May 18th, 2016

Reflections on the primaries and the 2016 election

Hey—haven’t I reflected on the primaries enough?

Perhaps.

But I’m going to reflect a bit more. After all, since Indiana, I’ve barely talked about them at all, and they’re still going on.

In Oregon yesterday, the only man left standing in the GOP race won about 67% of the vote (as of this writing), but the size of the vote for two candidates who have already suspended their campaigns—Cruz at 16.7 and Kasich at 16.4, representing the conservative and moderate wings of the party—shows the lack of acceptance of Trump among many voters, despite the GOP regulars slowly coalescing around him as nominee.

One thing I’m very grateful for at this point is that I don’t have to suffer through any more of those suspenseful primaries, where I fear a Trump victory and hope for one of his rivals (a whole succession of them over time) to win, only to see those hopes dashed. Quite early in the primary season, and certainly by Super Tuesday, I was pessimistic after seeing the continuing phenomenon of Trump victories (mostly with about a third of the vote), particularly when the field was way too big and I suspected if it narrowed down soon enough there would be someone to stop him. My frustration built and built until I wanted to shriek to most of them to DROP OUT and stop playing this game of Chicken.

But Chicken it was, for way too long. And we’ll never know what, if anything, might have been different if a great many had dropped out a long time ago. Now we have the surreal experience of seeing Donald Trump edging very close to the magic number of 1273 which he will almost certainly attain, and then he will indeed be the 2016 presidential nominee of the Republican Party. This has certainly been the most “interesting” primary season of my entire life, and I’ve seen quite a few.

Its “interesting” quality is not limited, however, to the GOP side, although that’s the one I’ve been covering most diligently. I’ve assumed for a long long time that Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee, because that party’s system is very different from the way the Republicans go about these things. For the most part, proportional primaries rather than winner-take-all, plus those super-delegates, put the party much more firmly in control than the shell-shocked and clueless GOP has been this year.

But despite all that, the Democratic Party’s firm hold on things looks almost as wobbly as the Republicans’. This speaks of a phenomenon that transcends parties and is a sign of the times and the voters. Call it the Howard Beale electorate, very very angry and fed up with everything. We know what that has meant for the Republicans. For the Democrats, it means the surprising strength of socialist Bernie Sanders, who last night won Oregon and forced a photo finish in Kentucky.

It may not end up mattering; it’s almost certain Clinton will be the nominee. But it indicates the depth of the trouble in the Democratic Party, as well. Have you noticed, too, how every single candidate—probable nominees Trump and Clinton, and Democratic challengers Sanders and even Biden—are rather long in the tooth for presidential contenders? To me, that signifies an exhaustion in each party. The GOP had plenty of younguns, and many of us thought one of these fresh young faces would get the nod, but they didn’t. And there’s nary a fresh young face in sight for the Democrats, at least not at the moment.

Despite the pending coronation of Hillary, the discord among the Democrats is very very real:

Sanders showed no intention of dialing back his fight against Clinton or urging his supporters to fall in line. His spokesman said Sanders is considering seeking a recount in Kentucky, where Clinton was clinging to a lead of a half percentage point.

“We are in until the last ballot is cast,” Sanders told supporters at a rally in Carson, California, saying he believes he can win the June 7 primary in the nation’s most populous state. “We have the possibility — it will be a steep climb, I recognize that — but we have the possibility of going to Philadelphia with the majority of the pledged delegates,” Sanders said of the July nominating convention. He said in early general election poll match-ups he does “much better against Trump” than Clinton…

…Some Sanders backers threw chairs and shouted down speakers during the [Nevada] convention, at which Clinton was awarded a majority of delegates, in a dispute over rules. The chairwoman of the Nevada Democratic Party was subjected to threatening messages on her voicemail…

Sanders responded with a statement saying that Democratic leaders must “understand that the political world is changing and that millions of Americans are outraged” at the political and economic establishment…

Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz told CNN on Tuesday night that Sanders’ response “added more fuel to the fire.”

The Nevada state Democratic Party said in a statement that the Sanders campaign was being “dishonest about what happened Saturday and is failing to adequately denounce the threats of violence of his supporters.”

“We believe, unfortunately, that the tactics and behavior on display here in Nevada are harbingers of things to come as Democrats gather in Philadelphia in July for our National Convention,” the state party’s lawyer wrote in a formal complaint to the Democratic National Committee.

What do they expect from socialists? Just as the alt-right wants to take over the GOP, the ultra-left sees its opportunity in the Democratic Party. They are like parasites seeing their chance to take over a weakened host, and both activist groups aren’t going to play by the usual rules.

It is indeed ironic that, just as Sanders suggests, he does better than Clinton in polls that match each one against Trump. And yet Sanders will almost certainly not be the Democratic nominee. Likewise, way back when, Rubio and several other GOP candidates did consistently better against Clinton than Trump did in polls taken before Trump had clinched the deal. This is another irony of this season—the eventual nominees that will be pitted against each other, Trump vs. Clinton, have consistently polled weaker against each other then many of the other contenders in their parties.

It’s only May and there are six more months to go before the election. Can you believe it? It seems to have been going on for so very long already. A lot—a lot—can change in those six months. The more Clinton weakens, the more Trump will rise.

For me, the election is likely to be somewhat anti-climatic, because I cannot rejoice at the victory of either candidate, and one of them will win. I keep trying to imagine how I’d feel at a Clinton victory (dreadful) and how I’d feel at a Trump victory (dreadful, but perhaps a mite less dreadful?). It’s that “mite less” that could get me to actually vote for him, although I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t be able to make a decision until I’m standing in that voting booth holding my barf bag in my hand.

110 Responses to “Reflections on the primaries and the 2016 election”

  1. liz Says:

    The age factor of the candidates means that the VP selection will be important. I would hope that Trump selects a conservative partner to draw that part of the GOP back into the voting booth.

    Likewise, if Hillary selects a more socialist partner, then regardless of Trump’s selection, I’ll be voting for him since Hillary’s legal and health issues are significant.

    Voting for Congress will also be very important. And if the two parties continue to have greater extremes, will this create an opportunity to get a successful “moderate/center” party to evolve?

  2. Cap'n Rusty Says:

    “[B]oth activist groups aren’t going to play by the usual rules.”

    History has shown, in bloody fashion, that when the makers of “the usual rules” stack them in their own favor, blatantly and for too long, challengers stop playing by them.

    “War is when the government tells you who the enemy is. Revolution is when you figure it out for yourself.”

  3. Ymarsakar Says:

    The problem is that people underestimated Democrats. They did the same thing in 1830 and then look what happened to the country.

  4. Tom Says:

    If there was ever a year for a successful third party run…

  5. Surellin Says:

    My wife (who leans Democrat) and I have agreed both to vote for the Libertarian candidate this year. I think I saw my attitude reflected perfectly in a picture of Trump and Hillary with the caption, “Go home, America. You’re drunk”.

  6. David Aitken Says:

    One way to deal with this kind of mess in the future would be to switch to Approval Voting, where voters can cast one vote for all of the candidates they like. For example, if you dislike Trump and prefer Cruz, Rubio, Carson, or Fiorina, you could cast one vote for each of those 4 candidates. The candidate with the most votes wins.

  7. Nick Says:

    Surellin – 🙂

  8. Mac Says:

    One small ray of personal light in this for me is that my state is certain to go Republican so I have no conscience-wrestling to do. I may vote for the Libertarian candidate as a statement.

  9. Artfldgr Says:

    “I told them they weren’t gonna get anything negative out of me about Donald Trump, and they weren’t really happy about that.” In case you had any doubt whatsoever, let’s just lay it out: The New York Times is not just a journalistic institution that leans left in its worldview. It’s a left-wing propaganda arm, and from the moment it sets out to write a story, it is looking not to learn the truth, but to assemble information and/or misinformation (whatever works) that appears to support the Times’s preferred narrative

    This is coming out more and more thanks to who?

  10. Daniel in Brookline Says:

    Neo: you might just want to take one of these with you:

    http://kellysairsicknessbags.com/bag_images/7531.jpg

    It’ll remind you, not just of whom you’re voting against, but why. (Well, one of the reasons why…)

  11. Artfldgr Says:

    https://pjmedia.com/diaryofamadvoter/2016/05/10/democrats-have-the-problem/?singlepage=true
    BY ROGER L SIMON

    The latest “betrayal” is that Trump admitted his tax plan was negotiable Imagine that—a tax plan being negotiated between the administration and Congress! Never heard of that before…. Never mind that the Trump plan, even negotiated, would be considerably lower than just about any on offer and well within the parameters of conventional GOP proposals.

    -=-=-=-=-

    the Democrats are still fighting, their internal enmity growing as Comrade Bernie wins primary after primary, sometimes by large majorities, and Lady Hillary clings to her super delegates like a three-year-old to a blanket….. According to West Virginia exit polls, a full third of Democratic primary voters are ready to defect to Trump.

    -=-=-=-=-

    It is the Democrats, not the Republicans, that have the problem, but you wouldn’t know it if you watched, say, The Kelly File or had your Internet perpetually wired to National Review or The Weekly Standard, where the writing is as elegant as the thinking, these days, is often fuzzy. The Democrats are fighting a real war of ideas, disreputable though those ideas may be, while the Republicans fight a status war among themselves, a battle over control, not, except in the margins, over ideology.

    Am I wrong? Remind me again where Trump, at least currently, is not a conservative?
    Taxes, check.
    Deficit, check.
    Immigration, check.
    Sanctuary cities, check.
    Strong defense, check.
    Supreme Court, check.
    Veterans, check.
    Common core, check.
    Iran deal, check. Israel, check.
    Healthcare, check.
    Pro-life, check….
    Oh, yes, Planned Parenthood.

    But…but…but… he has those whacky ideas on NATO and nuclear weapons and trade.

    ============================

    The people are not ideologues, they are shoppers.
    only the less than 20% of super political activists and such are idelogues, or think that things should be doctrainaire… so most of the arguments are completely silly, as people, the common people, just vote for the product with the things they want or like…
    and in THIS country, they have always done that… which is why lying is so fashionable on the left, without it, they cant create the false image of a package common people would want. they have to fire up the base, protest, lie about things and more. there is no other way to package a turd as the solution to your life. and those that get sucked into that paying attention too much to their commentary, their purity statements, and more… end up missing the picture. and are very easy to con by the elite, as they “prove” their chops by sacrificing a few items that dont really matter to them in the long run, and during the dog and poney show, the real issues are ignored, or lied about
    -artfldgr

  12. Artfldgr Says:

    Anyone realize that we now live in a country where no shirt, no shoes, is a reason to forbid entry and service… while artists are compelled to have to paint or draw images of men having sex with men or suffer and end to their lives and face homelessness.

    a long while ago i explained that there are two ways to wield power… to do right by people and so, they will like you, and you do not FEEL it… or the socialist way, to pick issues that allow you to impose a unwanted thing on the majority, and then see how helpless they are to have what they want in the face of your power.

    the first is what people like washington wanted, the second is what sociopathic sadists want, as to them, power without feeling it or showing it exists, is not worth having.

  13. Kimo Says:

    Neo… just a note from Oregon:
    The vote is Oregon is a mail in packet for primaries and for the general election. In this case, we had a timing problem in that the packets arrived a week or more before Cruz and Kasich (sp?) dropped out. You had a lot of votes cast prior to the date that Trump was the only choice on the ballot.

  14. Oldflyer Says:

    Bill Katz at urgentagenda.com remarked that the rest of the Democratic race, and convention, could get really messy, dangerous even. He points out that the ideological core of Bernie’s support are remnants from the crowd who wanted the U.S. to lose in Vietnam, and did whatever they could to bring that about. Then, there is added the energetic, leftist indoctrinated, youth. He does not think that they will go quietly.

  15. DirtyJobsGuy Says:

    The model of this is anytime people look to a “strongman” to resolve what they perceive as paralysis. This can be the guy who can work across the aisle (Kasich type) or a blowhard (Trump). They don’t see the paralysis as the result of their votes in the past and their unwillingness to face hard facts.

    Structurally, term limits for house, senate and supreme court justices would help a lot, but education and changes in popular culture are important also. In England, Queen Victoria’s successful reign coincided with a move back to religion and conventional morals after the Georgian excesses.

  16. GRA Says:

    Oldflyer say, “He [Bill Katz] points out that the ideological core of Bernie’s support are remnants from the crowd who wanted the U.S. to lose in Vietnam, and did whatever they could to bring that about. ”

    Those people? Good grief.

  17. Artfldgr Says:

    Obama’s Gift of Immunity to Trump
    BY VICTOR DAVIS HANSON
    https://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/obamas-gift-to-trump/

    he says many of the things i would not have room to say (and of course, can say it better and shorter than i given my writing skills are not my best skills)

    and similarly:
    How Trump Could Destroy Hillary Clinton In The Debates
    http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/16/how-trump-could-destroy-hillary-clinton-in-the-debates/

    both go together, and explain things the way I see them and others dont.

    example: ragging that trump did not know enough about geopolitics of nuclear arms… while our current president thought there were 57 states…

    etc. etc. etc…..

  18. KLSmith Says:

    Maybe there is a difference between the far left and the ultra left. I think the only difference is how “out” they feel they should be about their agenda. Otherwise, the left already owns the Dem party.

  19. expat Says:

    I wonder what will come of the meeting with Kissinger today.
    Wouldn’t voting for him be a bit easier if he would find a plastic surgeon to put a zipper in his mouth and give him some Botox so he would stop making faces? I just can’t stand listening to or looking at him.

  20. Brian Swisher Says:

    Kimo:

    I voted for Cruz on my Oregon ballot after he dropped out of the race. I won’t vote for Trump under any circumstances.

  21. Sam L. Says:

    Brian, that’s one less vote Hill or Bern will need.

    Neo, I keep reading of the alt-right, but I don’t know what it is. Could you enlighten me on this?

  22. Geoffrey Britain Says:

    “History has shown, in bloody fashion, that when the makers of “the usual rules” stack them in their own favor, blatantly and for too long, challengers stop playing by them.

    “War is when the government tells you who the enemy is. Revolution is when you figure it out for yourself.” Capt Rusty

    I would add that the greater the rules offend, the quicker that support for the ‘challengers’ grows.

    If, “Revolution is when you figure it out for yourself” then would not a successful revolution result in the revolutionaries effectively becoming the government. And would they not then tell us “who the enemy is”?…

  23. Brian Swisher Says:

    Sam L:

    As I said before, Oregon isn’t going to break for a Republican in my lifetime, so I have that dubious luxury. Were I in a state where my vote might mean something, I’d have more of Neo’s dilemma.

  24. junior Says:

    California’s also not going to go Republican anytime soon. Which means that for the first time ever, I can breathe a sigh of relief that who I vote for won’t matter.

  25. roc scssrs Says:

    Constitutional conservatism just doesn’t appeal to very many people today. Ronnie Reagan started a thirty-year run where we had at least some purchase on the levers of power. That’s over now. The principles will remain the same, but as for being a political force– that’s over now and might be for a long time. I feel like a Federalist, or a Whig, or an old British Liberal– ain’t nobody listening to us.

  26. physicsguy Says:

    Trump released a list of 11 possible replacements for Scalia today…. anyone familiar with any of them?

    I’m ready to vote for Trump.. I just can’t stomach a HRC presidency. I’ll take my chances with Trump.

  27. Bill Says:

    “example: ragging that trump did not know enough about geopolitics of nuclear arms… while our current president thought there were 57 states…”

    I’m not and have never been an Obama supporter, but even I know that people mis-speak now and then and the 57 states thing is something a person might say in the midst of a grueling campaign.

    Does anyone really believe Obama doesn’t know how many states there are?

    I’m glad you are comfortable with Trump’s abysmal ignorance of foreign policy and his loose-cannon rhetoric. I’ll be voting for someone who won’t 3am-tweet us into DEFCON 5.

  28. Ann Says:

    Trump released a list of 11 possible replacements for Scalia today…. anyone familiar with any of them?

    John Yoo at National Review says this about them:

    I am thrilled by this list. But that being said, I cannot trust Trump to keep his word. He has already flip-flopped on so many issues, before, during, and after the primary campaign. How do we know he would not start wheeling and dealing on judicial appointments if he were to win the Oval Office?

  29. KLSmith Says:

    Bill: i bet we’d all be surprised by how much the ex-stoner doesn’t know. he was sold to the american public just like a happy meal. and for the record, i doubt he’s a good father; unless being a good father means that every nice weekend you head to the golf course.

  30. Ymarsakar Says:

    Americans should vote their conscience. While the State allows them one still, at least.

    David Aitken Says:
    May 18th, 2016 at 10:18 am

    Serious reforms like the one from Aitken are needed, but the Left will destroy any attempts at reform, just as they sabotaged and destroyed the Tea Party’s logistics. You can’t fight DC if all your funds are frozen by the IRS and the SWAT teams.

    Several systems created in Europe, such as the pass down vote, seem to be much better. Assuming the computer system is made by the same ones who make credit card fraud protections.

  31. Tom Says:

    Bill,

    “I’m glad you are comfortable with Trump’s abysmal ignorance of foreign policy and his loose-cannon rhetoric. I’ll be voting for someone who won’t 3am-tweet us into DEFCON 5.”

    AMEN BRUTHA!!!!!!! PREACH IT!!!!

  32. Ymarsakar Says:

    So if it happens to be Sanders vs Trump, what will people do then?

    At least Civil War II, continued from Civil War I for about similar reasons, will keep on going down the predicted path. 1000 American factions all killing each other. At least that way, somebody will kill the ones that deserve it.

  33. parker Says:

    Ann,

    I saw the list of potenial SCOTUS nominees, and agree it is written on toilet paper.

  34. Oldflyer Says:

    Apropos of very little–except to me perhaps–I could not help noting during FNC’s breathless coverage of Trump’s arrival and departure from Kissinger’s abode, the number of security men surrounding him (and they looked a lot like the taxpayer funded type); the huge SUVs in the very large motorcade; and the fact that each vehicle had red & blue flashing lights (presumably to force taxpaying traffic from their path).

    Good grief, all of this when he is just a Presidential Wannabe. Here, I had hoped that the ostentatious flaunting had peaked with Obama.

    The notion of the Imperial Presidency may be extended in every way even beyond current manifestations. (And yes I am sure HNC would be as bad, or worse.)

    On another subject. News breaking that Romney is no longer recruiting candidates for a third party. Aah, well.

  35. blert Says:

    It’s with great relief that my vote does not count.

    I’m in a hopelessly Democrat state.

    Oldflyer…

    He’s the nominee to be — and he’s getting death threats in a stream.

  36. blert Says:

    Bill Says:
    May 18th, 2016 at 4:50 pm

    “example: ragging that trump did not know enough about geopolitics of nuclear arms… while our current president thought there were 57 states…”

    I’m not and have never been an Obama supporter, but even I know that people mis-speak now and then and the 57 states thing is something a person might say in the midst of a grueling campaign.

    &&&

    Then you don’t get it.

    There are 57 ISLAMIC states.

    This is pounded into the head of EVERY Muslim schoolchild…

    Like Barry Soetoro in Indonesia — where he was indoctrinated by a Wahabbist imam — and where he picked up his Saudi accented Arabic fluency.

    His flub revealed were his core thinking sprang from.

    His inner child is still back in Indonesia — which was a VERY traumatic childhood, indeed.

    It was SO BAD that Barry refers to his experiences in THE THIRD PERSON.

    Yikes.

    Any psych would tell you that such a tic is telling.

  37. blert Says:

    Tom Says:
    May 18th, 2016 at 5:56 pm

    Bill,

    “I’m glad you are comfortable with Trump’s abysmal ignorance of foreign policy and his loose-cannon rhetoric. I’ll be voting for someone who won’t 3am-tweet us into DEFCON 5.”

    &&&

    That’s cute.

    DEFCON 5 == complete peace … no prospective threats on the horizon.

    DEFCON2 == Extreme alert

    DEFCON1== Missiles away.

    And here you’re telling us that Trump is Dumpf.

  38. blert Says:

    KLSmith Says:
    May 18th, 2016 at 5:21 pm

    Bill: i bet we’d all be surprised by how much the ex-stoner doesn’t know. he was sold to the american public just like a happy meal. and for the record, i doubt he’s a good father; unless being a good father means that every nice weekend you head to the golf course.

    %%%%

    Strange to say, the WaPo and NY Times — and the tabloids — have been looking for such dirt.

    And coming up with “Father Knows Best” Trump.

    He spoils his family something silly… flying them down to Florida every weekend… half-way across the country to do so.

    He treats his kids more along the lines of Joe Kennedy.

    They think he’s Robert Young.

  39. Tom Says:

    blert, I think we all understood the intended point, which is that Trump is a thin skinned megalomaniac, who is very likely to lead us to undesirable international outcomes. I’m not surprised that you’d attempt to deflect it from that intended point.

    Dude, your guy is an idiot, and he’s not a conservative, and he’s the ultimate RINO. He’s DANGEROUS! He’s a megalomaniac, he’s very thin skinned, he attempts to destroy anyone who disagrees with him. He has short fingers, he’s very insecure, and very unstable. If I’m going to have an enemy in the Whitehouse, I’d prefer it was their steaming pile of crap, that I can work against, and we (Conservatives) don’t have to take responsibility for. Even if it’s Sanders or Warren. The same people who are telling me right now that I MUST vote for Trump, and to not do so is a vote for Clinton, are the people who will be telling me that I absolutely MUST defend Trump’s psychotic ramblings and ravings or I’m not a good Republican. You guys decided you wanted to burn it down, well I’m here with gasoline and matches! Let’s burn it!!!!

  40. Tom Says:

    And for the record, I AM in a swing state (Colorado), and while I understand my individual vote won’t count for much, I’m in a place where it matters. If Trump comes out of the convention with the nomination, I’ll change my registration to Libertarian, or Independent, and the Republican party can call me when they come to their senses and put forth a candidate who shares my values.

  41. parker Says:

    Tom,

    Friendly unsolicited advice…. take it easy. blert is not a trumpian. He is a bit of a stickler when it comes to details, and can be a bit condescending. But he is all around knowledgable.

    Like you, I live in a purple state, although since bho, we are slowly turning redder. I am also never hillary trump. BTW, you need not change registration to vote Libertarian for POTUS. And I hope you will vote gop down ticket.

  42. Michael Lonie Says:

    I voted in the Oregon primary. Since Cruz and Kasich had already bowed out, I wrote in the name of the guy I really wanted to see win this year: Bobby Jindal.

    If Trump wants my vote he’ll choose Jindal as VP, making him (as the GOP seems to go) the heir apparent in 2020 0r 2024, and promising to bring him into policy making. Otherwise, I’m thinking of voting Libertarian for the first time, despite their generally wacko ideas on foreign and military affairs.

    On the economy I sympathize with the Libertarians. There’s little wrong with this country that halving the civil service workforce of the Federal Government and revoking 90 percent of Federal Regulations would not cure.

    Powerline, most of whose bloggers are lawyers, was impressed by Trump’s list of possible USSC nominees. They’re fully aware of his unreliability but see it as a sign that he is at least consulting the correct people. I’m not certain that consulting Henry “Detente” Kissinger is a plus from my point of view.

  43. Tonawanda Says:

    Very unbecoming of you neo, and sad.

  44. neo-neocon Says:

    Tonawanda:

    I have no idea what you’re talking about.

  45. Bill Says:

    Blert: “That’s cute.

    DEFCON 5 == complete peace … no prospective threats on the horizon.

    DEFCON2 == Extreme alert

    DEFCON1== Missiles away.

    And here you’re telling us that Trump is Dumpf.”

    Touche. I deserved that.

    Defcon 5 sounds scarier than Defcon 1, I guess 🙂

    D’oh.

    Doesn’t change the fact that Trump acts like bull in a China closet when it comes to what he says/has said about foreign policy, the economy, the debt, and how he’ll handle the military.

  46. Eric Says:

    Neo:
    “Just as the alt-right wants to take over the GOP, the ultra-left sees its opportunity in the Democratic Party.”

    KLSmith:
    “Maybe there is a difference between the far left and the ultra left.”

    First time I’ve heard of “ultra-left”.

    If there was a survey of the 3 factions, represented as a Venn diagram, I wouldn’t be surprised if there was significant overlap.

  47. Eric Says:

    Tom:
    “If there was ever a year for a successful third party run…”

    I advocate it.

    I suspect there are more Lieberman, Webb type Democrats who are turned off by the hard left turn of their party than is generally acknowledged.

    I also consider the more valuable purpose than the election itself is the means to catalyze a real competitive social activist movement.

  48. Geoffrey Britain Says:

    Tom @ 8:14,

    Thank you for providing an excellent example of TDS. The only accusation you missed was pedophilia and excessive drooling.

    It’s not that you may not prove to be right about Trump, it’s that you refuse to acknowledge that you might be wrong about him, even in the smallest degree. And evidently the disparity between Hillary and Trump in the nature of the ideological forces supporting Hillary versus the paucity of organized forces supporting Trump, doesn’t enter into your calculus, even in the slightest. As it will be the nature of and amount of support each would receive, that will determine the amount of damage each might do. Obama could have done little of lasting consequence had he not the support he wields.

    “There are three kinds of people; those who see, those who see once they are shown and those who refuse to see” Leonardo da Vinci

    To stay pure, you would stand aside for Lenin, never realizing that to be a far greater sin than voting ‘for’ Caesar. But no, I for one do not label you a ‘bad’ republican, merely on this issue, a well-meaning but foolish man, unable to see the forest for the trees. To which I say, “Welcome to the human race.” James Taylor song lyric from “Secret O’ Life”

  49. parker Says:

    Eric,

    “Ultra-left” is a polite term for genocidal sociopaths. 😉

  50. Bill Says:

    “To stay pure, you would stand aside for Lenin, never realizing that to be a far greater sin than voting ‘for’ Caesar.”

    If Hillary is Lenin and Trump is Caesar. Debatable (highly!) but you’re absolutely convinced of it.

    Your treating as already proven (Trump will be better than Hillary) what’s yet to be proven. Also, one aspect that isnt often considered in these arguments is how much better of a demagogue Trump is than Hillary, and how ineffective she might be as President because she lacks basic political skills. I don’t think Trump is a very good politician either but I’ve been proven wrong on that score by his incredible (to me) success thus far.

    I think they both suck and I’m not voting for either one of them.

  51. parker Says:

    GB,

    Tom is speaking from his gut. I will not vote for the donald. Does that mean I have TDS? If djt should become POTUS and builds no wall, back tracks on muslim ‘refugees’, attempts to replace ocare with a UK healthcare system, nominates a leftist to SCOTUS…. you get the idea; will trumpians and those who reluctantly vote for him own up to what they have aided and abetted?

    Or will they pretend that it was better to deny the shrew queen when in reality they voted for the same result? And will they please refrain from the excuse that he loves America when in fact he loves only himself and perhaps his children. (I do not include his wives because djt wives have a sell date.)

  52. Geoffrey Britain Says:

    Eric,

    The 40% of those who self-identify as “solid liberals”, who also state that, “they often feel pride in this country” are exactly those who confirm your suspicion that there are many more Lieberman types than are commonly accepted.

    However, I suspect that they would be turned off at the hard left turn of the democrat party… if they had an actual clue. But the mass media from which they get their information slants it so severly, that letting male pedophiles into women’s bathrooms is justified as solely a matter of discrimination against transgenders.

    That so many liberal LIV’S are willing to sacrifice their children, rather than be labeled bigoted, is a chilling indicator of just how far they’ve strayed from their moral compass. And retaining a moral compass is critical to embracing a real, competitive social activist movement.

    Perhaps after enough suffering and carnage, ‘moderate’ liberals will start to be receptive to such an activist movement’s message but I suspect, it’s first going to take a lot of pain.

  53. Ymarsakar Says:

    GB’s tautologies and analogies are getting quite out there.

    Friendly unsolicited advice…. take it easy. blert is not a trumpian.

    Parker is right. Not that I particularly care about who wants to vote Trump or not. That’s on their conscience and power hierarchy. Power, once given away, cannot be easily taken back. And for once, people who give their power to evil will have to pay for it, sooner or later. The question then becomes who is the evil. Is it merely the Leftist alliance… or is it most everyone in politics now.

    The Leftist alliance has about 1000 mutually exclusive “factions” in it, hydra heads, which regenerate when you try to cut them off and which actually don’t agree with the other factions… on anything except how to rape and raid this country for more wealth redistribution. And sometimes not even that.

    I don’t call them far left or ultra whatever. They’re just evil. Whatever distinctions people give is kind of like calling Democrats “blue”, as if they are the American Blue and we are the Red Commies. Nice judo throw they got on us there.

    As for Blert, I consider him an analyst. I don’t immediately accept whatever he prints or says, but I never absolutely immediately reject it either. It goes into a filter and databank, just like every source I have.

    Tonawanda:

    I have no idea what you’re talking about.

    Neo, from my pov, Tona has been undergoing a “phase shift” individually for some time now. I believe we had some discussions about where this country and civil war ii was heading, so he has adapted to this setting in his own unique fashion. Trump or Alt Right. But I adapted before the Alt Right ever existed, back even before they were known as Puas or Red Pill or Men’s RIghts. I think if I had heard about the Left’s true excesses and evil about when Tona had been revealed to the truth, I would have gotten quite attached to recent political revolutions.

    But alas, I was early by a few years, and I could see slightly afar at how meaningless it all would be. There’s some other things going on this world that will surprise people, outside the election of the world’s most powerful tyrant.

  54. The Other Chuck Says:

    Parker, the ones who are the real TDS sufferers are those who are glomming onto Trump like the last discard in Jin Rummy. Yeah, a two bit hustler and con man will save us. Give me an effing break!

  55. Geoffrey Britain Says:

    Bill,

    No, as I’ve stated before, Lenin-Caesar is just the closest analogy that I find persuasive. I’ll happily adopt a more persuasive one, as soon as it comes along. Any suggestions?

    Nor have suggested that Trump will be better than Hillary, only that Hillary will be even worse and, what convinces me of the rightness of that position is the forces aligned behind Hillary, who are motivated by various varients of Marxism.

    I fully expect a Pres. Trump to be a disaster. On the other hand, I’m certain that Hillary will be catastrophic. And the difference is the massive network of ideological forces behind Hillary Clinton who will ensure that, if less apparently demagogic, the long term consequences are far more severe. Trump MAY have disastrous consequence. Hillary will be a long term castrophe from which America shall not recover.

  56. Ymarsakar Says:

    California’s also not going to go Republican anytime soon. Which means that for the first time ever, I can breathe a sigh of relief that who I vote for won’t matter.

    People who often wonder why torturers and camp guards have no problems obeying orders, this is part of the issue. The responsibility is distributed so far that individuals think that their personal actions have little relevance. I’m not trying to single out the author of those lines for negative criticism but it is a common human flaw.

    People think contributing to evil is fine, so long as 300 million other people are jumping off the bridge. They can justify it as saying their vote or action doesn’t matter.

    Is that really true though?

  57. vanderleun Says:

    Well, Bill, in that case say hello to your own personal Lenin Caesar. Either will suck and suck more because of folks like you.

  58. vanderleun Says:

    To be a bit more clear. In a binary political choice a vote cast either way increases the “weight” of the party voted for in the case of victory or in the case of defeat. Either way, the more that vote (participate) the more chance there is of a balancing of power in order to keep the more powerful in check. The greater the participation, regardless of who the vote is cast for, the more heft there is in the electorate. Since offers, options, circumstances, and environment can alter the political situation rapidly it is best to keep the electorate as big a player as possible. Both parties, each in their own way, have an interest in dissuading the other party’s voters from participating. If both parties are effective in this either may win but what is really reduced is the electorate overall. Thus, not participating decreases the size of the electorate and thus doth increase the suckitude of the power structure between elections.

    Not choosing is a choice. You choose to increase the power of the structure that rules you.

  59. Geoffrey Britain Says:

    parker,

    “I will not vote for the donald. Does that mean I have TDS?

    I confess to a few times flirting with the idea but have always quickly rejected it 😉 It is the stridency of his rhetoric that leads me to that conclusion. Even you commented on that stridency.

    “If djt should become POTUS and builds no wall, back tracks on muslim ‘refugees’, attempts to replace ocare with a UK healthcare system, nominates a leftist to SCOTUS…. you get the idea; will trumpians and those who reluctantly vote for him own up to what they have aided and abetted?”

    I strongly suspect not, most people are interested in ‘being right’ far more than in being honest with themselves.

    “Or will they pretend that it was better to deny the shrew queen when in reality they voted for the same result?”

    At this point with Trump the effective nominee… if voting for Trump turns out to yield the same result as the “shrew queen” (nice turn of phrase BTW), then we were always screwed and there was no escape from our fate.

    I have neither supported nor denied the claim that Trump loves America. I suspect he supports America because it most personally benefits him to do so, rather than any philosophical position. But that may be true of most and is certainly true of millions.

    “GB’s tautologies and analogies are getting quite out there.” Ymarsakar

    I’d say that snide, sniping little side comments were beneath you but you keep proving that not to be so.

    “When you’re one step ahead of the crowd you’re a genius. When you’re two steps ahead, you’re a crackpot.” –Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, Lincoln Square Synagogue, Feb. 1998

    No, that quote is not intended as a brag, I’ve often been with the crowd and have even learned from you Ymarsakar. But you just can’t let go of the animosity can you? And that makes you a lesser man.

  60. The Other Chuck Says:

    You choose to increase the power of the structure that rules you.
    Not, repeat not an answer for Bill, but since I’m not voting for either the bitch or the bastard it applies to me as well. What you are saying is that voting for evil is fine. Since they are both in that category you’ve flipped a coin and decided that Trump is the lesser of the two evils. But I will go further and say that in order to cast that vote you must also accept responsibility for everything that will happen with your validation. Are you sure you want to live with that, with validating evil?
    Come on Gerard, admit that you long ago drank the kool aid and see Donald J. Trump as the man on the white horse, with everything that implies.

  61. Ymarsakar Says:

    You choose to increase the power of the structure that rules you.

    Every time the Democrats boycotted an election, 1860 Lincoln one included, it decreased the power of the nation and top layer. It never increased it, until people caved and the Democrats got back in charge. Usually that’s the whole point of a boycott of elections, which Dems know how to do. The Republican patriots are learning the value of how to withdraw one’s support for a corrupt system as well, in their own way.

    That cannot be stopped now.

  62. Ymarsakar Says:

    But I will go further and say that in order to cast that vote you must also accept responsibility for everything that will happen with your validation. Are you sure you want to live with that, with validating evil?

    Vander’s not voting for Trump to validate political power. Vander’s doing it as a stalking horse so that Trump will distract the Leftists, while Vander bunkers up. And that’s not an exaggeration, as Vander will tell you himself, if he hasn’t already, what he is “stockpiling” and what for. In a very abstract fashion that is.

  63. parker Says:

    vanderleun,

    “Not choosing is a choice.” Ok, I get that, but a choice between cancer or cancer is no choice at all from my pov. Otherwise, I may have missed your garbled message. Or it may be that I am comfortly dumb.

    GB,

    Mr. Y is sometimes a bit on the self righteous side, but I respect his opinion just as I respect your opinion, even when we disagree.

  64. Ymarsakar Says:

    I’d say that snide, sniping little side comments were beneath you but you keep proving that not to be so.

    Why is stating the truth snide? You sure you aren’t just picking up what you see in a mirror there, GB… as I told you in the other thread, it’s about the mirror.

  65. parker Says:

    Oh my gosh, I must be a fossil. If life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, property rights, a republic if you can keep it, individual responsibility, and adherence to a bootstrap work ethic are so Kardashian yesterday; if that is where we are at, with no future, then we (me and mine) will bunker down in our gopher hole retreat. We are not there yet, but perhaps on the first few pages of Unitended Consequences.

  66. Ann Says:

    Oh, my — one of the potential Supreme Court nominations on his list is Don Willett, a justice on the Texas supreme court, who has been mocking Trump extensively on Twitter.

    This may be my favorite: ‎@JusticeWillett — “Can’t wait till Trump rips off his face Mission Impossible-style & reveals a laughing Ruth Bader Ginsburg.”

  67. Roy Lofquist Says:

    Alt right – that’s the key just to the right of the space bar.

  68. parker Says:

    Ann,

    Okay, but what if its all another the donald BS con to sucker in holdouts? There is no snake oil in my pantry nor BS. Neither go well with pasta.

  69. The Other Chuck Says:

    Hope, that is what is driving people who should know better to vote for Trump. Just like many of those who voted for Obama in 2008, they are buying into the illusion. Here is what one of our great founders said about hope:

    Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.
    Patrick Henry, St. John’s Church, Richmond, Virginia
    March 23, 1775.

  70. parker Says:

    TOC,
    I agree. But apparently we are fossils. Calcifie or die. 😉

  71. parker Says:

    We can all disagree to disagree, and set aside disharmony as that is what happens between thinking people. There should be no hard feelings if we agree that opinions differ unless someone specifically differs on rock bottem principles.

    That said, long may all of you run, and goodnight. Transplanting 50 tomatoes and 20 peppers tomorrow, and sowing another rows of spinach, lettuce, golden beets, swiss chard, kale, and another set of beans and winter squash.

    Till the earth and keep your powder dry.

  72. Julie near Chicago Says:

    vanderleun, May 18th, 2016 at 11:27 pm:

    This is a most astute comment. Yes, even the tiny difference that a single vote makes does matter, regardless of whether the vote is cast for the winner or for somebody else or is not cast at all. And your statement that those who vote for the one who ends up losing still help to keep the winner in check is spot on, and hadn’t occurred to me.

    The canard that “there’s no point in voting since the chances that your vote will make a difference are minuscule” is one that always makes me want to throw things. Often people who certainly should know better say this, which is even worse: “I don’t vote, because I know my vote will make no difference.”

    But clearly some votes do make a difference, or nobody would ever be elected. And the Dems do understand the importance of “get out the vote.” They know that if people who would vote Dem don’t show up at the voting booth, or show up in insufficient numbers, the Dem won’t be elected. And they know that the percentages matter. In our political climate, a win by 5% is considered a “landslide,” a mandate almost. How much better if the winner can win by 8% !

    More, lots more, but I’ll skip it.

    . . .

    Ymarsakar, May 18th, 2016 at 11:09 pm: Very true.

    . . .

    “How do you know Trump won’t be worse than Shrill?” seems to be the question.

    We don’t. We never know how good or bad the elected will be until his term of duty is over, and often enough not even then. (People are still arguing over whether X was a good President or a bad one, and why, for all or nearly all values of X.)

    But we can play the odds. And the odds are still that Trump wouldn’t wreak as much havoc on what’s left of our country — which means of our shared outlook and ideals and approaches to problems, insofar as they are shared, and as a result of all that our quality of life — as Shrill would.

    Geoffrey points out one piece of evidence for betting on Trump, which is that Shrill does have a massive network of leftist organizations backing her. Therefore, we should vote AGAINST her, and that means voting meaningfully against her: offsetting a vote that she would otherwise claim. (Yes, every single individual vote matters!) And we know her style in office, which is despicably irresponsible in so many ways.

  73. Bill Says:

    Responding to various commenters above: I am definitely going to vote. I’m just not voting for DJT or HRC.

    I’m being told repeatedly in these threads that a vote for either one will end our Republic. Lenin, Caesar, both are bad, our constitutional system is all but dead, etc. If that is so, why would I vote for it?

    I believe my vote counts, not the opposite. How can I vote for the destruction of the country I love?

    Personally, I believe regardless of who gets elected our Republic will still be breathing in four years. But if either of these are President it will have inched closer to the cliff. I can’t support either party because of who they’ve nominated.

    I’m not voting for Lenin or Caesar (if GB is correct). But I am going to vote.

  74. Bill Says:

    Also, question for Y @11:09pm

    Are you in some way equating not voting for Trump with working as a guard in a Nazi concentration camp? Like both actions involve similar human flaws?

    I may have read that wrong. But I have to ask 🙂 if we’re now in a world where not voting for the authoritarian demagogue makes one a Nazi, I’m, to put it mildly, really confused.

  75. Tom Says:

    In case anyone is under the impression that I’m not going to vote, that’s not the case. I will simply be voting for a candidate that reflects my values and beliefs. The Libertarian party actually believes in limited government, balanced budgets, and letting people keep more of their own money. I’m not a social conservative in any sense of the word. I strongly believe that people should be in control of their own lives. If you choose to take drugs, go for it. If you would prefer to have sex with someone of your own sex, go for it. If you choose not to bake a cake for a gay wedding, that’s your business. I’m strongly opposed to abortion, because I think once an egg is fertilized, a life has begun. (A logical argument, not a religious one.) For those of you who think I’m just suffering from TDS, you’re VERY wrong. I believe he has revealed exactly the type of man he is. He called a conservative author and left a message saying he gets more pussy than he does. He actually felt it was necessary to tell the nation that his small hands don’t mean he has a small penis (the action of a very small, very insecure man). He’s repeatedly had affairs on his wife. He tried to tie Ted Cruz to the assassination of JFK, even after Ted had dropped out. (An absurd notion, because even if that was Cruz’s father in the picture, it doesn’t even prove that Cruz’s father was involved in a plot, and certainly doesn’t say anything about Ted himself.) When people who were trying to live their own lives on their own farms refused to sell to him, he bullied them, and tried to use the force of law against them. His tweets at Megyn Kelly after she asked him a tough question are beyond classless. He has REPEATEDLY proven himself to be a VERY small man, a school yard bully, a classless man, and someone who’s very immature, and insecure. He has also never told me about how he believes in liberty, small government, low taxes, ridding us of the scourge of the ACA. He attacked Bush for his invasion of Iraq, which even today I think was probably the right move. He’s never spoken of reducing government influence in our lives. This man is not presidential material. He belongs nowhere near the levers of power in this country, and nowhere near the nuclear launch codes, and this is something he has repeatedly demonstrated to me. I will say I despise him, it’s not hard for me, as a man, to despise someone who picks on cripples and women. I was raised in country where we stood against people like that. He defended his thugs after they assaulted a female reporter. I’m sorry, this is not a man I can support, and I won’t. I’ll vote for someone who more closely reflects my beliefs, values and ideals. That will be either the Libertarian nominee, or hopefully a third party candidate. I think Donald Trump has demonstrated EXACTLY who he is, and that’s not someone I will ever vote for, any more than I’d vote for Hillary. Yes, I think my vote matters, I think it will matter when the pundits talk about how many people voted for “other”.

    A question to Neo, after you go and vote for him, barf bag in hand, are you going to be prepared to defend his actions in your blog once he’s president? Is you defense simply going to be, “I thought he’d be better than Hillary”?

  76. Ymarsakar Says:

    Are you in some way equating not voting for Trump with working as a guard in a Nazi concentration camp? Like both actions involve similar human flaws?

    @Bill

    I’m referring to the voting system, not to voting for any particular faction. My belief, to sum it up, is that people should vote their conscience, until the State takes even that away at least. So some people either believe they should vote the way society/family/other people tell them to vote because of “reasons”. Or they believe their vote doesn’t matter, so they refuse to participate. That is, as Vander said, still a choice. I agree with that part, I just don’t think it’s necessary to vote for Trump. As the Republic is going to die irregardless of who votes for what. (Different issue, but it relates to what was revealed to me slowly via my sources starting from 2007, so has little to do with this election) So people might as well vote their conscience instead of participating in the system merely because of social pressure.

    If a person votes for the evil because everyone else is doing it, and they say “it doesn’t matter, there’s millions of people doing the same thing so my actions don’t matter”, it is a good sign of why democracy doesn’t work and why personal accountability doesn’t exist, except for the 3% of humans who are actual independent humans. If democracy doesn’t work, one might as well vote one’s conscience too.

    People have already talked about why fascism is not impossible in the US. This is one of the reasons. As for camp guards, the more realistic adaptation is what happened at Waco 1/Waco 2, Ft Hood 1, Ft Hood 2. Now that I’ve had some time to think over it.

    The Democrats are putting pedos in toilets with kids and rapists on college campuses .They are fine with that. Why? Because they are obeying orders. Why are they obeying orders? Because they got used to doing evil because it was popular. Everyone else was doing it. Refusing or resisting was meaningless, so they stopped.

  77. Tom Says:

    One other thing that I’ll add. If Trump actually wins, and is our President, we’ll NEVER get the Republican party back. Think of how much damage Nixon did to the party, and how difficult it’s been to recover from his presidency. The only thing that saved us from permanent exile was that buffoon Carter. If the Dems had actually elected a real leader, we’d probably still be trying to recover.

  78. Ymarsakar Says:

    I agree with Tom’s characterization of Trump. ALthough to me, of course, every single Democrat is like that, every single Leftist is guilty. Trump just happens to be a Democrat. That doesn’t matter too much to the Alt Right taking over the GOP, of course, because the Alt Right is pretty brand spanking new. They don’t have a memory that goes past 2008 even.

    Not even 2012. They had zero interest in politics before 2012. Although there might be a faction left out, such as Men’s Rights movement, which I wasn’t paying attention to. They might have been around before 2012 circa. The Alternative Right is an alliance just like the Left is an alliance. They have all kinds of people, and they don’t necessarily agree on things.

    So here’s Socrates when he had a similar problem in Athens.

    I would rather die having spoken in my manner, than speak in your manner and live. For neither in war nor yet in law ought any man use every way of escaping death. For often in battle there is no doubt that if a man will throw away his arms, and fall on his knees before his pursuers, he may escape death, if a man is willing to say or do anything. The difficulty, my friends, is not in avoiding death, but in avoiding unrighteousness; for that runs deeper than death. -Socrates before the Athenian death panel

    “Some one may wonder why I go about in private giving advice and busying myself with the concerns of others, but do not venture to come forward in public and advise the state. I will tell you why. You have heard me speak at sundry times and in diverse places of an oracle or sign which comes to me, and is the divinity which Meletus ridicules in the indictment. This sign, which is a kind of voice, first began to come to me when I was a child; it always forbids but never commands me to do anything which I am going to do. This is what deters me from being a politician. And rightly, as I think. For I am certain, O men of Athens, that if I had engaged in politics, I should have perished long ago, and done no good either to you or to myself. And do not be offended at my telling you the truth: for the truth is, that no man who goes to war with you or any other multitude, honestly striving against the many lawless and unrighteous deeds which are done in a state, will save his life; he who will fight for the right, if he would live even for a brief space, must have a private station and not a public one.

    I can give you convincing evidence of what I say, not words only, but what you value far more, actions. Let me relate to you a passage of my own life which will prove to you that I should never have yielded to injustice from any fear of death, and that ‘as I should have refused to yield’ I must have died at once. I will tell you a tale of the courts, not very interesting perhaps, but nevertheless true. The only office of state which I ever held, O men of Athens, was that of senator: the tribe Antiochis, which is my tribe, had the presidency at the trial of the generals who had not taken up the bodies of the slain after the battle of Arginusae; and you proposed to try them in a body, contrary to law, as you all thought afterwards; but at the time I was the only one of the Prytanes who was opposed to the illegality, and I gave my vote against you; and when the orators threatened to impeach and arrest me, and you called and shouted, I made up my mind that I would run the risk, having law and justice with me, rather than take part in your injustice because I feared imprisonment and death. This happened in the days of the democracy. But when the oligarchy of the Thirty was in power, they sent for me and four others into the rotunda, and bade us bring Leon the Salaminian from Salamis, as they wanted to put him to death. This was a specimen of the sort of commands which they were always giving with the view of implicating as many as possible in their crimes; and then I showed, not in word only but in deed, that, if I may be allowed to use such an expression, I cared not a straw for death, and that my great and only care was lest I should do an unrighteous or unholy thing. For the strong arm of that oppressive power did not frighten me into doing wrong; and when we came out of the rotunda the other four went to Salamis and fetched Leon, but I went quietly home. For which I might have lost my life, had not the power of the Thirty shortly afterwards come to an end. And many will witness to my words.”

    Choose the right. If Americans cannot choose the right or use their own conscience (because of the fear of whatever), America or even the continent, does not deserve salvation. Not a particularly new idea from me, I know, but it seems many here are having similar thoughts, different conclusions, or same conclusions but different thoughts.

    That little voice/muse talking to Socrates? That was either Lucifer or Jesus/God, for those that believe in the primary religion. For those that don’t, they can believe it is the inherent honest/goodness/conscience of man. It doesn’t really matter what people call it, it only matters whether humans have the strength to follow their own spirit, to be true to their soul. Because they will be held to account. Not necessarily in the after life mind you, but right here, on this Earth.

    “Let us reflect in another way, and we shall see that there is great reason to hope that death is a good; for one of two things, either death is a state of nothingness and utter unconsciousness, or, as men say, there is a change and migration of the soul from this world to another. Now if you suppose that there is no consciousness, but a sleep like the sleep of him who is undisturbed even by dreams, death will be an unspeakable gain. For if a person were to select the night in which his sleep was undisturbed even by dreams, and were to compare with this the other days and nights of his life, and then were to tell us how many days and nights he had passed in the course of his life better and more pleasantly than this one, I think that any man, I will not say a private man, but the greatest king will not find many such days or nights, when compared to the others. Now if death be of such a nature, I say that to die is gain; for eternity is then only a single night. But if death is the journey to another place, and there, as men say, all the dead abide, what good, O my friends and judges, can be greater than this? If indeed when the pilgrim arrives in the world below, he is delivered from the professors of justice in this world, and finds the true judges who are said to give judgement there . . . that pilgrimage will be worth taking. What would not a man give if he might converse with Orpheus and Musaeus (5) and Hesiod (6) and Homer? Nay, if this be true, let me die again and again! . . . Above all, I shall then be able to continue my search into true and false knowledge; as in this world, so also in the next; and I shall find out who is wise, and who pretends to be wise, and is not. . . . In another world they do not put a man to death for asking questions: assuredly not. For besides being happier than we are, they will also be immortal, if what is said is true.

    Wherefore, O judges, be of good cheer about death, and know of a certainty, that no evil can happen to a good man, either in life or after death. He and his are not neglected by the gods; nor has my own approaching end happened by mere chance. But I see clearly that the time had arrived when it was better for me to die and be released from trouble. . . .

    The hour of departure has arrived, and we go our separate ways, I to die, and you to live. Which of these two is better only God knows.”

    “I am old and move slowly, and the slower runner has overtaken me, and my accusers are keen and quick, and the faster runner, who is unrighteousness, has overtaken them. And now I depart hence condemned by you to suffer the penalty of death,–they too go their ways condemned by the truth to suffer the penalty of villainy and wrong; and I must abide by my award–let them abide by theirs. I suppose that these things may be regarded as fated,–and I think that they are well.”

    http://www.emersonkent.com/speeches/socrates_apology_plato_2.htm

    Btw, that’s not even 25% of the speech. The Greeks, who founded the skill of rhetoric. They went on longer than the blogs of the 21st century. They were a mobile speaking video blog that they carried around on their feet.

    This might help understand why I am advocating not a certain path for this country, because the only certain path for evil is the destruction of this country, but advocating for improvement of the human individual. That’s about the only thing that can improve at this time. This world is prone to killing saints and those too enlightened for their own good.

    To that, the patriotic survivalists I know might say “let the killing begin” and I am not exactly against such a plan either. I just don’t think Trump needs my vote to help destroy the nation. Sanders and Clinton doesn’t need me either. The Leftist alliance doesn’t need me. And the Alt Right will fight and kill the Left irregardless of what happens to them. It looks fore ordained, and I only predicted half of it. ALbeit I saw the formation of the ALt Right from its component groups some several years before it came to this.

  79. Ymarsakar Says:

    I would also like to mention Tona and Holly and others. I remember conversing with them concerning what I saw as the current and future state of America, years ago. During the election cycle I did not see them make many/any comments. Which is natural, I was like that in 2008 as well. There were more important things to calculate and address.

    Once the truth is revealed to people and they accept it, hate begins to burn in their heart. The greater their love for the children and the innocent, the greater the hatred of the Left’s evil against children and the innocent. The greater their love for this country, the greater their hatred for the traitors and enemies of this country.

    But that in and of itself, is not enough, even though the Alternative Right is using hatred as an energy to propel their political power struggles. That’s not what made them a power when they were born online though. And it is not the end of the road for enemies of the Left. Controlling the hate and funneling it into a useful weapon that doesn’t corrode and destroy the user… that will be a more difficult thing. I had years to deal with that weapon modification. Unfortunately, for most Americans, they only woke up or were informed of the fate of this country some odd years after I began. So their control of anger/hate and their desires for vengeance/justice, is not quite as well controlled as I wanted it to be. If a person does not control their emotions, their emotions control them. Hope and change right. Or joining an organization that controls you, helps to control you.

  80. Ymarsakar Says:

    Think of how much damage Nixon did to the party, and how difficult it’s been to recover from his presidency.

    Whatever Nixon was said to have done, was no more than 10% of what FDR and JFK had already done in the country. Surveillance? The FDR and JFK had intel reports from the FBI routinely, concerning their political enemies.

  81. Tom Says:

    Y, I was referring specifically to the Watergate scandal, for which all new scandals are still named. For the most recent one see “deflategate”.

  82. Ymarsakar Says:

    Y, I was referring specifically to the Watergate scandal, for which all new scandals are still named.

    The one where the assistant director of the FBI used to run a bloodless coup on Nixon to pay him back for refusing to promote the assistant director to Hoover’s spot?

    The one where the same sub director was responsible for illegally searching Weathermen homes, ensuring Ayers and his terrorist wife was free and clear?

    The one who had the power to order the FBI to break into any place, any where, and the evidence that Nixon ordered it was in surveillance tapes of the White House that happened to be running constantly?

    Well, I have my own ideas of what happened there and who was pulling the media’s lap dog leashes at the time.

  83. Ymarsakar Says:

    The general point is that the Left has been very good at crippling resistance from people like Nixon, to Leftist antics. Sometimes they use shame, sometimes they use blackmail, sometimes they just count on the Republicans to be loyal opposition patriots and ostracize anyone who fights back against the Left using less than 10% of the Left’s bag of tricks.

    Which brings us to Trump and the Alt Right. A lot of the reasons why people feel it necessary to support the “lesser evil” now is because they want to use at least some of the Left’s bag of tricks. Because it works. They have been convinced of this now.

    Unfortunately, the tool T they have to use, has seriously degraded from the other options they might have had who were willing to fight the Left using the Left’s own poison and fire.

  84. blert Says:

    Nixon’s damage:

    Wage & Price Controls !!! epic

    Civil Rights ENFORCEMENT office within the Federal government

    ‘Duke Power’ came soon after. [ affirmative action launched ]

    { A foreseeable activist magnet — which would ensconce them in the Civil Service.

    { 0bama has weaponized this cabal. Now, no-one is safe.

    Fiat US dollars !!! epic

    Diplomatically, Nixon let OPEC rape the West.

    That was an EPIC error.

  85. Tom Says:

    My point was, and remains, that Trump has the capacity to do enormous amounts of damage not only to the country itself (my biggest concern) but to the conservative movement.

  86. Geoffrey Britain Says:

    parker.

    “Mr. Y is sometimes a bit on the self righteous side, but I respect his opinion just as I respect your opinion, even when we disagree.”

    It is not to his opinions but to his personal attacks to which I respond.

    Ymarsakar at 12:12 am.

    “Why is stating the truth snide? You sure you aren’t just picking up what you see in a mirror there, GB… as I told you in the other thread, it’s about the mirror.”

    Stating truth selectively turns truth into a lie. It’s what politicians, ideologues, the insecure and the intellectually dishonest do. Criticism that leaves out specifics, allows for no response. It is the equivalent of, “so when did you stop beating your wife?”.

    My admissions of error long ago proved my willingness to look in the mirror. While your utter silence on ever being mistaken indicates hypocrisy in telling me that, “it’s about the mirror.”

  87. Eric Says:

    The Other Chuck,

    Patrick Henry was activist. The Founding Fathers were activist.

    The essence of America’s founding is activism. Activism is necessary to “keep it”, while by the same token, activism drawn from the American essence has continually changed America since the activist founding of the nation.

    As such, conservatives’ essentially un-American aversion to activism and insistence on passing the buck on activism to the GOP handicapped the GOP versus Democrat-front Left activists, has been self-abnegating in the activist game – the only social cultural/political game there is – and harmful to America.

    Invoking Patrick Henry is a call for essential American activism.

    Tom:
    “My point was, and remains, that Trump has the capacity to do enormous amounts of damage not only to the country itself (my biggest concern) but to the conservative movement.”

    Right now, there is no conservative movement in the real activist competitive sense.

    To reject political obsolescence, conservatives must collectively adopt the necessary activist mindset, adapt the necessary activist skillset, and fully commit to, and zealously undertake a social activist movement that competes vigorously across the whole social spectrum against all comers in the arena, whether Trump-front alt-Right, Democrat-front Left, far Left, ultra Left, whomever, in order to win the social dominance that’s necessary to reify your preferred social condition.

    Conservatives need to make this change collectively right now because the political obsolescence of conservatives is looming and closing fast. Activist competitors from the Democrat-front Left and Trump-front alt-Right will assure it.

    The time and place, the way and opportunity for conservatives to catalyze the needed social activist movement to fight for their political evolutionary survival in the arena is a determined proselytizing third party campaign in the 2016 general election that both fully intends to wrest the White House from either side and deliberately uses the process to set up an insurgent Gramscian long march that will compete for real to win the social dominance that’s necessary.

  88. Tom Says:

    Eric,

    “The time and place, the way and opportunity for conservatives to catalyze the needed social activist movement to fight for their political evolutionary survival in the arena is a determined proselytizing third party campaign in the 2016 general election that both fully intends to wrest the White House from either side and deliberately uses the process to set up an insurgent Gramscian long march that will compete for real to win the social dominance that’s necessary.”

    Dittos

  89. Ymarsakar Says:

    It is not to his opinions but to his personal attacks to which I respond.

    I merely reflect the method of attack Mr Nuclear Deterrence Diplomat here chooses to send to me as his point of contact. If GB wants to play the game of personal insults, that is what my automatic responses will use too, to play along with people. It’s more energy efficient.

    Besides, when people think this line is a personal attack:

    “GB’s tautologies and analogies are getting quite out there.”-me aka Ym

    I begin to call into question their capability to maintain the requisite processing capability for certain levels of conversation and negotiation.

    I had already addressed why Caesar being assassinated killed the Republic. If GB wanted to focus on that, he would have. Since he ignored it, it doesn’t matter to me whether he agrees or not, so I throw him a line or two later on. I saw Caesar convincing GB before. Now it’s Lenin. I make the appropriate deduction and description.

    If I had taken up more space, then GB would have started saying I was crowding out other people’s views and opinions and start accusing me of other diplomatic incidents. Sighs, so it’s a game that is getting old. One line is enough. If people want to know more, they would ask me questions instead of attacking me. Attacking me isn’t going to get them a knowledge upload, after all. Unless they actually think that they will…

    blert makes a more persuasive case of Nixon’s damage list. To reference Bush II, TSA also. It’s part of why people are willing to tolerate radicals like the Alternative Right or New Republicans. Or GOP vs GOPe. They are getting tired of stuff like that, taking hits for the team like that when it doesn’t win them anything. Americans like to win, and now a days, they want to win, even if it costs them their soul. Which is fine. That’s their choice to make. They have the free will to make themselves into slaves or sell their souls. They just aren’t given the right to sell the next generation into slavery, though they can power through it via Might Makes Right.

    Tom, Trump probably will cause damage. That may in fact be why people want him in power. My point to those people is that Trump or Clinton is going to be in power irregardless of what people vote for. The Fix is in, so to speak. I don’t think all of it is fabricated astroturf. The Tea Party was authentic. Ted Cruz is authentic. Even the Alternative Right is authentic, mostly. Eric disagrees with me on that, he thinks Alt Right activists are mostly Leftists or Russian sympathizers. Those kinds of group do exist, recall the Georgia border incident under Bush II. A lot of propaganda groups were propping up Putin vs the Georgians. But they spoke Russian or whatever language people used in that region. It wasn’t a home grown English community.

  90. Ymarsakar Says:

    Oh, by the mirror I’m referencing my comment here.

    http://neoneocon.com/2016/05/17/more-evidence-that-the-social-contract-has-broken-down/#comment-1174393

    Just for convenience.

  91. Bill Says:

    Eric, to your point on the need for conservative activism. You may be right, but I think one handicap, perhaps a fatal one, conservatives like me have is we don’t want every thing in life politicized. The left wants that, we don’t, and to engage in the kind of vigorous activism that may be needed here by definition will mean politicizing everything.

  92. Geoffrey Britain Says:

    Tom at 10:24 am,

    Had your prior comment had the rationality and specifics of the one above, I would never had characterized you as suffering from TDS. In my defense, lest I be accused of unfairness, I’d remind you that parker also found your prior comment a bit strident. I’ll happily concede that your comment above disproves that characterization.

    I’m much in agreement with some of your libertarian positions and, if not to the same degree, I am in agreement in principle with your characterization of Trump. Yet as you know, I disagree about voting for a man that I too personally despise. My reasoning for doing so is simple and I have yet to see anyone logically disprove that arguments rationale. Had someone done so, I would have dropped it and still will, if persuaded otherwise.

    None of us have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight prior to events. If Trump turns out to be everything you and parker fear to be true about the man, I can only answer for myself, my defense is simply going to be, “I still am convinced that Hillary would have been worse as it could not be otherwise”.

    Your and others vote of conscience may well enable Hillary’s election and if that happens, will you accept your share of the responsibility? Or will you hide behind, ‘I didn’t vote for either one!’ ?

    Just to be clear, I share Ymarsakar’s POV that the republic is doomed under either Trump or Clinton. IMO, wherein the difference lies between Trump and Clinton is in the likelihood of surviving the aftermath and in the possibility of a new American experiment in liberty arising. The conditions that arose after the fall of Rome permitted the enlightenment to germinate and flourish. The possibility of that type of renewal is, in my judgement, far less should the world turn Marxist or Islamic.

  93. neo-neocon Says:

    Geoffrey Britain:

    You wrote:

    Your and others vote of conscience may well enable Hillary’s election and if that happens, will you accept your share of the responsibility? Or will you hide behind, ‘I didn’t vote for either one!’ ?

    No, they won’t hide in that way, nor need they. They will hide in a manner very similar to what you already said for yourself, when you wrote:

    If Trump turns out to be everything you and parker fear to be true about the man, I can only answer for myself, my defense is simply going to be, “I still am convinced that Hillary would have been worse as it could not be otherwise”.

    In other words, all they have to do if accused of facilitating the election of a terrible President Hillary Clinton is to say, “I still am convinced that Trump would have been worse.”

    Positing a worse alternative is not disprovable. It’s a matter of opinion and trying to foresee the future, trying to picture an alternative history that did not come to be but about which we speculate.

    The road-not-taken argument is available to anyone.

  94. Tom Says:

    GB, I geddit, but if you go back and read my posts over the last weeks and months, they contain most of those arguments. I’m sick of hearing over and over again that Trump is the lesser of two evils. I don’t feel that way about it at all. I feel the Republican party will survive the election of Clinton, I do not feel it will survive the election of Trump. Pundits are already writing the epitaph, with glee I might add, of the Republican party.

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/r-i-p-gop-how-trump-is-killing-the-republican-party-20160518

    We’re the country that first put a man on the moon, invented space craft that could go into space and then return and be re-used, Hubble Space Telescope, we won WWII, we broke the sound barrier, developed computers and the internet. We built the first production cars. And that was just last century. I’m not willing to concede that it’s a choice between Trump and Clinton. There ARE other options. We need to rise above it.

  95. Geoffrey Britain Says:

    Ymarsakar,

    Mr Nuclear Deterrence Diplomat???

    What “point of contact” are you referring to? Enlighten me.

    “If GB wants to play the game of personal insults”

    It is not I that has offered insult but you and you know it. Which further adds to your intellectual dishonesty. Ego is a terrible task master… it demands retaliation when no prior attack existed… but since clearly “play[ing] along with people” gets you off, have at it but don’t be surprised if people start to catch on to what you’re doing.

    “Besides, when people think this line is a personal attack:“GB’s tautologies and analogies are getting quite out there.”-me aka Ym”

    It’s a perfect example of a snide side comment, unsupported by factual observation or specifics.

    “I begin to call into question their capability to maintain the requisite processing capability for certain levels of conversation and negotiation.”

    I can see that your study of the left has taught you their tactics well. Disagreement is proof of inferiority…

    “I had already addressed why Caesar being assassinated killed the Republic. If GB wanted to focus on that, he would have.”

    I missed that and certainly would have given it due consideration. An argument either stands upon its own merits or egotism is at play.

    “I saw Caesar convincing GB before. Now it’s Lenin. I make the appropriate deduction and description.”

    Caesar ‘convinced me’? Then I progressed to Lenin? Since from the very first and in every following comment I have taken pains to mention them together and assign the comparison to Trump and Clinton, I can only conclude that you are either unfamiliar with the comparison or are purposely distorting it.

    “If I had taken up more space, then GB would have started saying I was crowding out other people’s views and opinions and start accusing me of other diplomatic incidents.”

    NEVER have I done that with anyone. A malicious strawman argument exposes the slanderer. “When the debate is lost, the loser resorts to slander” Socrates

    “If people want to know more, they would ask me questions instead of attacking me.”

    You attack me and then, berate me for not asking questions of Olympus? No thanks, your ego presents too high a mountain to climb.

  96. Tom Says:

    Oh, and I’ll proudly say I didn’t vote for either, that I voted for the person who best reflected my principals and beliefs. There’s only one person that I really need to concern myself with, and that’s the one that looks back at me in the mirror. Asking me to choose between having my right leg chopped off, and my left leg chopped off isn’t really a choice, is it?

  97. The Other Chuck Says:

    Eric, the isolated quote from Patrick Henry was strictly about the nature of hope and how people allow themselves to be soothed by its illusion. His speech, such as what remains of it from the recollection of those who were there since it wasn’t transcribed or published at the time, is a well reasoned, eyes wide open, no illusions statement of the circumstances which he saw as leading either to total subjugation, or a war for independence which he favored. The revolutionary activism came after Paine’s publication of Common Sense the following year.

    I paragraph I quoted was strictly about hope as a false alternative to eyes wide open, unvarnished, and unpleasant truth. Faced with a Hobson’s choice people are engaging in self-delusion about the nature of Donald Trump.

    This morning while waiting to get a hair cut, I was stuck listening to Limbaugh. He was railing on and on about the Clinton’s greed and corruption from Whitewater to the Clinton Foundation. He quoted Ron Radosh’s article at length. It amounted to see, the Clintons are so corrupt and evil that you have no choice but to vote for Trump while totally ignoring ANY realistic look at Trump’s lifetime of buying politicians, bribes, and bankruptcies. I had to chuckle at his lame attempt at moral equivalency, which is a logical fallacy of the 1st order:

    The “not as bad as” argument is always popular with people who know perfectly well they’re doing something immoral. Being fully aware of this problem, they feel compelled to attempt to justify it, and they do so by pointing to other, usually worse, immorality. It is practically synonymous to the idea of “the lesser of two evils”.

    Claiming that Nazism wasn’t as bad as Communism, by drawing a moral equivalence between the Holocaust, and the mass deaths under Mao’s Great Leap Forward, Stalin’s purges and gulags, and Pol Pot’s killing fields.

    Claiming that communism is not so bad compared to Nazism, by insisting that the ends justify the means, and thus drawing a moral equivalence between Nazis who were forthright about their ethnic policies and hypocritical communists.

    Claiming neither side in World War II was morally superior because of Allied atrocities, such as the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and the firebombing of Dresden.

    Drawing a moral equivalence between 9/11 and U.S. policy in the Middle East, thereby attempting to justify or excuse the 9/11 attacks.

    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Moral_equivalence

    We’ll be hearing a lot of these types of arguments to justify voting for Trump.

  98. Ymarsakar Says:

    It is not I that has offered insult but you and you know it.

    I’ll keep this short.

    That’s what you say, but in reality it’s quite different.

    Your ego is showing-GB to Ym

    Nobody writes stuff like that without trying to initiate hostile contact. That’s a point of contact. Also calling lines which I have written, which are on topic and subject to logical discernment and train checks, “snide” is also quite hostile and not diplomatic. You can call those positive remarks all you want GB, but after awhile, even my filters can categorize them as hostile insults. Not merely coincidences bred from a coincidental imagination.

    In your brain, GB, I’m sure you feel you’re justified in launching attacks against me. In reality, you started the first strike. You just seem not to realize it. That’s why I call you Mr Diplomat, right. It’s a funny hint and a reference to previous topics. This exact same procedure happened the first time you tried to argue with me, 1.5 years ago even. At the time, you were frustrated talking with Democrats who refused to heed you and ignored you. Now you’re frustrated at the primary cycle. Whatever floats your boat, has nothing to do with me tho. You’re not a large enough object on the radar for me to construct special personal attacks against you, GB. In case you hadn’t noticed, I don’t even go out of my way to launch personal attacks at the People Here who have called me crazy and used that as a way to dismiss my predictions and analysis. Honestly, they’re not important to me to provoke the response you want. Which provokes your response to insult me, strangely enough.

    Now onto the other subjects in the breach here.

  99. Ymarsakar Says:

    No, they won’t hide in that way, nor need they. They will hide in a manner very similar to what you already said for yourself, when you wrote:

    Not necessarily Neo.

    Just as Leftists used guerilla warfare to kill people and sabotage affairs under Bush II, helping enemies of American patriots, the same can be done by US patriotic insurgents under occupation by Leftist forces.

    It’s merely a role reversal.

    If things are just like elections from 1980-1990, then it might be different. But things have deteriorated to a certain point where people are getting transformed and the nation is not what it used to be. Change, true transformative change, is now feasible. Hussein didn’t do it via an election. He used power tyranny and megalomania to do it. The response doesn’t have to follow the Rules as Usual. Since after all, there are no Laws in America, just Power.

    Maybe people aren’t convinced of that, so they want Trump and elections to convince them that there is still time. Time ran out some time ago.

    The “not as bad as” argument is always popular with people who know perfectly well they’re doing something immoral. Being fully aware of this problem, they feel compelled to attempt to justify it, and they do so by pointing to other, usually worse, immorality.

    Interesting point, I am reminded of when people criticized Leftist leaders as being immoral, rapists, and law breakers. The Left’s response was notoriously “but Bush lied and people died”. Remember that one. It works every time. What does Bush II, not even in power, have to do with Hussein’s kill lists though? Benghazi? IRS? Planned Profit? But Bush did it too? It’s a feeble defense of cognitive dissonance. They know there’s something wrong, but they Obey Orders to defend their Messiah. Their Savior. Their Hero King. Their Divine Salvation. Their Political Resurrection. 4 more years to stall the Left. The Left hasn’t been stalled for a single year in the 21st or 20th centuries.

    Asking me to choose between having my right leg chopped off, and my left leg chopped off isn’t really a choice, is it?

    This goes back to the Collectivist and Statist thing, Tom.

    People think the Republican or Red Conservatives in the US are individualists, not statists right?

    So why do people become collectivists at election cycle? Is winning elections So Important that they will sacrifice individual philosophy and independence? Everyone has to pull along inside the State, for the State, nothing outside the State?

    It’s a kind of suspended mass insanity almost. And people can feel it too, it’s a kind of cognitive dissonance.

    Elections are not that important, if you actually believe in limited government. Only the local government impacting you should matter the most. Yet people are so afraid of this one federal election. Why. If this election is so important, then that means the Leftists are right. Everything Within the State, Nothing Outside the State. People already adhere to that philosophy. They just want to play for their team, not the blue/commie team. That was originally the red team before they ditched the colors on us.

    Of course this isn’t designed to paint people as collectivists. I’m merely describing this kind of vote Trump or else argumentum ad whatever I see online.

  100. The Other Chuck Says:

    Sheesh Y. Give it a rest. That’s what I’ve decided on the Trump vs. other choice issue. The die is cast. I’m not going to change anyone’s mind and neither are you. Good luck to all.

  101. Ymarsakar Says:

    Sheesh Y. Give it a rest.

    Give what a rest?

    This is the best talk I’ve seen here since 1-2 years ago, back when people were recognizing the reality of Civil War II in America or TWANLOC, Those Who Are No Longer Our Countrymen I think is how it went.

    I was wondering how long the political arguments of voting would go on. But this topic of whether people should adhere to the State’s GOP party or whether people should obey their spirit/soul and internal will, is very critical for freedom of humanity.

  102. Ymarsakar Says:

    Also, for me this is Eric’s activism. It’s my own activism. I just don’t call it that. To me, activism is wearing the Armor of Faith and belief, when online. When interacting with people. They do something, it glances off the armor, and gives me an opportunity to show the strength of my belief and the reasons for it.

    For other people, they’re not going to stop supporting Trump or Hillary or whatever Leftist replaces them.

    To Democrat zombies, they are always Obeying Orders. Pedos in children toilets? They Have Obeyed. Rapists on campus and in CPS? They Will Obey. False rape charges authorized by oligarchy trials? They will and have Obeyed. To a Leftist zombie, their entire life is the activist cause and war front. They never backtrack, they never give up. That’s how they can advance, as a collective, as a zerg, as a mass Fist, the pure avatar of strength in the State and the Utopia.

    The problem with humans is that when 99% of people go along to get along, every thinks they should as well. After all, if literally nobody has the strength to resist the public, why should anyone put their head on the line? The nail that sticks out gets hammered first and hard.

    Somebody has to stand up and say the Emperor has no clothes, and then everyone can disagree or agree with that. But first, there has to be some kind of fight about it. People really shouldn’t just go along to get along, promised rewards from some government entity.

    There’s a good Christian story about the 40 martyrs.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/42_Martyrs_of_Amorium

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forty_Martyrs_of_Sebaste

    They refused to obey orders to convert. It was so easy. Convert, get some food and shelter. Why not. Your God isn’t here to save you. Convert and it will be easy.

    But the ancient Christians were made of a sterner faith. They just Refused to Bow down to the Authority of the State, even on pain of death.

    I look around today at this so called home of the brave America, and I see something a little bit different. Just a little bit.

  103. OM Says:

    Ymarsakar:

    Not to condemn you by association, but I find your arguments more cogent and consistent than Geoffrey’s. Keep the faith. It is persuasive.

    Tautologies indeed they are at times.

  104. parker Says:

    How silly, GB and Y playing ego games. Break it up gentleman and drink a good beer together. Yes, you have diferences, but so what? I have differences with both of you; and despite your claims Y, I can kill you and GB easily before either of you can blink. And what does that mean? Absolutely nothing because dead is dead.

  105. parker Says:

    For 40+ years I have trained to kill or render neutral with open hands, to kill with blades and with firearms. I am rather confident that at my advanced age I can one on one or one on 3, 4, 8 survive to kiss my grandchildren.

  106. Bill Says:

    This thread took a dark turn…

  107. The Other Chuck Says:

    Bill, agreed. This site has been immune to that kind of stuff which is rampant at many other sites. Sign of the times. I hung it up here once before and then came back because of the host and the otherwise general intellectual decency. Time to leave.

  108. Bill Says:

    I’m fairly new year, The Other Chuck, but I’ve enjoyed your commentary and hate to see you leave. God bless.

    But, yes, things have gotten kind of . . . apocalyptic. Between assurances that no matter who I vote for the Republic is doomed, doomed, doomed, side by side with encouragements to not stray outside the two parties bringing the doom . . . if we were being invaded by another country, even if our odds of survival were low, wouldn’t we want to, I don’t know, do something about it?. We need to get momentum toward a third party, *even if it can’t win this year*. Voting for more of the same AND the demise of our Republic seems like madness.

    I don’t like my candidates but I don’t really think either one is going to *end* America, just make us more European and Statist (on one side) or Authoritarian, Corrupt and Statist (on the other). That is unless the Donald decides so and so country hasn’t shown him enough deference and decides to press the button, in which case all bets are off.

  109. Bill Says:

    I’m fairly new *here*.

  110. Ymarsakar Says:

    Yes, you have diferences, but so what?

    It’s a matter of logic and the record. If GB is claiming that I attacked him first, all I have to do is look at the threads in question and check the date stamp on the statements, which will be forwarded as evidence in my favor.

    People may not care what we are arguing about, but the evidence of the internet date stamps and statements still held in reserve and saved format, still exists. The truth exists, even if nobody cares about why that matters.

    And if GB is claiming a record that goes beyond the available, then that’s just hearsay and memory talk. It has no substance, unless he wants to provide a link to the relevant records, which I often do and have done.

    But GB is not interested in the actual literal record online, which anyone can check. Which is, in fact, what he disputes but I don’t think it is in dispute, but rather made obvious by the evidence.

    Sign of the times. I hung it up here once before and then came back because of the host and the otherwise general intellectual decency.

    I got the historical thread where Neo made a post about what C is referring to here as well. Another “record” of course.

    I don’t like my candidates but I don’t really think either one is going to *end* America, just make us more European and Statist (on one side) or Authoritarian, Corrupt and Statist (on the other).

    The thing is, Bill, the only way you can assess accurate predictions of global strategy and what would destroy America is to check the records for the ones who accurately predicted what state of affairs the US would be brought due as a result of the Leftist alliance.

    It’s sort of like checking people’s anti Islamic comments before 2001 September, and seeing who the authentic predictive prophets are vs the fakes.

    As for the destruction of America, elections didn’t destroy America and elections aren’t going to save America. A more practical concern is Islamic Jihad taking over Europe and gaining hold of European technology and launch systems, intact. If America is too busy fighting a civil war at that time because people refused to fight it sooner or with great fervor to conclude it, then Islam will be able to wipe out all factions in the US, with a few technical deliveries via cargo payload or missile delivery systems.

    Do people know how many nuclear power plants France has, or that have been de commissioned but can also be re activated with France’s technical manpower? It’s more than the breeder reactors Eisenhower planned to build in the US, which ended up fueling the nuclear arms race against Soviet Russia.

    All the pieces are there, just how they end up is a matter of logistics and strategy, not tactics and not elections. The time frame and limit is literal and real. It cannot be easily adjusted.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>



About Me

Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely leaving the fold and becoming that dread thing: a neocon.
Read More >>






Monthly Archives



Blogroll

Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AtlasShrugs (fearless)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
Baldilocks (outspoken)
Barcepundit (theBrainInSpain)
Beldar (Texas lawman)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
Breitbart (big)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
Contentions (CommentaryBlog)
DanielInVenezuela (against tyranny)
DeanEsmay (conservative liberal)
Donklephant (political chimera)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (thinking shrink)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InFromTheCold (once a spook)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor is Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
RedState (conservative)
Maggie’sFarm (centrist commune)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
Michelle Obama's Mirror (reflections)
MudvilleGazette (milblog central)
NoPasaran! (behind French facade)
NormanGeras (principled leftist)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob’s blog)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (Jewish refugees)
Powerline (foursight)
ProteinWisdom (wiseguy)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RachelLucas (in Italy)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SecondDraft (be the judge)
SeekerBlog (inquiring minds)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
TheDoctorIsIn (indeed)
Tigerhawk (eclectic talk)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Regent Badge