The purge of conservatives from the Republican party has begun.

[Cerberus]

Sorry, but I just don't agree. Using the military to crush a protest, whether it's a 1 man protest, an organized gaggle, or a rebellion, is the same sin, just different degrees of the same thing. If you want to disagree, that's fine, but I do not agree that taking up arms against "American people" requires taking up arms against all of them or even a large plurality.

You may need to go look up protest and rebellion. FAR from being the same. Protest is protected and has to retain some vestiges of peace. Rebellion is violence and not protected, in fact it's specifically addressed in our Constitution. Words have meanings and those meanings are vitally important.

Unfortunately mankind has to have at least some small vestiges of government, it is in our nature. If we have no law, and no way of inspiring people to respect it, we will always get anarchy, and anarchy is always followed by it's big evil brother tyrrany.

 

[downzero]

You may need to go look up protest and rebellion. FAR from being the same. Protest is protected and has to retain some vestiges of peace. Rebellion is violence and not protected, in fact it's specifically addressed in our Constitution. Words have meanings and those meanings are vitally important.

Unfortunately mankind has to have at least some small vestiges of government, it is in our nature. If we have no law, and no way of inspiring people to respect it, we will always get anarchy, and anarchy is always followed by it's big evil brother tyrrany.

Just doesn't follow that the President should use the Army to deal with it. Sorry, but I'm just not with you here, even if I agree with the basic premises involved, the beginning of the national government's power was right then and there.

It continued through the Civil War, then onto the Progressive Movement in the early 1900s, then FDR and the court packing, WW II, undeclared wars, the "Great society," Civil Rights Act of 1964, and on down to the modern era with the 1968, 1984, 1989, and 1994 attacks on gun rights, 9/11/patriot act/GWOT, and finally through financial regulation, too big to fail, and so-called health care reform.

We are where we're at because of the continued expansion of power, and that was the beginning point.

 

[Bapak2ja]

Perhaps now the conservatives will get serious about abandoning the GOP and forming a new conservative party that will actually defend the Constitution.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Perhaps now the conservatives will get serious about abandoning the GOD and forming a new conservative party that will actually defend the Constitution.

Conservatives maybe, the Republican party, never

 

[IndyDave1776]

Perhaps now the conservatives will get serious about abandoning the GOD and forming a new conservative party that will actually defend the Constitution.

Why do holding religious values and upholding the Constitution have to be mutually exclusive. Granted, some people who should be doing both forget which hat they are wearing sometimes, but this is like arguing that because some people can't walk and chew gum that chewing gum while walking should be illegal. After all, the majority of our founders were more religious than any of these people in Washington today and they wrote the thing.

 

[mrjarrell]

Why do holding religious values and upholding the Constitution have to be mutually exclusive. Granted, some people who should be doing both forget which hat they are wearing sometimes, but this is like arguing that because some people can't walk and chew gum that chewing gum while walking should be illegal. After all, the majority of our founders were more religious than any of these people in Washington today and they wrote the thing.

None of those founders wanted to legislate morality or impose their religious beliefs on the country. Today's evangelicals can't wait to do it. Instead of more freedom and liberty and equality before the law, they're content with less and making sure that other people are busy living their lives the way THEY want them to. The evangelicals have managed to drive a large segment of potential conservative and libertarian voters away, due to this. It's why the TEA Party is going to die. They forgot that fiscal responsibility, liberty and freedom were supposed to trump social issues. Governor Daniels told folks what needed to be done and they wouldn't listen to him. I have no doubt that's one of the primary reasons he didn't (and likely won't) run for president. We all have values we hold, but you don't need to impose or try to impose them on others.

 

[IndyDave1776]

None of those founders wanted to legislate morality or impose their religious beliefs on the country. Today's evangelicals can't wait to do it. Instead of more freedom and liberty and equality before the law, they're content with less and making sure that other people are busy living their lives the way THEY want them to. The evangelicals have managed to drive a large segment of potential conservative and libertarian voters away, due to this. It's why the TEA Party is going to die. They forgot that fiscal responsibility, liberty and freedom were supposed to trump social issues. Governor Daniels told folks what needed to be done and they wouldn't listen to him. I have no doubt that's one of the primary reasons he didn't (and likely won't) run for president. We all have values we hold, but you don't need to impose or try to impose them on others.

I never said anything about imposing them (as I indicated with my reference to some examples in circulation forgetting which hat they are wearing). My point is that the previous post seems to suggest that a viable conservative party had to be atheistic in nature which I see as being untrue. I agree about using government as a vehicle for imposing such values but that does not demand that a person be bereft of them.

 

[mrjarrell]

Well, as I read Bapak's post he made a typo. He meant to type g o p , not god.

 

[Bapak2ja]

Perhaps now the conservatives will get serious about abandoning the GOP and forming a new conservative party that will actually defend the Constitution.

Please note the correction: GOP not GOD. If ever there was a bad time to make a spelling error, that was it! What can I say?

 

[Bunnykid68]

Please note the correction: GOP not GOD. If ever there was a bad time to make a spelling error, that was it! What can I say?

God has a sense of humor

 

[IndyDave1776]

Please note the correction: GOP not GOD. If ever there was a bad time to make a spelling error, that was it! What can I say?

Don't feel bad. I was wondering why it was in all caps and it didn't cross my mind that it was a simply typo. You are on to something there. If the GOP leadership can't rediscover its conservative roots, we really do need to move on. Funny thing is that by definition, a conservative requires something to conserve. A Constitution-based government is a good start when looking for the commodity to conserve. It seems that the only thing the party cares about conserving is the jobs of its members who see winning elections as an end in itself.

If nothing else, you brought out some interesting discussion!

 

[hornadylnl]

Don't feel bad. I was wondering why it was in all caps and it didn't cross my mind that it was a simply typo. You are on to something there. If the GOP leadership can't rediscover its conservative roots, we really do need to move on. Funny thing is that by definition, a conservative requires something to conserve. A Constitution-based government is a good start when looking for the commodity to conserve. It seems that the only thing the party cares about conserving is the jobs of its members who see winning elections as an end in itself.

If nothing else, you brought out some interesting discussion!

Funny, several of us said these same things before the election and we were called Obama voters.

If everyone had voted Romney, it would all be puppy dogs and unicorns.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Funny, several of us said these same things before the election and we were called Obama voters.

If everyone had voted Romney, it would all be puppy dogs and unicorns.

I know. If you didn't get red, white and blue swirls in your eyes over Romney you were an Obama groupie. At least now that there is no such thing as an ABO lobby since it is done, maybe we can focus on finding some real candidates somewhere.

 

[Cerberus]

Just doesn't follow that the President should use the Army to deal with it. Sorry, but I'm just not with you here, even if I agree with the basic premises involved, the beginning of the national government's power was right then and there.

It continued through the Civil War, then onto the Progressive Movement in the early 1900s, then FDR and the court packing, WW II, undeclared wars, the "Great society," Civil Rights Act of 1964, and on down to the modern era with the 1968, 1984, 1989, and 1994 attacks on gun rights, 9/11/patriot act/GWOT, and finally through financial regulation, too big to fail, and so-called health care reform.

We are where we're at because of the continued expansion of power, and that was the beginning point.

You read into what you've been taught to read into it. The Whiskey Rebellion was not so drastic as many like to claim. There were no soldiers raiding rebels homes, no locking down of counties, simply a mere show which achieved the goals peacably. With state provided militia at that. All other methods had failed prior to that. When you have groups murdering and assaulting people that are lawfully going about their business, then you have a state of activity that can not be justified by anyone with a shred of actual decency. Murder and assault are illegal in every society and rightly so. Ending the Whiskey rebellion was conducted in strict accordance with the lawfully ratified Constitution, ratified by the States, and done with militia provided by several states. Not exactly the Feds being bullies here. The National governments power was not quite so solid until closer to Woodrow Wilson's time, despite what you wish the think.

 

[Bunnykid68]

I know. If you didn't get red, white and blue swirls in your eyes over Romney you were an Obama groupie. At least now that there is no such thing as an ABO lobby since it is done, maybe we can focus on finding some real candidates somewhere.

Don't hold your breath my brethren, they shall hoist another one worthy of running for Republican party and the masses will vote for him instead of the evil Democrat that MUST BE DEFEATED

 

[IndyDave1776]

Don't hold your breath my brethren, they shall hoist another one worthy of running for Republican party and the masses will vote for him instead of the evil Democrat that MUST BE DEFEATED

I know. I was just trying to indulge in a little wishful thinking. I wouldn't be surprised if they put up Bloomberg next time, rigged primary/convention and all.

 

[Bunnykid68]

You read into what you've been taught to read into it. The Whiskey Rebellion was not so drastic as many like to claim. There were no soldiers raiding rebels homes, no locking down of counties, simply a mere show which achieved the goals peacably. With state provided militia at that. All other methods had failed prior to that. When you have groups murdering and assaulting people that are lawfully going about their business, then you have a state of activity that can not be justified by anyone with a shred of actual decency. Murder and assault are illegal in every society and rightly so. Ending the Whiskey rebellion was conducted in strict accordance with the lawfully ratified Constitution, ratified by the States, and done with militia provided by several states. Not exactly the Feds being bullies here. The National governments power was not quite so solid until closer to Woodrow Wilson's time, despite what you wish the think.

Just because someone calls it murder does not mean that it was not a justified killing

 

[IndyDave1776]

Another noteworthy thing about the Whiskey Rebellion is that when Washington went out with the troops and caught up with those participating in the rebellion, he simply told them to calm down, go home, get on with life and called it even. Today the .gov slaughters people for far less.

 

[hornadylnl]

I know. I was just trying to indulge in a little wishful thinking. I wouldn't be surprised if they put up Bloomberg next time, rigged primary/convention and all.

Bloomberg/Boehner 2016!

 

[IndyDave1776]

Bloomberg/Boehner 2016!

Horn, are you trying to give me bad dreams tonight?