Contrary to published reports, William F. Buckley is very much alive and well.
Posted on 02/08/2017 11:53:10 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Which GOP do you belong to? That's a question every Republican has been pondering since Donald Trump commandeered the party and won the White House.
There is, first, the old Grand Old Party — the party of Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, and an array of conservative movement activists, think tank staffers, journalists, and lobbyists. This party favors lower taxes (especially on the wealthy), less regulation, and smaller government, except when it comes to military spending, which it aims to increase to maintain America's position of global dominance and role as "leader of the free world."
Then there are the Trumpists — populist and nationalist Republicans (like White House senior counselor Stephen Bannon) who blend a mania for cutting taxes and government programs with an enthusiasm for trade tariffs, border walls, and immigration bans from majority-Muslim countries. This GOP also promises to increase defense spending, but not to contribute to the leadership of anything. It advocates putting "America first," by which it means that the United States should do whatever it wants anywhere it wants, including, perhaps, "taking the oil" from Iraq, backing away from our commitments to NATO, and turning a blind eye to Vladimir Putin's aggression in Eastern Europe....
(Excerpt) Read more at theweek.com ...
No, I am a natural born citizen, I don’t have a Canadian birth certificate.
People born outside the country have top have a CRBA to be recognized as US citizens.
When did Cruz get his?
Canadians do not automatically get US citizenship.
If they have a claim because of a parent, they must have a CRBA to be recognized as a citizen.
- The officials won't call a penalty.Guess what? You're going to lose almost every time.- You refuse to hold because it's against the rules.
But we don't. The Left has no rules and we have many.
Conservatism and Constitutionalism has had ZERO major victories in a Century. And your're still advocating it?
If Conservatives can't keep men in dresses out of little girls' bathrooms, they've Conserved nothing.
If the Constitutionalists can't successfully counter-argue a right to gay marriage in the Constitution, they are irrelevant.
Example:
The Left has brought in millions of Muslims and there are places in the US now that are quite literally "not American" anymore. They resemble the Middle East.
There are huge mosques with the Call to Prayer booming through the streets. Women wearing burkas. Swarthy men with beards. Filthy streets.
Heard of Dearborn, Michigan?
According the the Constitution, that is perfectly fine. First Amendment, Freedom of Religion, right?
That's just ONE example of how the Constitutionalists are completely hamstrung by their unrealistic thinking.
The new Right, Alt Right, Trumpists, Nationalists, Populists, whatever you want to call them, say.....
NO!
Burn down the mosques, send these people BACK!
Again, I understand your thoughts. In a perfect world, we would have what you want. But the demographics in the country are not the same as they were in the early 1800s when courtly gentlemen had civil debates about the Constitution.
Identity politics have arrived. Wait 20 years. The white liberals in California will be voting Republican.
I'm not advocating it, I'm just predicting it.
You're playing football and the other team is holding on every play. - The officials won't call a penalty. - You refuse to hold because it's against the rules. Guess what? You're going to lose almost every time.
Great example. I also have a football example, but yours is fine!
Do I take it, then, that you’re perfectly fine with violating the Constitution if it suits your policy objectives? Because that’s not a conservative position.
Yes, I'm fine with violating the Constitution if it means Western Civilization is saved.
I posted those pictures on this thread for a reason. Look at them carefully and understand that the Constitution isn't a magical solution that will save the nation or our beautiful civilization.
Please explain how to expel Islam from American without violating the First Ammendment.
Oh, I and many others, no longer consider ourselves "Conservative."
Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney, Bill Kristol, George Bush. National Review. All "Conservative."
A person can be on the "Right" and not be a "Conservative."
Conservative means losing. Over and over. No victories in decades. Who in their right mind would stay on a team like that?
Your error is that you are blaming the Constitution & the Constitutionalists for the dishonest & dishonorable antics of those who deliberately ignore the Constitution and pursue Leftist philosophical pursuits. The policies you deride fly in the face of the explicit language of the Constitution, starting with the clear statement of Constitutional purpose in the Preamble.
The fact that many, who verbally prance around proclaiming themselves "Conservative," especially since Reagan made the term popular again, are not in fact Conservative; are not in fact even pro-American, is no valid argument. There have always been poseurs, opportunists, false pundits with ulterior purpose. The American version of these parasitical faux conservatives have all the "credibility," all of the absurdity of the Courtiers in Andersen's The Emperor's New Clothes. You are applying terms to them, which they simply do not deserve, while denying those of us, whom the terms correctly describe, the correct description that we deserve.
There is absolutely no way that anyone, who understands simple English, can claim Constitutional justification for the deliberate betrayal of the interests of the rooted American population, by the contemporary Left.
See my reply #47, above.
I read that piece last night and agree.
All I'm doing is pointing out that a slavish devotion to the Constitution bordering on religious obsession is NOT going to save America.
Far from it.
Please explain how to purge Islam from America without violating the 1st Amendment.
Please explain how to get the corrupt House and Senate to vote themselves out of office (term limits.)
I'm not advocating we trash the Constitution. All I'm saying is that there are some major flaws with it.
I know, I know. The Federalist Papers, Intent, etc etc.
It's NOT in there.
Western Civilization is more important to me and most Americans than the Constitution.
Time to stop being slaves to a document and a failed Pollyannish non-Ideology (Conservatism) and start fighting and WINNING for our nation.
I think you are focusing on particular approaches to problems created by the Academic/Media complex and the effort to indoctrinate the susceptible, and intimidate those less susceptible, rather than considering practical & completely Constitutional approaches to the present legal chaos. I will try to return to this tomorrow—with suggestions;—but I need to run some errands now.
How DARE THEM lump Ronald Reagan in with these other ASSHATS !!! GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!
Your error is that you are blaming the Constitution & the Constitutionalists for the dishonest & dishonorable antics of those who deliberately ignore the Constitution and pursue Leftist philosophical pursuits.
I'm not blaming them for the Left's antics, I'm blaming them for quite literally not having the capacity, ideology, or mindset to stand up to, defend against, and beat the Left.
History has VERY CLEARLY proven this. The Left has won victory after victory for a Century.
I agree with the Preamble and "who" the Constitution was written for. But it's still irrelevant with respect to traditional "Conservatism."
Traditional "Conservatism" believes in FREEDOM OF RELIGION and All Men are Created Equal.
Foreign born Muslims with an average IQ below 80 and brutally primitive cultures voting by the millions kinda destroys the good intentions the good ol' Conservatives had for worshiping the Constitution, eh.
The same can be said for tens of millions of foreign born South Americans and Mexicans with brutally primitive cultures with an average IQ below 90 voting by the tens of millions.
The Preamble, and the Constitution itself, will stop being irrelevant when the Right adopts the policy of protecting the "who" the Constitution was written for. (Which it will. Identity Politics)
The FACT is that the non-Ideology of "Conservatism" and a slavish devotion to the Constitution have LOST LOST LOST LOST for 100 years.
They will continue to LOSE LOSE LOSE LOSE.
What I'm saying isn't theoretical. It's proven history. I live in the real world.
Exactly!
The Democrats are “heavy” progressives. The Establishment Republicans are mostly “light” progressives. One cannot be a progressive and a conservative, let alone a constitutionalist.
What 'constitutionalists'? Shirely, you are NOT referencing that Harvard Law School grad, ineligible Ted Cruz?
Get this, some of US know exactly what the Constitutional requirement to hold the office of US president meant from the 'original intent'. AND so long as we are living in these flesh bodies, we intend on keeping that 'original intent'. In spite of the spineless, and mindless so called 'constitutionalists' who say one thing and do the opposite.
And for the 'snobs' in the law business, 'original intent' did NOT give power or authority for Congress or some Federal jock, I mean judge to change the meaning of 'natural born' US citizenship. DEAL with it.
Contrary to published reports, William F. Buckley is very much alive and well.
Traditional Conservatism believes in the continuity of the cultural achievements & institutions of the particular societies represented by the traditional Conservatives being defined. American Conservatives believe in freedom of religion; Conservatives in many other societies do not. Without a developing culture of mutual respect, despite doctrinal differences among the Colonial peoples who constituted the original States, we would never have Federated. So you are completely correct as to the American context.
On the other hand, "All men are created equal," as usesd in the recitation of the compact theory of Government in the Declaration of Independence, has been totally--and probably deliberately--misconstrued by those embracing egalitarian nonsense--certainly not Conservative in any sense. It never meant anything but as a refutation of the "Divine Right of Kings." Equality at creation, is very far from equality in intelligence, skill, virtue, beauty or any other quality. Equality as an abstract is one thing. Actual equality does not and never has existed in the biological or botanical world.
Far from accepting the notion of equality in condition among us, as a goal, American traditionalists & conservatives have always favored the aspirations of the individual to excel, to rise above the crowd; have always championed the right of the individual who excels, to the fruits of his own labor; to the right of the high achieving family to pass on their achievements to their posterity, down through the generations.
For a discussion of the actual thrust of The Declaration Of Independence, check out the link.
For a discussion of American Conservative positions, on both foreign & domestic issues; on both economic & social, ethnic & cultural aspects, check out the Conservative Debate Handbook.
Where we differ, I suspect, is that you are willing to let egalitarian/collectivists & totalitarian humanist internationalists, claim a Conservatism they simply do not have, in order to peddle their tainted wares.
George W. Bush was never an American Conservative. The Founders of America may have welcomed immigration--to help settle the vast frontier; but it was an immigration of like spirited, able & adventurous stock with kindred values. Jefferson, you will perhaps remember, justified the purchase of French Louisiana, to create a great buffer between the Anglo & Hispanic world. The Clinton/Bush/Obama immigration policy--an extension of the ethnic betrayal involved in what Teddy Kennedy pushed through Congress in 1965, would have been absolute anathema to the Founders.
Do not let the faux conservatives, whether poseurs, neocons or party hacks, make you too skeptical to recognize that we can win on the issues, if we simply understand them, and develop approaches completely consistent with the realities of human interaction & American history.
You might check out my #57 on this thread.
This thread proves that there are some among us who have no principles except blind loyalty to the leader.
“[Is] rapid population [growth] by as great importations of foreigners as possible... founded in good policy?...
They will bring with them the principles of the governments they leave, imbibed in their early youth; or, if able to throw them off, it will be in exchange for an unbounded licentiousness, passing, as is usual, from one extreme to another. It would be a miracle were they to stop precisely at the point of temperate liberty.
These principles, with their language, they will transmit to their children. In proportion to their number, they will share with us the legislation. They will infuse into it their spirit, warp and bias its direction, and render it a heterogeneous, incoherent, distracted mass...
If they come of themselves, they are entitled to all the rights of citizenship: but I doubt the expediency of inviting them by extraordinary encouragements.”
—Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.VIII, 1782. ME 2:118
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.