomed lifestyle for the sake of fulfilling their social responsibilities and supporting “what is best for society as a whole”. Liberals therefore believe that increasing taxes and dumping a bunch of regs on the private sector will succeed in DRIVING our economy (because these evil capitalists will simply develop new products and expand their businesses in order to ensure that they can maintain their greedy, evil lifestyle, you see). This will generate more revenues going into public funds that progressives can use to further their social welfare agenda.

Don’t even try to mention the word “demand” or suggest that demand for goods and services is what drives our economy. In their world, this is a lie that is perpetuated by the evil capitalists so that they can avoid accepting their societal responsibilities.

I wish these folks would form their own nation. Let them tax and reg each other into oblivion!

Well it burned my biscuits because the morning he was saying it, my family were busting their butts to help cement a seat in a state legislative district far away from where we live. It caught me totally by surprise. Even if Erick couldn’t stand Romney, at least for the sake of the down-ticket candidates you keep up the fight until the 4th quarter clock really runs all the way down. Erick has a leadership role: he’s on television, he’s an official Talking Head and an opinion-shaper. His sentiments about enthusiasm matter in general.

You can’t split the baby: you can’t say: “Well, I really never thought our Presidential contender could win, but stay strong anyway and get everyone to the polls.” It’s going to take me a long while to get over that.

There you go again Common_Cents….What Erick said in the Primaries was right….and so was I….and you never acknowledged it then….nor will you now….Romney represented nothing but Romney and supporting the inside the Beltway infrastructure of the Republican Party leadership.

We’ve had two successive elections where you and your ilk have had your way running milk toast moderates who refuse to stand for anything while falling for everything the Democrats lay in front of them….you can’t win an election without making a case….McCain didn’t make a case beyond, “I’m a war hero and it’s my turn” and Romney didn’t make a case beyond…well….what the hell was Romney’s point now that I think of it….he didn’t articulate a positive message at all…all he did was mouth empty platitudes about America making a comeback without ever saying how he’d bring it about…

and here you are again stating the obvious that it would have been better if Romney had won never mind that he didn’t win….PERIOD!!!

so what’s your freaking point???

This is behind what I commented on another thread. I strongly believe the reason Romney lost is the anti-capitalistic mood that Captain Bull**** and his minions have been able to foster. Once the Bain thing came out, he was toast. A rich, slick Republican who has worked as CEO for a company that buys other companies and lays off their employees? He was doomed from the git-go. That was just asking for a massive Democrat ad campaign. All this hoo-hah about social issues is papering over the fact that the Left has expanded the popularity of left-wing fiscal policy by demonizing business. What we have failed miserably to do is to provide a narrative about why successful businesses are good for people from ground-up.

….I turned out to vote…and I turned everyone I knew out to vote…despite the insults and petty crap from know it alls like you….Romney won the Bible Belt Romney won the base….but he didn’t win the precious Moderates an independents that have been the Holly Grail of the establishment because he never made a case to them….it’s time for the Republican Party to stop pandering to moderates and independents and make a frigging case for why they should support us instead of acting like you don’t stand for anything in an effort to appeal to them

I agree with the suggestion you’ve provided about how we could approach the situation, Bill. How can this be achieved is the question, isn’t it?

Dems have a major problem though, Bill. Many of the Liberals I’ve talked during the past week are of the opinion that this election gives them a mandate to move forward with implementation of the progressive ideology. But to succeed in that, we’d have to see a major shift from private sector employment to public sector employment (to achieve the ultimate “economic dominance” part of the ideology).

Then we have comments like those made by Jesse Jackson in the following article
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/16297115-418/story.html

I had seen a few comments posted at black websites hinting at affirmative action quotas in Obama’s second term (whether or not that is true, I don’t know, but Jackson’s comments indicate some sort of deal might have been in the works)

Here’s an example of their problem, though…City of Chicago has 417,067 people unemployed. Chicago held its first ever city government-wide job fair last week. Want to know how many people showed up? 3003. Out of over 400K.

I’m thinking the Dems pushed the “entitlement” narrative so hard that they have persuaded people to buy into a “hand out” mindset rather than accepting a hand-up. If they have, then the progressive dream will unravel before it even gets started.

Old saying “You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make them drink” applies on this one????

/golf clap

So Eric….you are proposing a bloody intra party civil war for the soul of the GOP?

good luck with that. 2012 was the extinction event at the K-T boundary for the all white GOP. The GOP needs to broaden its demographic scope, or its all over. White vote share was 81% in 2000, 74% in 2008 and 72% in 2012. Will it be 70% in 2016?
You need a plan.

Meanwhile OFA never sleeps.
They are getting ready for 2014 right now.

Well…letting them go wouldn’t be that simple. They do make most of the money in the country (e.g., NYC, Palo Alto, Microsoft, Apple). And with all due respect to the fine educational institution that is Texas A&M, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford aren’t exactly slackers.

That sounds like a strawman to me. Most liberals I know don’t hate free-market capitalism they just want to contort it into something less than optimally efficient.

A few that I’ve talked to fall outside the realm of what I’ve stated above. They are actually what would be called modern progressives (because they see free-market capitalistic activity as being a necessary evil, and therefore are willing to support it).

But most Liberals I’ve talked to would fall into the category of traditional progressives, i.e they’re hung up on the glory days of the New Deal and believe the same type of policies would succeed, regardless of changes that have occurred during the past century in areas such as international trade. These Liberals adhere to the kind of outlook that I’ve provided in the anecdotal statements above.

“He did not defend social conservatism, but let those attacks go unanswered.”

Even worse, he didn’t point out that the real extremist in the abortion debate are those who support abortion in the 9th month, or have no issue tossing a baby who survives an abortion into the corner to die. Also, where was the debate over school choice? The failure in our public school system especially punishes minorities groups such as blacks and hispanics. Where was the effort to detail how 50 years of liberal education policies have drown minority groups into a permanent underclass?

In a close election where many of the battle ground states game down to a few votes, was it conservativism that lost, or the Romney’s failed attempt to revolutionize GOTV efforts that left 30K volunteers in the wind?

The only area where I might agree that conservatives need to change is not in their principles, but in the areas they those principles are applied. Conservatives are never going to change minds in this country about first term abortions until they can change minds on late term abortions. Focus on that, and eventually work back. School choice should be another huge issue for Conservatives. Also, Conservatives need to find a way to better teach people about real free market principles, especially in minority areas. People in the inner cities run into people promising free stuff every day. How often do they come across people interested in teaching them how to run a business, or what real economic freedom means? Preaching about the free market once every four years is about as influential as the dead beat dad who shows up to see his kid once a year on Christmas.

Great link, thanks.

“I’d like a guy like Krauthammer, who calls himself an empiricist, to take more time studying data and studying why it is that Hispanics are okay with big goverment from the time they arrive, even IF they get jobs.”

I don’t crunch the numbers, but I do talk to some of the folks in the samples. If Krauthammer were to analyze immigrant demographics and voting patterns, I’d guess that he might come up with the conclusion that no matter what the ethnicity – Hispanics, Asians, Russians, and Europeans from the early days of Ellis Island – the poorer newcomers have voted overwhelmingly for Democrats with a populist message through their first generations in the US, and the more prosperous business classes from their homelands were more likely to split parties when casting their votes.

Good, we are glad you agree…we already have a book out about it called “Better off without em, a northern manifesto for southern secession”, by Chuck Thompson. Very sarcastically written, but once you get past the sarcasm the guy has a real idea about why we should separate, and a good way to do it. Best chapter is probably the one about the SEC and the BCS. But my favorite…the south would finally have to tax itself to support its services, instead of taking the taxes of blue states. And it would have to raise a military (Union would keep all equipment, give the south the bases) and this is a costly proposition. We with Union attitudes are all for this, and it is good to know you guys are too. Let’s get to it.

“The Hispanic vote in America will never be in your life time or mine “a natural fit for the GOP.”

Sure it can, but I agree that amnesty will have little effect. The error people make when it comes to Hispanics is treating them as some amorphous group. Saying that every Hispanic is the same, is like saying that every person who immigrated from Ireland is exactly the same as every Italian immigrant. Hispanics come from a broad range of countries, many of which don’t have a high opinion of other latin countries. A guy from Argentina could give a rats you know what about a guy from Mexico. The problem is that most people confuse “Hispanic” with “Mexican”. Trust me, Mexican’s do not represent most of Latin America.

Back to my point. What’s the difference between a person who is a second or third generation descendant of Hispanic immigrants, versus a second or third generation descendant of Irish or Italian immigrants? There isn’t one. One of the problems stemming from the immigration debate, is that the conversation always becomes about Hispanics coming here who want free stuff. Not saying that is wrong, but it also turns off legal Hispanic immigrants who feel they are being labeled into the same group. It analogous to people being labeled racist because they support the tea party. It isn’t true, but I bet they feel resentment towards those making the claims. All I know is that the Cuban vote in Florida went to the Democrat in a presidential election. This is a group that has been solidly Republican at least in my life time. Why did they switch?

we do it at the dinner table

Hate from the Oxford English Dictionary:

intense dislike: feelings of hate and revenge

[as modifier] denoting hostile actions motivated by intense dislike or prejudice: a hate campaign

[count noun] informal an intensely disliked person or thing:

ROFL. You don’t know much about Southerners, do you? We love a challenge, especially ones that allows us to revert to Hank William Jr.’s philosophy “a country boy can survive”.

That’s why someone smarter than me needs to come up with a way to reach out into the community and teach people about free market principles. Is it something that can be done through churches, or business groups? I don’t know, but unless there is some sort of push in this area, we’re going to be a country dependent on other peoples money.

Many thanks, streiff, but I was just about to ask this poster who made the call to “destroy our enemies” and said “voting is the best revenge”?

Way too much emotive reasoning going on with Liberals these days.

There are some groups that are working in this area, such as Young Entrepreneurs Clubs, etc. But I think Bobby Jindal’s approach on education, i.e. including apprenticeships, could be a start.

Explain Lineholder

LOL Ace, first of all you are completely wrong about me being some Romneybot. I was pissed the RINO establishment basicly rigged the process for Romney at every step. So I have NO idea where you got that. I was supporting Gingrich more than anyone.

However, my ENTIRE point since the election was RS motto, REPUBLICAN IN THE GENERAL. ALL of my comments refer to that, and that only.

Erick did not support Romney, ergo did not support conservatism.

Again I ask, what admin gives us a better chance to promote conservative ideas? Obama or Romney?

What part of the obama admin does Erick like? because that is the reality of not really supporting Romney once he was nominated.

After the primaries, it became Romney or Obama. Not Romney or Perry or Gingrich.

It was real simple.

My points since the election was that there are many crybabies pointing fingers but how many can look themselves in the mirror and say they did enough to keep obama out?

Hell, EE said he didn’t care who won a few days before the election and just wanted his life back. WTF????

Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Communists, Marxists, including all Hillary, Kerry and Obama supporters, et al:

Since the 1930′s we have stuck together for the sake of the kids, but the whole of this latest election process has made us realize that we want a divorce. We know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has clearly run its course.

Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right for us all. For well over 100 years, you have worked tirelessly to change the very fabric of what America is, was and should be.

You call this “Progress”. We call it “Tyranny”.

You are hell-bent on trying to change this country into something we find distasteful and don’t want, so let’s just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own separate ways.

Here is a model separation agreement:

Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a similar portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.

We don’t like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU. Since you hate guns and war, we’ll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military. We’ll take the nasty, smelly oil industry and you can go with wind, solar and biodiesel.

You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore, and Rosie O’Donnell. You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them.

We’ll keep capitalism, all those evil corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart and Wall Street. You can have your socialism, communism, green fascism, and progressivism.

We’ll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO’s, tea-partiers, hunters, gun owners, cowboys and rednecks. You can have your beloved lifelong welfare dwellers, food stamps, gangbangers, homeboys, hippies, druggies, illegal aliens, radical college professors and SEIU thugs.

We’ll keep the Bibles, Ernest Hemmingway novels, the Wall Street Journal and Fox News. We’ll give you Bill Clinton’s “My Life”, Obama’s memoirs (which he didn’t write), Hillary’s village, MSNBC, NPR and Hollywood.

We’ll keep Christmas, Easter, Memorial Day, and Independence Day. You can have Kwanzaa, Ramadan, and April Fool’s Day. Of course, you are welcome to create your own “Independence Day” as you see fit.

We’ll keep ESPN, The History Channel, the Sci-Fi Channel and Spike TV. You can have PBS, Bravo, MTV and Lifetime.

We’ll take Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Michelle Malkin. You can have Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi, Saul Alinksi and Jesse Jackson.

You can make nice with Iran, North Korea and Palestine. We’ll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us. You can have the peaceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we’ll help provide them security.

We’ll keep our Judeo-Christian values. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Secular Humanism and political correctness. You can also have the U.N. and we will no longer be paying the bill.

We’ll keep our barbecue grills, pork ribs, red meat and bacon. You can have all the tofu, granola, and watercress that you can cram down your gullets.

We’ll keep the SUV’s, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon, Yugo, and Prius you can find.

We’ll keep NASCAR, the NFL, NHL, and other contact sports. You can have yoga, polo and water ballet.

We’ll keep the Founding Fathers, Christopher Columbus, Andrew Jackson, Sam Houston, General Patton, John Wayne, Clint Eastwood, Charleton Heston and Ronald Reagan. You can have Karl Marx, Lenin, Malcom X, Stalin, Barbara Streisand, Jane Fonda, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, LBJ, and FDR.

You can give everyone health care if you can find any practicing doctors. We’ll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right. We’ll keep “The Battle Hymn of the Republic” and “The National Anthem.” I’m sure you’ll be happy to substitute “Imagine”, “I’d Like to Teach the World to Sing”, “Kum Ba Ya” or “We Are the World”.

We’ll practice trickle down economics and you can continue to give trickle up poverty your best shot.

Since it often so offends you, we’ll keep our history, our name and our flag. You can come up with whatever gobbedly-gook you want.

Sincerely,

The Vast Conspiracy of Right-Wing Wackos.

What i cant understand, is why Romeny did not simply point to the locations where the left has pretty much have had its way??

DETRIOT… hell on earth and run by the left for 50+ years
Chicago
Stockton
*You name the inner city* .. all a mess

California/Illinois… pretty much run by the left; and a complete mess as well…

He never Called him out on the Born alive act he fought against…

Dennis Praeger called it correctly … If all Romney did was fight on the econ., and if it was ‘perceived’ to be getting better , he would lose… and he did …

It should have been about ideas; not “I can create jobs” ….

Thats just hatefull for you to say that …. *grin*

Yep, especially since we’ll have the workers, and they’ll have the takers and slackers.

This is why libertarians wind up alienating so many people. Your reasoning is flat out perverting the notion of freedom and liberty.

The horrors of rape are no ones fault but the rapist.

The notion that the solution to any pregnancy is to kill the child is an even worse offense than the rape.

Freedom and liberty are not isolated concepts that exclude responsibility and considering how others may be affected by one’s choices.

Every child is precious. Every woman who carries a child is in the process of bringing forth life — and women are at one of the most beautiful stages in their life when they are going through the process.

I am tired of listening to do-gooders without half an ounce of decency or honor raging about the government “forcing” women to carry a child — in essence, demonizing pregnancy and talking about a child as if it is a burden. These are evil ideas hatched in the pit of hell.

You should thank God we live in a country that respects and honors the life of every human being. That our government is grappling with its conscience over the evil of abortion is a good sign. Only a heartless human being can so harden their heart that they coldly call murdering a baby in the womb “liberty”.

It seems to me that – barring some unlikely and extraordinary development (like Obama adopting a strict interpretation of the Constitution or zero Supreme Court judges retiring in the next 4 years) – the abortion position taken by Red State front pagers and Republicans running for office is about to become academic.

I’d say the best way to reduce abortions now is to focus on providing pro-life alternatives to planned parenthood – working to serve those who are pregnant in difficult circumstances/ for struggling single mothers – providing counseling – connecting soon to be mothers with families who would be willing to volunteer some daycare – perhaps legal representation for those who are having trouble collecting child support, facilitating adoption, etc. — in short an expansion of help the pro-life movement already provides.

Umm, usually the one that calls “hate” is a troll. Haven’t seen a lot of talk about “hate” against the conservatives — we know it’s baseless blow-hard rhetoric. It’s pretty easy to find Democrats on YouTube that actually say they hate Republicans. And they won the election, so not sure what your point is other than to try to start a riot against Erick, “Turned me into a newt…” Erickson.

Key words: feelings, dislike. So really has to do with how you feel, not whether it is true or not, whether it is purposeful slander or not. Only that your feelings run your life. There are those that say Charles Manson is a conscience-less monster. Hateful? Maybe. True? Definitely. Could it hurt Mr. Manson’s feelings? Assuming he has some, yes. True, nonetheless.

Isn’t “emotive reasoning” an oxymoron?

What a dumb post.

A) you have no “free speech” here. It’s private property, and we reserve the right to turn away anyone we damn well please
B) the use of “hate” to describe the speech of site members is a tell.
C) no one in this thread said anything about “demonic”
D) Blam.

Seriously? I’ve seen “STFU, social conservatives” comments at least 10 times I the last week here at RS, and twice from my own FB friends.

No offense to any northerners on this site, but Romney was just too much of a damned Yankee. Very cold and aloof personality. Like Erick said, there needs to be a moratorium on anyone from the northeast getting a major party nomination. It only ends in tears.

Nice. I love it.

You are right, Look how fast and furious has faded and the loss of life across the border is almost as high as the murder rate in Chicago.

You’ve mastered cut and paste. Continuing to post the same crap over and over isn’t going to make it any better.

Exactly.

Exactly this. This was the worst year to run someone like Romney. There were way too many ordinary folks who had their savings wiped out, their houses devalued, their jobs or small businesses lost, and they were (rightly) looking for someone to blame.

Reason suggests that they’d blame Obama, since he presided over this fiscal disaster, but instead the Republican party handed him Romney on a golden platter. It was the simplest thing in the world to make Romney a scapegoat. And somehow we managed to nominate the guy who said he “likes firing people,” would “let Detroit go bankrupt,” doesn’t care about the “47%,” entered a dancing horse into the olympics, etc etc.

Because he was more “electable.”

Erick is right. They lost their chance to tell us who to nominate, or how to “moderate” our positions. There is Nothing wrong with our convictions, or our positions. Can we make sure people don’t go off into the weeds and explain social issues in the most inarticulate possible terms? Sure. But there is nothing wrong with the conservative values the Republican party stands for.

The problem was nominating someone like Romney, who stands for nothing, and believing the lie that he was more electable, and that all the SuperPAC money would solve everything. Money doesn’t buy elections. You need a candidate who believes in real conservative values, and can drive the conversation. Romney’s last debate as a “me-too” candidate demonstrated exactly the mealy-mouthed, weak, purposeless type of person he’s always been.

We nominate a pro-choice liberal Republican governor of Massachussetts who instituted the system Obamacare was based on, and we act surprised that he lost. And now the party elites tell us that Romney wasn’t liberal enough, and that’s why he lost. If they had their way we’d nominate a Democrat and still lost.

We need to get back to the basics. In 2008 and 2012 we compromised our integrity and values to nominate a candidate who was neither conservative nor electable. In 2016, let’s vote for conservative and then worry about electable.

No worries.

But apparently you support them winning elections.

Wow – thanks for THAT one too.

You ain’t buying my abortions or my contraceptives. Haven’t been party to any of the former and my spouse of 30 years is well into menopause. “One Nation, under God, indivisible” – choose any two.

As originally written “One Nation, INDIVISIBLE” is what you have taken from the nation.

You don’t know me Wilma. Your definition does not a party make.

I think a large part is that prudent, successful politicians do not sail into the wind if at all possible. Spends political capital with limited expectations for payout. Challenging an incumbent is sailing into the wind. Not sure if the GOP 2012 Primary was bloodier than usual or not.

As a conservative, I believe in small government. A small government does not get between a woman and her doctor in the private decision such as abortion. The government should not engage in forced pregnancy. Forced pregnancy is not a conservative value. Forcing a woman to give birth to the child of a rapist will only further traumatize her. And let us remember, rape is not about sex; it is about power. If the government forced women into becoming incubators for rapist children, the rape statistics would go through the roof. These sadistic animals would love to be able to make their victims suffer for the better part of a year.

A small government does not interfere in people’s private lives.

Democrats will put on the ticket a presidential candidate who wins primary and who gets most votes. Hillary ain’t dead yet and Andrew Cuomo is waiting. Biden is not out. Evan Bayh IN may have appeal in a general but not in a primary or caucus where the most Identity based voters decide.
The VP will be a quota by gender,, race, ethnicity, orientation, This team has a bench made of members known for their physical qualifications more than achievements. That is the formula that got Prof Warren her appointment at Harvard. The Dean said he was ‘under the gun to appoint more females and blacks’ mostly from student take over of offices and demos. The search settled on her but why is unclelar with so many others from which to pick. Not her scholarship. And she is not much more than a popular writer who has had her book reviewed and torn to shreds by a scholarly reviewer Harvard should have noticed.
I think her listings as a Native American at two previous universities was a way to get ‘two for one’ and promote her as a minority for years. She stole a positiont from a real Cherolkee they never sought, but Harvard did not look too closely. I think Harvard let her define herself as Cherokee and ignored Cherokees who say she is not one of them.
And that process is how the state parties and presidential candidates are chosen. in the Democratic party caucuses.
HILL or POLITICO reported on the incoming House members by race, sex/gender, orientation Women outnumber men in the incoming class. Merit alone and these others qualifications will determine their ticket. It is not as drastic as it seems since they all think alike by choice. All have same agenda to rely on government. Democrats have no need for innovation and creativity in candidates just good get out the vote abilties by consituencies.
VP Corey Booket NJ Mayor and contender for governor. Maybe Eliz Warren rookie Sen MA, Mayor LA are listed as possible for 2016. Gen Petraeus is off.

You don’t “get” the military. You keep the bases located in your neo confederacy, we keep the equipment. Union enlistees stay in the military, we drum out the southern boys. With them you can start your own military. Good luck funding that, since you guys hate paying taxes. Over three years, all the libs that want to can come out of the south and into the north. This of course will include most of your minorities, which I am sure you will love. Any cons that wish to could leave the union and head south in those same three years. We divide along the old lines of the confederacy with two exceptions…we keep Florida and Northern Va. as these are now liberal places. For this we throw in Oklahoma, Kansas and Missouri and west virginia. And please, southerners hate Lincoln, so don’t try to claim him now. He is Illinois and yankee all the way. We Unionists have wanted this for a long time, but if it will convince you to do it, we will let you think it is your idea.

Lincoln is a hero to us where I live and I live in the upper South. You are so bigoted and intolerant. Do you really believe we are racists and hate people of color? You may want to study the history of your own party, the KKK orginals (aka the Democrat Party). Additionally, Illinois in the mid-1800′s and the Illinois of today are miles apart. Poor Lincoln would not recognize his own home state. You forget that it was the so-called religious right (the people you despise) that spear-headed the abolitionist movement.

The military despises the Left, with a passion. The attacks on the VA, Tri-Care, and the shameful actions in Benghazi are just a few of the things that make the military one of the largest GOP voting blocks.

I do not wish for a divided nation. I want one that returns to our Founding principles and the Constitution, where hatred and bigotry such as you have spewed is reduced to a mere squawking minority.

Bull… We get every state that has a Republican governor, along with all of the structures, organizations, equipment, material possessions, wealth and natural resources located within their physical borders. Every state automatically becomes a right-to-work state.

Liberals/Progressives can have everything that’s left.

Every Liberal/Progressive who chooses to leave may do so, but they must leave empty handed. The welfare state in their new home will provide for their every want or need.

The current Social Conservatives are the modern-day Dixiecrats. The same fate will be befall them.

In the 1930s, the Democratic Party was comprised of a coalition of groups that did not share beliefs on social issues, but who otherwise
shared beliefs on interventionist economic philosophy. One group was comprised of regionally powerful Southerners segregationists, while the other
nationally powerful Northern liberals. Through a platform that tolerated
segregation, the Democrats had the political power to implement their
commonly held the economic goals, such as the New Deal. By contrast, at
the time, Republicans offered a policy of supporting civil rights,
deriving from the days of Lincoln and the Reconstruction.

By the end of World War II, segregation policies were no longer tenable
to a growing number of younger Americans, including returning soldiers
who had fought in integrated units. In order to ensure its political
survival, the Democratic party chose to abandon its coalition with the
segregationists, and to adopt the Republican Party’s policy of extending
civil rights in order to remove that as a source of distinction between
the two parties. After a brief dalliance with creating a failed third
party, disaffected Southerners ultimately abandoned segregation
themselves. Instead, they adopted a broader set of less
race-antagonistic causes, today branded as Social Conservatism, and
ultimately were wooed by the Southern Strategy into the Republican Party
based on new-found common belief in laissez-faire economic philosophy.

Since that time, the Republican Party has greatly benefited from the
political power of this coalition, enabling it to largely rollback the
New Deal through lower taxes, less regulation, and supply-side economic
policies. However, the price to pay for this coalition has come due. The
social policies favored by regionally powerful Social Conservatives are
increasingly no longer tenable among younger Americans on a national
basis. Like their Democratic counterparts several decades ago, the
Republican Party now faces the question as to whether this coalition
helps our hurts achieving their economic policy objectives going forward.

In the end, in order to
ensure its survival, the Republican Party will be forced to
abandon this coalition with the “Dixiecons”. Just as the Democratic
Party before it, the Republican Party will adopt the social policies of
its opposition in order to
remove this as a source of distinction between the two parties, so that
it may rebuild its brand with a rapidly changing electorate. Within 2
Presidential cycles, both Republicans and Democrats will support
what are currently considered liberal positions with regards to
abortion, immigration and gay rights.

The reality is that Social Conservatism will forever be a niche
political philosophy within an Enlightenment-based Constitutional
Republic. It will never vanish from American politics entirely, but nor
it will ever garner sufficient support to become a dominant force in and
of itself. The dominant political parties are principally based on
long-standing differences in economic philosophy. They will each
periodically caucus with Social Conservatives when it suits their
political needs, and abandon them when it doesn’t.

If you voted for Obama…you voted for all of us to pay for contraceptives and abortions…and you have to pay for it too. Oh…too old…think again…they stole (the Democrats) $716 BILLION from Medicare to fund this piece of crap.

Now about me taking indivisible from you. WRONG. I am not the divider…the idiot in the WH is…or haven’t you noticed his dividing along gender, social, financial, sexual…and you name it lines…THAT IS DIVISIBLE.

The Government owes you certain rights…they are in the Constitution…and birth control is not one of them. We want EQUAL RIGHTS for everyone…and right now…we don’t have that and that means DIVISIBLE. Affirmative Action is not equal…it is special treatment. It is not based on talent…it is based on race or gender…so…anything else you want to know.

Give’em room and the free run of the place. They will wear out their welcome fastest that way. We have been protecting the sensibilities of the naive for the last four years and all we get is a slightly slower decline. What is the saying, no pain no gain? We have protected the voters from the pain of what they did. The sooner they realize it hurts, the sooner they will pay attention to their hand that is in the fire.

Rove did a damn good job in 00, 02, and 04…

To the point where Democrats were calling themselves ‘fiscal conservatives’ in an effort to re-brand themselves via cloaking their opposition to the war in deficit terms…

The fact that Rove hasn’t played well in the new ‘Obama’ reality does not change this….

The government should not condone, let alone declare to be a right, the killing of children for the father’s crimes.

Kill the rapist, not the baby!

The hard-line anti-immigration crowd is downright un-American and should have been in the crosshairs back in 04.

I’m not talking about the ‘enforce the laws’ folks. I’m talking about the Pat Buchannan-following, ‘OMG! Browning of America!’ whining, end-all-immigration types…

BOOT! THEM! OUT!

The Federal government is involved in the abortion debate, because the US Supreme Court has to overturn Roe v Wade before we can return the issue to the states…
It doesn’t matter what view (other than abortion-is-a-fundimental-right) you have, all roads lead through the USSC.

If progressives can continue to garner overwhelming percentages of blacks and latinos in future elections, especially if some kind of amnesty is passed, I’m not sure conservatives can be ascendant. I hate to say that, but it seems a possible outcome to me.

I think you need to understand something…I AM A CONSERVATIVE…I DO NOT THINK ABORTION IS A RIGHT…nor does the Constitution…Roe v Wade be damned. So…I don’t have that opinion…but the less the Federal government is involved in ANYTHING the better it is for the people.

As fas as your remark about the USSC…I think it does take 2/3 of each house to overturn a law…unfortunately both houses are corrupt and without moral character.

A 3rd party insures defeat.

The Electoral College requires a 2-party system. Absent an instant switch-and-rename, in today’s climate, you will just split the non-liberal vote and ensure defeat.

So far all I see is a pack of dogs running with waging tongues dripping the blood of the collective ego of the right. Please, let’s get over who said what. This is childish talk. Let’s have a discussion about strategic policy in the Pacific or what we need to do moving forward to protect American lives. Let’s have a discussion to determine if the $500 million cut from the State Departments security played a roll in this as well. Or maybe we could have a discussion on the role of Turkey in the middle east and how the US should help them become the strategic partner in that region. Read “The Next 100 Years” by George Friedman so we can have an intelligent discussion regarding foreign policy.