Why current conservatism is NOT good for you.

They obviously did not want to preserve the Constitution on January 6. They attempted to block the constitutional process and then defended using violent force in their failed effort.

They demonstrated against the subversion of the Constitution, and Capital Hill was the perfect place to carry out such a demonstration.
 
They demonstrated against the subversion of the Constitution, and Capital Hill was the perfect place to carry out such a demonstration.

They were trying to subvert the Constitution. Congress was following constitutional procedures.

Capital Hill is a good place to carry out a demonstration but not for a violent attack that vandalized our Capitol and assaulted and injured 140 police officers.
 
They were trying to subvert the Constitution. Congress was following constitutional procedures.

Capital Hill is a good place to carry out a demonstration but not for a violent attack that vandalized our Capitol and assaulted and injured 140 police officers.

That was set up by the Revolution.....I thus give those who went into the Capital a pass. In any case that Capital belongs to the people, entering it to object to a very poorly run election is fine. As for the claims of significant violence and 140 officers being harmed that is a lie. It is those who protested who are being persecuted/harmed.
 
That was set up by the Revolution.....I thus give those who went into the Capital a pass. In any case that Capital belongs to the people, entering it to object to a very poorly run election is fine. As for the claims of significant violence and 140 officers being harmed that is a lie. It is those who protested who are being persecuted/harmed.

Totally fake news with 0 evidence.
 
probably not but every action has an equal but opposite re-action so starting with the Gore fueled hatefest against the opposition, it was inevitable.

translation: not being able to fault the OP, our MAGA Celticguy fabricates an accusation to deflect from that fact. Typical Trump tactic that has culminated in his current dilemma.
 
WOKE/Not WOKE True/Not True and Civilization/Dark Age are the cuts that matter now......not Left/Right or Liberal/Conservative.

You blather buzz words, Hawk....you can't logically or factually disprove or debunk what this man says. If you could, you would. So suck it up and deal.
 
Here are some simple, easily researched and verified FACTS that should convince even the most ardent MAGA/Trump/GOP supporter that the current version of conservatism does NOT bode well for Americans. Kudos to this guy:





You do realize that George Carlin was a comedian, right? :rofl2:
 
Is there really something called "conservatism" today?

Other than a few outlanders, the right is defined as Trumpism, and Trumpism is a far cry from classic conservatism, or even what conservatism was prior to Trump

IMHO, true conservatism started to die the second Ronnie Raygun took the oath of office.
 
Originally Posted by archives View Post
Is there really something called "conservatism" today?

Other than a few outlanders, the right is defined as Trumpism, and Trumpism is a far cry from classic conservatism, or even what conservatism was prior to Trump



Conservatives want to preserve the Constitution and Old America.....the radical Leftists want neo-marxism and the tyranny of the all powerful state.

It's not the "leftist" who are gerry-mandering in various states to increase GOP voting strength. It's not "leftist" states who fix it so that certain people stand in line for hours to vote, and move to keep even water from them. It's not the leftist who want drown our democratic gov't in a bath tub.

"Old America" kept women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, didn't recognize black folk as full human beings, had no uniformed work compensation, safety or hours for those in the private sector, etc., etc.

Sucks to be you, because the majority of Americans rejected this MAGA madness and will do so again in 2024.
 
Define "globalist"

Gets lame everytime we see another employ the term "globalists," it's like "deep state," and other abstractions that the users never define yet freely throw them around, kinda like "those people," "you know, those people"

He's on my ignore list....recently took him to task on another thread and he deteriorated into creating his own language along with his usual undocumented BS and rhetoric.
 
Which has been clear for years, but almost no one has updated.

This is not good.

When you stop circle jerking with that asshat, ask yourself this: who runs Wall St.? How do they vote? How do corporate heads vote? Who puts up the majority of PAC money in congress?
 
You are aware that conservatism principles include free trade, and how wouldn't corporations benefit from free trade? What major corporation isn't international? Even Trump's businesses are international

And "globalists misreresent the perceived benefits of globalized trade, accentuating alleged positives and denying obvious negatives" says nothing

You keep forgetting that MAGA asshats prefer their own definitions of words & reality...like scientologists.
 
Originally Posted by archives View Post
Here we go agian, "they," who the f*ck is "they," and don't say "globalists," "deep state," elites," "Revolution," etc., they are all the same as saying "those people," "you know, those people," and you deliver, "they"?


I am not difficult to follow.

We know....that's why Archives' got your number...and why we all know you're full of it.
 
Sure, as long as you don't have to explain the terms and generations you employ, same reason talk radio was successful, anyone could say what they wanted without having to define terms or answer questions

What generations does he employ? :palm:

Wtf does that even mean, anchovies?
 
You keep forgetting that MAGA asshats prefer their own definitions of words & reality...like scientologists.

So you say. How about some proof?

Wasn't I arguing about how leftists change the meaning of words every year so a new dictionary is necessary every year just yesterday?

How about fuck off with that. I'll use words in the classic manner in which they have been and you have zero authority to assign new definitions to words.

My main dictionary is World Book from 1958. I do have some older Webster's too.

If you want the real definition of words, I'm going to recommend this:

https://webstersdictionary1828.com/

An example of a definition:

https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/gay
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by archives View Post
Yet you can not define your terms.

You constantly employ generalizations that say nothing, as I've said, comparable to "those people," you know, "those people"



Feel free to move along, you are certainly not doing me any good.

Why don't you take your own advice? Clearly, you're just a low paid troll of little substance
 
No warrant was politicalized, and please, spare us the talk radio rhetoric. If you are referring to Pennsylvania, even the SCOTUS confirmed none of that happened, impeachment wasn't political, and I can't think of anyone who ever stacked the SCOTUS or abolished the electoral college, again, talk radio rhetoric

On the other hand though, actual examples, several from Conservative sources, and none of them even include attempting to stop Congress from executing its Constitutional responsibilities on January 6th

https://www.politico.com/magazine/s...unconstitutional-freedom-liberty-khan-214139/
https://www.theusconstitution.org/blog/president-trump-mocking-the-constitution/
https://www.cato.org/commentary/exit-survey-trumps-constitutional-misdeeds
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/02/five-trump-amendments-constitution/618097/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...failures-require-reckoning-column/5817963002/
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/po...onstitution/lROExwrjgyRDT6Qu9dm6jN/story.html
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-violated-constitution-separation-powers-three-times-1427253

:hand:
 
Back
Top