Donkephant

[Perianne]

When posters use the term "Donkephant", what are they saying?

[The Sage of Main Street]

When posters use the term "Donkephant", what are they saying? Vote Libertarian!

It's all a typical scam by these costumed lizards to get the Republicans to go even farther to the Right. It's not an attack on both Liberal and Conservative ideologies, but a devious attempt to make people think that the Republicans are owned by the Liberals.

[Don]

I think it means that there is only one true party, the establishment party with a left and right wing.

[Chris]

^^That.

So vote libertarian. Or Tea party.

[KC]

It describes the lack of real difference between the two major parties when they're in control of the government. Republicans in control of the presidency get us involved in foreign misadventures and spend money on costly social programs. Democrats in control of the government do the same. Both support their cronies rather than the people, making policies advantageous for reelection rather than making policies to benefit.

[Perianne]

It describe the lack of real difference between the two major parties when they're in control of the government. Republicans in control of the presidency get us involved in foreign misadventures and spend money on costly social programs. Democrats in control of the government do the same. Both support their cronies rather than the people, making policies advantageous for reelection rather than making policies to benefit.

I see a major difference between the two parties: Supreme Court nominees.

[Chris]

http://i.snag.gy/ulRPe.jpg

Two students hold up a painting of the "Donkephant," the mascot of the 1944 Nonpartisan Mock Convention. source (http://www.oberlin.edu/archive/gallery_convention.html)

[Green Arrow]

I see a major difference between the two parties: Supreme Court nominees.

John Roberts, Obamacare.

[Perianne]

John Roberts, Obamacare.

I agree. He blew it. But right now the court is fairly balanced. Imagine if Scalia and Thomas were to die tomorrow. Then for certain the previous election would have consequences this nation would feel for 30+ years.

[KC]

I see a major difference between the two parties: Supreme Court nominees.

True, but the Supreme Court being partisan is an extremely recent phenomenon. Remember: Chief Justice Earl Warren was appointed by Eisenhower.

[Don]

And all the bloated federal agencies try to get as much money coming in to continue their wasteful spending as possible no matter which wing of the establishment party has "power."

Bill Clinton's mentor.....

The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy.
- Carrol Quigley, Tragedy and Hope (http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FTragedy-Hope-History-World-Time%2Fdp%2F094500110X%3Fie%3DUTF8%26s%3Dbooks%26q id%3D1222788301%26sr%3D8-1&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325&tag=bullnotbull-20)

[Perianne]

True, but the Supreme Court being partisan is an extremely recent phenomenon. Remember: Chief Justice Earl Warren was appointed by Eisenhower.

Didn't FDR manipulate the Court until it was extremely partisan?

[Redrose]

Didn't FDR manipulate the Court until it was extremely partisan?
Yes.

[KC]

Didn't FDR manipulate the Court until it was extremely partisan?

FDR did manipulate the court in order to ensure his major accomplishments would survive, but I'm not sure if that makes them partisan. Remember, they had already struck down significant parts of the New Deal. Was that partisanship?

Partisanship is when Supreme Court decisions frequently break down based on party lines, based on the party that appointed the nominees. This has happened more frequently in recent years.

[Peter1469]

When posters use the term "Donkephant", what are they saying?

That the establishment of both major parties are really two sides of the same coin.

[Peter1469]

John Roberts, Obamacare.

John Roberts in Obama Care said that the Commerce Clause does not allow Congress to do what it wants. That is extremely significant (he screwed up with the taxing power, but likely would not have had a majority that way).

[donttread]

When posters use the term "Donkephant", what are they saying?

Essentially that modern day mainstream democrats s and republicans are so similar in actions as to effectively constitute one, corrupt, failed non-functional party. At least that's what I mean when I use the term. You see they talk very different but do very similar things.

[donttread]

I see a major difference between the two parties: Supreme Court nominees.

That and there rhetoric but that's about it. Both spend too much, kill too much, regulate too much and grow government

[Perianne]

To be honest, the term "Donkephant" has annoyed me. But after asking, I see your points. While I am a partisan and see Obama's administration as horrible, I could also see that G.W. Bush's (especially) second term was a disaster.

Still though, I see things a bit different from you guys. I do thank you for responding.

[The Xl]

Two sides of the same coin. Nearly identical policy wise.

[Peter1469]

Two sides of the same coin. Nearly identical policy wise.

On the major fundamental issues to grow government. Each side of the coin still dangles their pet projects to whip up their bases and keep us seemingly divided.

[Chris]

To be honest, the term "Donkephant" has annoyed me. But after asking, I see your points. While I am a partisan and see Obama's administration as horrible, I could also see that G.W. Bush's (especially) second term was a disaster.

Still though, I see things a bit different from you guys. I do thank you for responding.



Well, left and right, or liberal and conservative, in modern American terms, are still different in basic values, but I think the link from that to the Donkephant is weakening. It could be said the right is unhappy the Reps are not limiting government fast enough and the left unhappy the Dems are growing it fast enough.

[Redrose]

John Roberts, Obamacare.
I still have whiplash from John Roberts flip flop. Three weeks before their ruling was to be released, Roberts was shooting down the ACA as unconstitutional. His about face is illogical, even the other conservative Justices were shocked. Someone must have gotten to him and threatened his kids or threatened to uncover something bad in his past, because there is no legitimate reason he would basically reverse himself.

[Peter1469]

Bump ^^^
John Roberts in Obama Care said that the Commerce Clause does not allow Congress to do what it wants. That is extremely significant (he screwed up with the taxing power, but likely would not have had a majority that way).

[donttread]

To be honest, the term "Donkephant" has annoyed me. But after asking, I see your points. While I am a partisan and see Obama's administration as horrible, I could also see that G.W. Bush's (especially) second term was a disaster.

Still though, I see things a bit different from you guys. I do thank you for responding.

The last 15 years is proof of their collective incompetence

[The Sage of Main Street]

I see a major difference between the two parties: Supreme Court nominees.

Four out of the five appointed by Pro-Life Nixon voted Pro-Choice on Roe v. Wade.

[The Sage of Main Street]

That the establishment of both major parties are really two sides of the same coin. So Liberals are agents of the Right Wing? That's what I've been saying all along, but Americans wear Plute earplugs and won't listen.

[donttread]

Well, left and right, or liberal and conservative, in modern American terms, are still different in basic values, but I think the link from that to the Donkephant is weakening. It could be said the right is unhappy the Reps are not limiting government fast enough and the left unhappy the Dems are growing it fast enough.

Don't be fooled , other than the Pauls, nobody in DC has any interest in limiting government

[Chris]

Don't be fooled , other than the Pauls, nobody in DC has any interest in limiting government

Agree. What I'm trying to say is there's little connection between the right/left and the donkephant and its growing government.

[The Sage of Main Street]

Don't be fooled , other than the Pauls, nobody in DC has any interest in limiting government The Paulistas are interested in minimizing government and establishing an unelected dictatorship of the private sector, which is a form of GUBMINT.

[donttread]

Agree. What I'm trying to say is there's little connection between the right/left and the donkephant and its growing government.

No , you're right. They are all growing government.

[donttread]

The Paulistas are interested in minimizing government and establishing an unelected dictatorship of the private sector, which is a form of GUBMINT.

Sage , I differ from many of my LP friends in that I do see the megacorps as big a threat to freedom as government. I think we can limit government, kill the megacorps and feed local economies while staying home as a nation and minding our own damn business

[Mini Me]

^^That.

So vote libertarian. Or Tea party.

In other words, vote Rethuglican! He says! Not at all biased!

There is no Tea Party. They are Rethugs. And little left of a Libertarian party

I say, lets vote for independent 3hd parties, who are not owned by the NWO and corporate whores of Babylon.

Jessie Ventura, er, or is it Ace Ventura for POTUS?

[Captain Obvious]

In other words, vote Rethuglican! He says! Not at all biased!

There is no Tea Party. They are Rethugs. And little left of a Libertarian party

I say, lets vote for independent 3hd parties, who are not owned by the NWO and corporate whores of Babylon.

Jessie Ventura, er, or is it Ace Ventura for POTUS?


http://i.imgur.com/Pyr699Q.gif

[Mini Me]

Vote Libertarian!

It's all a typical scam by these costumed lizards to get the Republicans to go even farther to the Right. It's not an attack on both Liberal and Conservative ideologies, but a devious attempt to make people think that the Republicans are owned by the Liberals.

Hmmmm! Maybe your right! I thought I saw the scales on Dick Cheney's neck, and a tail below Bush's overcoat! David Icke may be right! The alien lizard people may be running things!

Or is it the body snatching pod people? I have noticed children with bloody fangs, and Zombies roaming around at night!

[Mini Me]

So Liberals are agents of the Right Wing? That's what I've been saying all along, but Americans wear Plute earplugs and won't listen.

I think Maobama, the Manchurian Candidate is proof of that.

As a true liberal, he is nothing but a poser!

The Reich Wing is controlled by the NWO Globalist Fascists!

[The Xl]

Their are no liberals or conservatives. Their is a well oiled special interest duopoly.

[Mini Me]

http://i.imgur.com/Pyr699Q.gif

Hehe! He's high on Fukitol!

[Mini Me]

Their are no liberals or conservatives. Their is a well oiled special interest duopoly.

May be! Hegelian dialectic ongoing

Thesis<> antithesis
Action<>reaction

"We haven't learned how to take control of our own consciousness" Wer'e essentially allowing others to do that for us.

[Libhater]

When posters use the term "Donkephant", what are they saying?


A person posting that term is obviously someone who has zero political principles and is more often than not sitting on the fence of despair waiting to see which direction the political balloon blows before striking out in contempt of anything that doesn't look or feel familiar with their X-Box surroundings in the basement of his parent's home. Pay no attention to these blowhards for they have nothing to offer anyone for they are bereft of a viable set of balls.

[Peter1469]

The term implies wisdom: our establishment parties are evil, corrupt, and working together to screw us all.

[Libhater]

The term implies wisdom: our establishment parties are evil, corrupt, and working together to screw us all.

OMG, I suppose you detest our Constitution as well. That type of thinking is sick. Perhaps you prefer anarchy. Call on your buddy GA to get some support.

[Peter1469]

OMG, I suppose you detest our Constitution as well. That type of thinking is sick. Perhaps you prefer anarchy. Call on your buddy GA to get some support.

Listen hard left agitator. You have read enough of my posts to know that I support the Constitution. To say otherwise is to stretch the definition of reality.

[Libhater]

Listen hard left agitator. You have read enough of my posts to know that I support the Constitution. To say otherwise is to stretch the definition of reality.

Oh sure, you say you support the Constitution, but every chance to get to rip apart the very guts of it, such as with the two party system......you go at it with guns blazing leaving no survivors. You have no political principles.

[Green Arrow]

Oh sure, you say you support the Constitution, but every chance to get to rip apart the very guts of it, such as with the two party system......you go at it with guns blazing leaving no survivors. You have no political principles.

The two party system is not the "very guts" of the constitution, and in fact, political parties are never mentioned. George Washington himself was vehemently opposed to the idea of political parties and femt that they would tear the nation apart. Turns out, he was right.

[Chris]

In other words, vote Rethuglican! He says! Not at all biased!

There is no Tea Party. They are Rethugs. And little left of a Libertarian party

I say, lets vote for independent 3hd parties, who are not owned by the NWO and corporate whores of Babylon.

Jessie Ventura, er, or is it Ace Ventura for POTUS?


SO you'd vote for Ventura, who I hear has selected Howard Stern as running mate. Both libertarian, thus Rethuglicans, and you have contradicted yourself.

[Chris]

May be! Hegelian dialectic ongoing

Thesis<> antithesis
Action<>reaction

"We haven't learned how to take control of our own consciousness" Wer'e essentially allowing others to do that for us.



Hegelian dialect is Thesis > Antithesis > Synthesis. Come on Strange, what, were you posting half asleep last night.

[Chris]

OMG, I suppose you detest our Constitution as well. That type of thinking is sick. Perhaps you prefer anarchy. Call on your buddy GA to get some support.


It's Donkephants despise the Constitution.

[Peter1469]

Oh sure, you say you support the Constitution, but every chance to get to rip apart the very guts of it, such as with the two party system......you go at it with guns blazing leaving no survivors. You have no political principles.

What does the two party system have to do with the Constitution?

You don't play a "staunch" winger well.

[Libhater]

It's Donkephants despise the Constitution.


Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in my disgust with certain people always lumping the two parties together as if they both shared exact ideologies. The Republican party is the party of the Constitution, and from everything I see today the Democrat party is the one stripping out the guts of the Constitution--be it via our 2nd Amendment, the perpetual raising of our taxes, the overreach of executive power and their dedicated agenda to centralize our government with virtually every policy they issue.

Furthermore, the left is totally AWOL when it comes to securing our border, and their feckless potus has breached his duty to uphold our Constitution and to protect the United States from the curse of illegal immigration.

So when people who supposedly have politically 'Right' leanings go out of their way to get in bed with the leftists by attacking the Rinos' and the current GOP leadership--it only helps to fuel the already un-American Democratic base that in turn uses the inner fighting of Republicans to further damage the party. In case you haven't noticed--the democrats had a field back during the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections by having we Republicans/Conservatives etc. bash one another thus setting up easy victories for Obama while those in fighting Republicans decided to stay home as a result of all the propaganda being dished out by both sides over Romney's personal and political life.

[Libhater]

...........

[Mainecoons]

OMG, I suppose you detest our Constitution as well. That type of thinking is sick. Perhaps you prefer anarchy. Call on your buddy GA to get some support.

No, the people he is talking about detest and undermine the Constitution, starting right at the top with Mr. Obama. Why do you have such blind faith in such a broken government? You're worse than the far lefties.

[Chris]

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in my disgust with certain people always lumping the two parties together as if they both shared exact ideologies. The Republican party is the party of the Constitution, and from everything I see today the Democrat party is the one stripping out the guts of the Constitution--be it via our 2nd Amendment, the perpetual raising of our taxes, the overreach of executive power and their dedicated agenda to centralize our government with virtually every policy they issue.

Furthermore, the left is totally AWOL when it comes to securing our border, and their feckless potus has breached his duty to uphold our Constitution and to protect the United States from the curse of illegal immigration.

So when people who supposedly have politically 'Right' leanings go out of their way to get in bed with the leftists by attacking the Rinos' and the current GOP leadership--it only helps to fuel the already un-American Democratic base that in turn uses the inner fighting of Republicans to further damage the party. In case you haven't noticed--the democrats had a field back during the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections by having we Republicans/Conservatives etc. bash one another thus setting up easy victories for Obama while those in fighting Republicans decided to stay home as a result of all the propaganda being dished out by both sides over Romney's personal and political life.


The problem here is your lumping ideology with parties. Liberal and conservative are one thing, the parties something else altogether. One is about principles, the other power.

[Libhater]

The problem here is your lumping ideology with parties. Liberal and conservative are one thing, the parties something else altogether. One is about principles, the other power.

Just the opposite. I'm telling you that there is a huge difference between the parties as well as a huge difference between the principles they hold. Bottom line here is that it the ideology and the principles of the leftists' that is growing our government and bankrupting our nation. There are people here that still lump the GOP in with the progressive lefties that is what my bitch is all about with them using the term donkephant. You got to stop calling out the Republicans as being a part of the overspending democrat problem. I'm at the point now where I feel the need to call you and mainecoons your typical liberal-lite Rinos. Please tell me you haven't given in to the democratic strategy of lumping Cons in with the Libs, i.e. 'donkephant'.

[Mainecoons]

There is no huge difference. Take off your partisan blinders and join the movement for real change. You won't get it from the Donkephant.

[Chris]

Just the opposite. I'm telling you that there is a huge difference between the parties as well as a huge difference between the principles they hold. Bottom line here is that it the ideology and the principles of the leftists' that is growing our government and bankrupting our nation. There are people here that still lump the GOP in with the progressive lefties that is what my bitch is all about with them using the term donkephant. You got to stop calling out the Republicans as being a part of the overspending democrat problem. I'm at the point now where I feel the need to call you and mainecoons your typical liberal-lite Rinos. Please tell me you haven't given in to the democratic strategy of lumping Cons in with the Libs, i.e. 'donkephant'.



You keep repeating your claim but earlier when asked to name those Reps who stand on principle you could name none. In fact there are none in the Rep establishment, and that is what the Tea Parties aim to tear down.

And you weak attempts at guilt-by-association are unimpressive. No one has said con and lib principles are the same, only that Reps and Dems are no different. And that criticism is coming from those on the right.

[Libhater]

You keep repeating your claim but earlier when asked to name those Reps who stand on principle you could name none. In fact there are none in the Rep establishment, and that is what the Tea Parties aim to tear down.

I was never asked to name those Reps who stood on principle. In fact, I've said I am not too happy with many of the Reps currently in Congress. My overriding point here which is being misunderstood is that there is a huge difference between the two party ideologies, and that because the Reps don't have full control of Congress (Both Houses) their hands are literally tied from enacting policy that would reduce the size of government while abiding by our Constitution. You and others keep saying that there is no difference between the two parties as they are currently sitting inside Congress. Not only is that a ridiculous and factually wrong view to take, but by being so wrong you have given the leftists even more ammunition in which to push forward their economy wrecking agenda. You guys need to get on the winning team and the team that has America's best interests at heart. Obama and his midterm team don't need any more help from their base so long as there are guys like you dragging the Republican party down for them.

[Chris]

I was never asked to name those Reps who stood on principle. In fact, I've said I am not too happy with many of the Reps currently in Congress. My overriding point here which is being misunderstood is that there is a huge difference between the two party ideologies, and that because the Reps don't have full control of Congress (Both Houses) their hands are literally tied from enacting policy that would reduce the size of government while abiding by our Constitution. You and others keep saying that there is no difference between the two parties as they are currently sitting inside Congress. Not only is that a ridiculous and factually wrong view to take, but by being so wrong you have given the leftists even more ammunition in which to push forward their economy wrecking agenda. You guys need to get on the winning team and the team that has America's best interests at heart. Obama and his midterm team don't need any more help from their base so long as there are guys like you dragging the Republican party down for them.

It's not that it's misunderstood, it's that many of us disagree--have a fundamentally different view of politics that sees no alignment of ideological principles and party partisanship.

[Libhater]

It's not that it's misunderstood, it's that many of us disagree--have a fundamentally different view of politics that sees no alignment of ideological principles and party partisanship.

Not sure I understand that statement. Are you saying that you and others who disagree have a fundamentally different view of politics that is different than say the leftist ideology and or the Conservative ideology? Or are you saying that you and others (presumably the donkephant) see no difference between the Republican and the Democrat ideology as it pertains to our current congress?

[Chris]

Not sure I understand that statement. Are you saying that you and others who disagree have a fundamentally different view of politics that is different than say the leftist ideology and or the Conservative ideology? Or are you saying that you and others (presumably the donkephant) see no difference between the Republican and the Democrat ideology?

I, and others, are saying there's little to no connection between ideological principles and parties. There is no Republican ideology or Democrat ideology, there is only, as you even said, and cigar would echo, winning, power.

And there's little to no difference between parties.

[Libhater]

I, and others, are saying there's little to no connection between ideological principles and parties. There is no Republican ideology or Democrat ideology, there is only, as you even said, and cigar would echo, winning, power.


And there's little to no difference between parties.

Wow, I knew I should have stayed longer in that logic class. Of course there is little to no connection between ideologies and or principles between the parties because the two are 180 degrees opposed to one another. So why do you and other so-called politically right leaning people keep insisting on lumping them all together? It just doesn't make sense that you would keep doing that.

And now in the same breath you say there is no Republican or no Democrat ideology? You got to be kidding. Perhaps you are contemplating joining in with the Green Party or the Libertarians or the Communist party of the United States etc. as a revolt or disgust against the two major parties, for I just can't see where you're coming from or what type of political ideology if any that you currently espouse, let alone join in on the campaign trail with.

[Chris]

Wow, I knew I should have stayed longer in that logic class. Of course there is little to no connection between ideologies and or principles between the parties because the two are 180 degrees opposed to one another. So why do you and other so-called politically right leaning people keep insisting on lumping them all together? It just doesn't make sense that you would keep doing that.

And now in the same breath you say there is no Republican or no Democrat ideology? You got to be kidding. Perhaps you are contemplating joining in with the Green Party or the Libertarians or the Communist party of the United States etc. as a revolt or disgust against the two major parties, for I just can't see where you're coming from or what type of political ideology if any that you currently espouse, let alone join in on the campaign trail with.



You're missing the point altogether. There is no connection between any political principles and any parties, period. No Republican or no Democrat ideology, period. Not kidding. No, I'm not contemplating joining any party. I'm libertarian right.

[The Sage of Main Street]

Sage , I differ from many of my LP friends in that I do see the megacorps as big a threat to freedom as government. I think we can limit government, kill the megacorps and feed local economies while staying home as a nation and minding our own damn business I feel we should have a coalition with Russia, China, and NATO to annex the Muslim oilfields. Oil is really worth less than $5 a barrel. Lies about pollution, global warming, and Peak Oil are just smokescreens to accept the strangulation of our economic potential.

[The Sage of Main Street]

May be! Hegelian dialectic ongoing

Thesis<> antithesis
Action<>reaction

"We haven't learned how to take control of our own consciousness" We're essentially allowing others to do that for us.
Like Chris, Hegel compressed everything to fit into strict, simple-minded rules. History is more like thesis>antithesis>chaos>stagnation, which is only broken up by an outside force, whether good or bad, and not by any progression from within.

[The Sage of Main Street]

Listen, hard left agitator.




You don't play a "staunch" winger well. These claims that Libhater is a Liberal intentionally trying to make the Rightists look bad are silly paranoia. He parrots what his Right Wing talk-show nannies say all the time, only he is more forceful, narrowly focused, and less hesitant, knowing that his nannies fake their hedging to hide the Fascism they are really trying to promote.

[The Sage of Main Street]

Listen hard left agitator.




You don't play a "staunch" winger well. These claims that Libhater is a Liberal intentionally trying to make the Rightists look bad are silly paranoia. He parrots what his Right Wing talk-show nannies say all the time, only he is more forceful, narrowly focused and less hesitant, knowing that his nannies fake their hedging to hide the Wall Street Fascism that they are really trying to promote.

[The Sage of Main Street]

The term implies wisdom: our establishment parties are evil, corrupt, and working together to screw us all. They're also working to create and control fake alternative parties.

[Chris]

Like Chris, Hegel compressed everything to fit into strict, simple-minded rules. History is more like thesis>antithesis>chaos>stagnation, which is only broken up by an outside force, whether good or bad, and not by any progression from within.

Hegel was a statist like you, sage. It's funny you say I like Hegel like simple rules then you proceed to extend Hegel with simple rules, rules that make no sense in any dialectic, if you know what that even means.

[Libhater]

You're missing the point altogether. There is no connection between any political principles and any parties, period. No Republican or no Democrat ideology, period. Not kidding. No, I'm not contemplating joining any party. I'm libertarian right.

Okay, I got you now, you think there is no such thing as Conservatism as espoused by the Right, and no such thing as progressive socialism as espoused by the Left. In short, you don't think Conservatism and or Socialism are ideologies. Could you tell us if you think there is an ideology associated with the Libertarian mindset.

[Libhater]

these claims that @libhater (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=305) is a liberal intentionally trying to make the rightists look bad are silly paranoia. He parrots what his right wing talk-show nannies say all the time, only he is more forceful, narrowly focused, and less hesitant, knowing that his nannies fake their hedging to hide the fascism they are really trying to promote.

lmfao!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Peter1469]

I offer exhibit #1.

:shocked:


Okay, I got you now, you think there is no such thing as Conservatism as espoused by the Right, and no such thing as progressive socialism as espoused by the Left. In short, you don't think Conservatism and or Socialism are ideologies. Could you tell us if you think there is an ideology associated with the Libertarian mindset.

[Libhater]

I offer exhibit #1.

:shocked:


Where are you at a Robert Mapplethorpe art auction?

[Peter1469]

Where are you at a Robert Mapplethorpe art auction?

I mean as in evidence. I am a lawyer.

[Chris]

Okay, I got you now, you think there is no such thing as Conservatism as espoused by the Right, and no such thing as progressive socialism as espoused by the Left. In short, you don't think Conservatism and or Socialism are ideologies. Could you tell us if you think there is an ideology associated with the Libertarian mindset.

Nope, still not it. I don't think Republicans hold conservative principles anymore than Democrats hold liberal principles. No connection between parties and principles.

No, libertarian principles and Libertarian Party are, imo, disconnected.

Parties are about power. They may, in their bids for power, appeal to principles, appeal to the rich, the middle class, the poor, this special interest group or that, quite often contradicting themselves in the process. I remember once Bush promised stricter steel tariffs to a steel manufacturing audience and the next day lighter ones to a steel consuming audience. In another thread I posted today, we have Reps and Dems against the Ex-Im bank, and Reps and Dems for it. It's just about votes, being on the winning side as you earlier said, nothing but power.

"The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." ~P. J. O'Rourke

[Libhater]

Nope, still not it. I don't think Republicans hold conservative principles anymore than Democrats hold liberal principles. No connection between parties and principles.

No, libertarian principles and Libertarian Party are, imo, disconnected.

Parties are about power. They may, in their bids for power, appeal to principles, appeal to the rich, the middle class, the poor, this special interest group or that, quite often contradicting themselves in the process. I remember once Bush promised stricter steel tariffs to a steel manufacturing audience and the next day lighter ones to a steel consuming audience. In another thread I posted today, we have Reps and Dems against the Ex-Im bank, and Reps and Dems for it. It's just about votes, being on the winning side as you earlier said, nothing but power.

"The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." ~P. J. O'Rourke

Okay, I'll give this one more shot to see if I know where you're coming from. You believe that the two major parties are corrupt, and if not corrupt then that they both only serve our nation as entities for the rich and the powerful, and that both parties have it on their agenda to grow the government exponentially in what most would call a progressive manner.

I am a bit curious if you believe a Libertarian president would also seek unlimited power, and would also grow our government as well? What I see from you and others here is that you have zero faith that anyone from the two parties in Congress have the best interest of our nation in mind while serving. You probably would like to see all of the bums thrown out from our congress. If so, who exactly would you replace them with? My point is that while the government may not be up to snuff with you, it is the one the people elected to carry on our affairs. Until you devise a system to where you can get the people you think can do the job to your liking, I believe its best you stop taking pot shots at these people from both parties until you can remedy the situation.

I don't see any party or any entity that is strong enough or capable enough to fix all of our nation's problems any better than what we have now with the two party system. You sound like the guy who yells fire in a crowded theatre when there wasn't one just to create unnecessary commotion. You seem to have political leanings to the right whether you call them Libertarian or not, but you don't do anyone a favor by bashing the very people in our government who just happen to be on the right. Until you can come up with some legitimate solutions to these real or perceived problems, you would do best to encourage voters to elect all Republicans so you'll get the most efficient group of legislators we have available to do the job.

[Chris]

Okay, I'll give this one more shot to see if I know where you're coming from. You believe that the two major parties are corrupt, and if not corrupt then that they both only serve our nation as entities for the rich and the powerful, and that both parties have it on their agenda to grow the government exponentially in what most would call a progressive manner.

I am a bit curious if you believe a Libertarian president would also seek unlimited power, and would also grow our government as well? What I see from you and others here is that you have zero faith that anyone from the two parties in Congress have the best interest of our nation in mind while serving. You probably would like to see all of the bums thrown out from our congress. If so, who exactly would you replace them with? My point is that while the government may not be up to snuff with you, it is the one the people elected to carry on our affairs. Until you devise a system to where you can get the people you think can do the job to your liking, I believe its best you stop taking pot shots at these people from both parties until you can remedy the situation.

I don't see any party or any entity that is strong enough or capable enough to fix all of our nation's problems any better than what we have now with the two party system. You sound like the guy who yells fire in a crowded theatre when there wasn't one just to create unnecessary commotion. You seem to have political leanings to the right whether you call them Libertarian or not, but you don't do anyone a favor by bashing the very people in our government who just happen to be on the right. Until you can come up with some legitimate solutions to these real or perceived problems, you would do best to encourage voters to elect all Republicans so you'll get the most efficient group of legislators we have available to do the job.

Something like that.

Already saud "No, libertarian principles and Libertarian Party are, imo, disconnected."

Parties and politicians should stop trying to fix things. It's not their business, they don't have the Constitutional powers to allow it. Why would anyone want unconstitutional efficiency? See, now that is where you, Reps and Dems are exactly the same.

[Libhater]

Parties and politicians should stop trying to fix things. It's not their business, they don't have the Constitutional powers to allow it. Why would anyone want unconstitutional efficiency? See, now that is where you, Reps and Dems are exactly the same.

No, Reps are Dems are light-years apart as I've already stated. Any and all inefficiency and or anti Constitutional laws or policies are left for the dems to own. You still haven't given us your solution to or your push for a party , an ideology or a working team of Libertarians etc. that would help make government more efficient to your liking. I kind of like to deal with reality and real time solutions here to that of empty rhetoric. After all, we've seen what empty and smooth rhetoric and an empty suited president has given us for 5 1/2 years now; no need to follow suit.

[Chris]

No, Reps are Dems are light-years apart as I've already stated. Any and all inefficiency and or anti Constitutional laws or policies are left for the dems to own. You still haven't given us your solution to or your push for a party , an ideology or a working team of Libertarians etc. that would help make government more efficient to your liking. I kind of like to deal with reality and real time solutions here to that of empty rhetoric. After all, we've seen what empty and smooth rhetoric and an empty suited president has given us for 5 1/2 years now; no need to follow suit.

And you haven't named a conservative politician yet. And now you're rambling on vaguely about Republican's progressive agenda to fix and change things. Not a bit of difference from Democrats.

My solution? Let the people solve their problems, keep government out of it. If we must have one, confine it strictly to the Constitution.

Already told you I am libertarian not Libertarian.

You're the one talking progressive ideology and then you claim to be in touch with reality? LOL

[Libhater]

And you haven't named a conservative politician yet. And now you're rambling on vaguely about Republican's progressive agenda to fix and change things. Not a bit of difference from Democrats.

I wasn't asked to name a Conservative politician, moreover, naming some doesn't have anything to do with what we're debating here. But just to please you I would mention a couple like Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Scott Walker, Marco Rubio, Rick Perry, etc.


My solution? Let the people solve their problems, keep government out of it. If we must have one, confine it strictly to the Constitution.

Sounds to me like you've been conversing with our forum anarchist, green arrow. Keeping government out of solving our nation's problems is and has been the Conservative message all along, and that includes lowering if not eliminating taxes for starters--perhaps even abolishing the IRS. But continuing to bash the Republicans isn't going to help them win the mid terms so that they can begin the task of reducing this government.


Already told you I am libertarian not Libertarian.

Okay, I don't know the difference and at this point I don't want to know.


You're the one talking progressive ideology and then you claim to be in touch with reality? LOL

I'm the one talking progressive ideology? Wow, please point to where I talk about wanting or pushing forward a progressive ideology? You must have forgotten who you were kibitzing with there for a moment.

[Chris]

I wasn't asked to name a Conservative politician, moreover, naming some doesn't have anything to do with what we're debating here. But just to please you I would mention a couple like Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Scott Walker, Marco Rubio, Rick Perry, etc.



Sounds to me like you've been conversing with our forum anarchist, green arrow. Keeping government out of solving our nation's problems is and has been the Conservative message all along, and that includes lowering if not eliminating taxes for starters--perhaps even abolishing the IRS. But continuing to bash the Republicans isn't going to help them win the mid terms so that they can begin the task of reducing this government.



Okay, I don't know the difference and at this point I don't want to know.



I'm the one talking progressive ideology? Wow, please point to where I talk about wanting or pushing forward a progressive ideology? You must have forgotten who you were kibitzing with there for a moment.

You named a libertarian, Mike Lee, and a Tea Partier, Cruz, along with big government cons. Apparently you like them all, whether they want to shrink government or grow it, simply because they call themselves Republicans.

The Constitution does NOT grant government the power to fix things. So, yes, in that respect you're no different that a progressive. In your last several posts you've amply demonstrated that.

[Libhater]

You named a libertarian, Mike Lee, and a Tea Partier, Cruz, along with big government cons. Apparently you like them all, whether they want to shrink government or grow it, simply because they call themselves Republicans.

The Constitution does grant government the power to fix things. So, yes, inthat respect you're no different that a progressive. In your last several posts you've amply demonstrated that.

You've made absolutely no sense here, and for that, I am officially ending my conservation with you. Carry on if you must for I've got bigger fish to fry.

[Chris]

You've made absolutely no sense here, and for that, I am officially ending my conservation with you. Carry on if you must for I've got bigger fish to fry.


Correction: "The Constitution does NOT grant government the power to fix things."

Sorry to see you end this "conservation".

[Mini Me]

SO you'd vote for Ventura, who I hear has selected Howard Stern as running mate. Both libertarian, thus Rethuglicans, and you have contradicted yourself.

No, Jessie hates both the Rethug and Duhmocrap parties. He even put out a book on it. "Democrips and Rebloodicans" or something like that. He subscribes to no idiotology such as the two party farce is.

Howard is there to back Jessie with $ 100 M of his fortune, but Jessie insists that the people must draft him, if he is to run.

Can you imagine a race of Queen Hillary vs. Jeb Bush? Gawd! How boring! You might as well just lie down in the street and let the Globalist bulldozers run you over!

[Mini Me]

Hegelian dialect is Thesis > Antithesis > Synthesis. Come on Strange, what, were you posting half asleep last night.

Could be. Nurse Rached wouldn't increase my coffee IV drip last night. She slipped me quaaludes instead!

[Mini Me]

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in my disgust with certain people always lumping the two parties together as if they both shared exact ideologies. The Republican party is the party of the Constitution, and from everything I see today the Democrat party is the one stripping out the guts of the Constitution--be it via our 2nd Amendment, the perpetual raising of our taxes, the overreach of executive power and their dedicated agenda to centralize our government with virtually every policy they issue.

Furthermore, the left is totally AWOL when it comes to securing our border, and their feckless potus has breached his duty to uphold our Constitution and to protect the United States from the curse of illegal immigration.

So when people who supposedly have politically 'Right' leanings go out of their way to get in bed with the leftists by attacking the Rinos' and the current GOP leadership--it only helps to fuel the already un-American Democratic base that in turn uses the inner fighting of Republicans to further damage the party. In case you haven't noticed--the democrats had a field back during the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections by having we Republicans/Conservatives etc. bash one another thus setting up easy victories for Obama while those in fighting Republicans decided to stay home as a result of all the propaganda being dished out by both sides over Romney's personal and political life.

Its well known the the Rethuglicans eat their own! They are the party of cannibalism. Kinda like the Mafia, they kill their way to the top of the dung heap!

BTW, are you hungry yet?

[Chris]

No, Jessie hates both the Rethug and Duhmocrap parties. He even put out a book on it. "Democrips and Rebloodicans" or something like that. He subscribes to no idiotology such as the two party farce is.

Howard is there to back Jessie with $ 100 M of his fortune, but Jessie insists that the people must draft him, if he is to run.

Can you imagine a race of Queen Hillary vs. Jeb Bush? Gawd! How boring! You might as well just lie down in the street and let the Globalist bulldozers run you over!



Howard is there for access to media.

[Captain Obvious]

Howard Stern would be a better candidate than anyone currently on the ticket.

Mostly because he's honest.

[Mini Me]

Wow, I knew I should have stayed longer in that logic class. Of course there is little to no connection between ideologies and or principles between the parties because the two are 180 degrees opposed to one another. So why do you and other so-called politically right leaning people keep insisting on lumping them all together? It just doesn't make sense that you would keep doing that.

And now in the same breath you say there is no Republican or no Democrat ideology? You got to be kidding. Perhaps you are contemplating joining in with the Green Party or the Libertarians or the Communist party of the United States etc. as a revolt or disgust against the two major parties, for I just can't see where you're coming from or what type of political ideology if any that you currently espouse, let alone join in on the campaign trail with.

Let me put it to you in words you may understand:

The D and R parties are ruled by the Globalist plutocrats, Bilderbergers, all of them! That's how they are the same!
They are two sides of the same Globalist coin, pretending to be opposed on certain issues that have nothing to do with their ultimate goals. We have been conned! All this political jabber is just a smoke screen to entrap the masses.

Its really the Shadow Government that rules us, the New World Order, and the people have no real power, only the rich, elite do anymore.

[Mini Me]

I feel we should have a coalition with Russia, China, and NATO to annex the Muslim oilfields. Oil is really worth less than $5 a barrel. Lies about pollution, global warming, and Peak Oil are just smokescreens to accept the strangulation of our economic potential.

We had our chance when Bush failed to storm Iraq and seize the oil fields during Desert Storm! He lost his guts, and lost the mission.

Then Son of Bush failed miserably when we had Iraq in a death grip, then declared; "Mission accomplished" and let the terrorists move in and take over. Once again, a failure of will.

China, Russia, etc. would NEVER share that oil with us. Nevah!

[donttread]

OMG, I suppose you detest our Constitution as well. That type of thinking is sick. Perhaps you prefer anarchy. Call on your buddy GA to get some support.

I think he'd prefer politicians and parties that would actually do their jobs and you should prefer that too