I'll drink to that!
Posted on 08/16/2013 5:44:13 AM PDT by cotton1706
Use the terms I have defined for the purposes of this discussion, please. This would be under the "Concession" definition. We all -- C Edmund, you, and I -- agree that this is unacceptable.
Point is, let us stay hewed to the definitions I have established for us to communicate better.
Mr. Judge LazAmataz. Is this akin to calling someone a 'drunk'?
This would require someone with the mental capacity to understand a few rather pedestrian concepts.
first, there is compromise of strategy and compromise of principles, and they are different.
second, the word nuance can be used in different contexts. You might say the essence itself is nuanced.
third, not everything is either black or white 100% of the time.
Fourth, one cannot keep ignoring three or four major foundational points made against him and retain any credibility.
I don’t think the subject at hand is capable of processing the above, and even if he were, big enough to admit it.
Obtuse ass. That is not the same and anyone above 43 IQ knows it.
Ok, you guys have made your point. You’d rather argue. LOL... I tried.
Laz, I appreciate your effort. But look at this thread. It is just like the last one I engaged him on. There can be no come to jesus here.
I laid out a dozen things that are common discussion topics. He ignored/dismissed them and went full on Alynski.
That speaks for itself. I’m done.
I'll drink to that!
Once again I don’t disagree with what you say. I agree also that what you say is true. The aforementioned are playing on the inside, on the lesser of two evils rule, but being pummeled by their own party machine. The few are doing the work of giants and holding to your point of view that building a third party is a nearly impossible task fit only for the demoralized.
The inevitable result is five patriots lose to the Republican machine guy, who then goes on to barely lose to the Socialist Party. The clock seems to have run out by now on this rinse and repeat cycle. What’s more is that the Democrat Party is largely relieved of smear duty when the Romney type GOP leadership and rainmakers do it for them.
We have lost any meaningful differentiation between the parties, which results in lethargy for any fight on the field. The Republicans are demonstrating they have the numbers and the money to ensconce lethargy, so why deny speaking for myself that there has been a coup? Only Obama these days fails to call a coup, a coup. :)
I think your analogy holds up pretty accurately in Prez elections, and only prez elections -but I am focused on a whole lot more than that. A third party might elect a President one day - but that’s not the same thing as being a real across the board party.
A third party elected a Minnesota governor in 98, and it didn’t do a thing to help out in any meaningful way, and that party is now gone with the wind. A third party got 19% of the vote for Prez in 92, but it’s not even a vapor anymore.
Across the board attraction would be helpful, that’s for certain. But, what attracts across the board is kind of circular, in that what it is attracting is proving distasteful.
Of course, then I go off and say I am starting to watch Rand Paul! His approach is equally attracting and repelling unlikely bedfellows, across-the-board, shaking up all sides of both parties.
You are probably more informed of advances being made inside the party than I. Hope springs eternal. I believe we are being entertained again with hope, over having a real fight against oppression. Cynical me. Thx.
Keep swinging at the really bad guys.
I’ll keep swinging....if you will!!!
This is true.
And it is an agenda. Any conservative in truth would be out there rallying the troops to find and vote for conservatives.
I'm starting to really hate the term conservative
, on the ideological sense my stance of strict Constitutionalism would result in a drastically different government and there's the perfectly valid definition of keeping things the same
that can be applied to the word. I don't want things the same: I want more Truth, I want more Justice, I want more Liberty.
One could also argue that the Spirit of Laziness is strongly correlated with conservative
— because look at how an actual activity (the TEA Party) was and is such a aberration.
These guys totally ignore the words of the founders saying EXPLICITLY not to vote for things we know are wrong.
And they ignore that voting for the lesser of two evils
is still voting for evil.
I can get behind someone I don't perfectly agree with, so it's not a purity
issue.
The purity thing is another of the moderate cop outs to avoid reality. For all the accusations I get hit with (a lot) about being a purist, I’m perfectly fine with Reagan’s 80 percent.
And Romney couldn’t crack 50 with a tailwind. If he broke 20 in all seriousness I’d be floored.
So there it is. You have a bunch of people who to this day defend and scream at us because we refused to go all in on a guy that can’t even produce a majority of conservative examples in his record.
On the ‘conservative moniker, I have to agree. The moderate/leftists pretty much rendered it meaningless anyway. It’s just a fashion statement for a lot of people nowdays as they shre as hell don’t walk the talk. See my post history yesterday for a couple stunning examples by ‘name’ freepers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.