Matt Walsh:
Goodbye, Republican Party.
I mean that in more ways than one. I’m leaving. You’re dying. I could stick around while you gasp your last pitiful breaths, but what would be the point? I’m certainly more pro-life than you ever were, but when it comes to political parties that have been overtaken by some kind of unintelligible, socially liberal populism, I say pull the plug.
Good riddance. Your wounds are self-inflicted anyway. Clearly you have no desire to live. So goodbye. I am abandoning you on your deathbed, and I feel no shame in it.
Ted Cruz lost Indiana by enormous margins last night. He dropped out. It’s over. It would’ve required a miracle for him to win the nomination anyway, and this is certainly not a country that deserves a miracle. I’d say ruination and judgment are more our speed at this point, and I believe the good Lord just may oblige us.
Ruination is obviously what a majority in both parties have enthusiastically endorsed, especially the predominately “conservative,” “Christian,” “Republican” states that turned out in droves for a left-wing vulgarian who, when he’s not bragging of his adultery or fantasizing about dating his daughter or mocking POWs and the disabled, has taken to perpetuating conspiracy theories about how his former opponent’s father killed JFK. Of course, he said this on Fox News while the empty vessels on their morning show sat by and nodded submissively.
But this is par for the course with Trump. He’s not abovecalling your wife ugly if you cross him or sending his surrogates out to accuse you of being a serial adulterer. As a guy reportedly linked to the mob, and who’s been credibly accused of brutal rape, and who used to pal around with an infamous international pimp and pedophile, you’d think he’d shy away from repeating rumors. But Trump doesn’t shy away from anything, save the truth.
Trump, as Sen. Ted Cruz finally observed hours before the end, is a pathological liar. He lies about everything, all the time, relentlessly. Even when there’s no real need or reason, like when he brazenly lied about Mike Tyson’s rape conviction after Tyson endorsed his campaign. And so on. I don’t need to list all the times Trump strayed from the facts, nor the conflicting positions he’s taken on every issue, nor the litany of other charges that can be leveled against him. All of these things are known, yet he was still handed the banner of the Republican Party and appointed its standard bearer. Let others suffer the degradation of marching behind him. I’ll be somewhere far away, shaking my head in disgust.
Still, before I leave, I thought I’d pass along a few final thoughts. It doesn’t matter to me if you take them to heart. I am no longer associated with the idiotic activities of the GOP and its orange god-king. I refuse to have spent 8 years criticizing President Obama’s unthinking statist minions only to throw my lot in with Trump’s own gaggle of worshiping cultists. The fate of the suicidal, self-mutilating Republican Party is no longer my concern.
But, out of the kindness of my heart, I offer these closing observations:
1. It’s not me, it’s you.
The Republican Party is host to many millions of people who fell prostrate before a flamboyant charlatan, despite, or perhaps even because of, his compulsive dishonesty, his moral cowardice, his cruelty and pettiness, his blatant and unapologetic ignorance and disinterest in the most important issues facing our country, his liberalism and so on. As Trump said himself, he could shoot someone in the middle of the street and these people would still follow him.
That’s why I’m leaving. It’s also why you’re dying. It’s not my fault, and it’s not even Trump’s fault. Trump is just a parasite who took advantage of a weakened immune system. He’s the violent case of dysentery that finally kills the frail man who was already sick with a thousand other exotic diseases. The untrained eye may say the man died because he was vomiting blood, but in truth he was vomiting blood because he was dying.
The Republican Party, we should remember, is made up of Republicans. And most of the Republicans are voters, not politicians. So even if nobody else will say it, I must make it clear that I’m leaving because of these voters. Whatever else can be said of citizens who want a man like Trump to run the country, it cannot be said that they’re anything resembling conservative. Nor can it be said that we have anything much in common.
Yesterday, a Republican in Indiana told the media she’s voting for Trump because he’s a “different kind of liar.” The day before, Cruz attempted to have a reasoned dialogue with a couple of Trump supporters who responded to all of the senator’s arguments by shouting slogans and pumping their fists. Trump fans perform even less admirably in cyberspace, where an impassioned collection of anti-Semites and white nationalists work tirelessly to confirm every negative and cartoonish stereotype liberals have ever concocted about Republicans.
I’m not saying they’re all like this, but I’m done answering for the antics and inanities of the Trump squad. They’re not in my party. Or, I suppose they’d respond, I’m not in theirs. And they’re right.
2. Trump is Hillary, Hillary is Trump.
Many conservatives have told me they “hate Trump” but “hate Clinton more,” or words to that effect. Last night, a good number of them condemned me in no uncertain terms for daring to do anything but fall in line behind Trump and his party. “Lesser of two evils,” they cried. “If you don’t vote for Trump, you vote for Hillary,” they insisted. And they were wrong and will continue to be wrong on both counts.
What these people have not been able to do is explain, in clear and rational language, why they think Trump would be superior to Clinton. Reminding me that Clinton is awful doesn’t help. I’m aware, thank you. My contention is that Trump is awful in equal measure. I think the facts are on my side: They’re both elitist progressives. Both pathological liars. Both morally bankrupt. Both narcissists. Both entirely unconcerned about the issues and willing to take whatever position assures them more power. Both Statist. Both authoritarian. Both tyrants, the only difference is that Trump actually ran on a platform of tyranny – promising to murder women and children and squash dissent. etc. – whereas Clinton has to pretend she’s not a tyrant. That means Trump will have a mandate for tyranny that Clinton will, much to her chagrin, not be granted.
These two could not be more identical. That’s why they were such good friends. For God’s sake they’ll both be under investigation for crimes during the general election. Clinton for her email scandal and Trump for financial fraud. It’s like they’re fraternal twins or something. It would almost be kind of cute if they weren’t harbingers of national doom.
It’s true that Hillary is worse than almost every human in America, but Republicans went rifling through a a flaming dumpster and managed to dig up the one guy who could rival her in general contemptibleness. This will be yet another reason why I’ll cringe with shame when I tell my grandkids that I was once a member of the GOP. Of course, by that time the GOP will be a question in a Trivial Pursuit game, not an actual functioning political party. (Question: “Which American political party actually wasn’t joking when it made the guy from The Apprentice its nominee for president?”)
Either candidate will, through their vanity, moral vacuousness, and incompetence, inflict fatal damage on the country. Hillary would do so with the hearty endorsement of liberal Democrats, and Trump with that of Republicans. I’d say, if you really had to choose, it’s better that the tyranny come from the other side than your own. That doesn’t mean I’d vote for Hillary – as I’ve said many times, I’d rather take a bullet to the head – but the situation does bring to mind an Alexander Hamilton quote:
“If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures.”
I think there is a very basic voting principle that is as American as the Constitution itself (not that Trump or his fans care much for that old thing), and it’s that we must never actively affirm tyranny. It’s one thing to compromise on a policy here or there, but if a tyrant is seeking the Oval Office, no matter who he is running against, you cannot support him. You cannot support tyranny. Ever. Under any circumstance. Indeed, American have died for the sake of this principle. The least we can do is trouble ourselves to vote third party.
Anyway, it doesn’t make a difference. Trump will lose in a landslide to Hillary. Allow me to egotistically quote myself from a week ago:
Matt Walsh’s boss has said that he is on suicide watch.
With a boss like that, no wonder Matt is so depressed.
Matt reminds me of that South Park meme: “Screw you guys, I’m going home”.
Throw a tantrum, take your toys and refuse to play – very helpful.
Some of this stuff is made up. for example who has ever alleged that Trump is ‘under investigation’ for financial fraud. ? That’s systemic of this whole article, it’s mostly ‘made up’ for the sake of making a useless argument. So the alternative is Hillary. Would that be a step up? I don’t know who Matt Walsh is and am not sure the point of posting his “I’m going to take my marbles and go home” article. Sounds like a immature person that didn’t get his share of cookies.
Why would anyone need to do that? Someone that has been in this country since 1992 should have all the answers they need about Hillary Clinton and know that the last place, in the world, that she needs to be is near the Oval office. There are very few US citizens that would not make a better president than Hillary Clinton. That certainly can’t be said about Trump. Trump will (if elected) be probably the best qualified by experience of any president to ever enter the office. Reagan was better suited for it when he entered office due to his experience and personality.
And that would do what? Absolutely nothing. Name a third party candidate. Who’s on the ballot?
So, whoever Matt Walsh is, he needs to grow up and share his marbles.
I would have liked to have supported Ted, but with his over the top zealous theocratic campaigning there was no way in hell moderates and independents were going to vote for Cruz yet the “never-Trumps” just couldn’t understand how much his holier-than-thou overemphasis turns voters off. We weren’t voting for a pastor, we were voting for a presidential candidate. He also clearly did not want anyone to look at his triple-citizenship. If he would have legally filed to irrevocably renounce both his Canadian and Cuban citizenship, then I might have considered voting for him.
We held our noses since Reagan and reluctantly voted for the party’s greedy progressive-globalist establishment candidates, who time after time promised to be more conservative, and instead, time after time, they turned more into Democrats. It was the establishment’s refusal to listen to the voting base that made Trump’s success possible.
“What these people have not been able to do is explain, in clear and rational language, why they think Trump would be superior to Clinton.”
Complete and utter bullshit.He has just proven that he doesn’t listen to anyone who disagrees with him, yet he keeps writing, expecting us to listen to him. I wonder how it feels to live in an elite bubble?
Well, it’s about to burst.
Cruz for SCOTUS 2017
@Redteam:
My God, man, have you lost what little common sense God gave you? Trump will probably be better qualified than any other president? Better than George Washington, who led rag-tag troops to defeat the most powerful nation in the world at the time? Coolidge, who steered the nation out of a massive depression without plummeting the nation into great debt? Lincoln, a lawyer who understood federal law and who understood how our government functioned? Eisenhower, another leader of troops against a ferocious enemy and gave us a period of stability and growth?
And what has Trump really done that was greater than those men? By your standards, Rockefeller, Carnegie, J.P Morgan and all the other robber barons would have been well suited for the Office of President.
@Ditto:
So what you are saying is that you would have never voted for the other men who held strong beliefs in God? Men like Washington, Adams, Lincoln and FDR? Men who were not ashamed of their belief in God, who believed that our nation was created for a “moral and religious” people? Men who believed that our right to worship took such importance that it was placed in the First Amendment, above all other Amendments?
Nah, better to have someone office that thinks if a man wakes up one morning feeling all girly, he has he right to use the same rest room facilities as my daughter, right?
Time will tell what the implications are for the Republican Party. The dems have already had their “revolution” with the election of Obama and decided that their party should be one of neo-Marxist/neo/socialist ideals. There are no conservatives left in their party and virtually no moderates left either. That brings us to the Republican Party. They were supposed to be the conservative party. While they have far more conservatives than the dems have moderates, they also have a number who are “conservative” (read big government establishment types) only because compared to how far the dems have lurched to the left, they are.
Time will tell if the Republicans become the populist party under Trump as opposed to the conservative party they claim to be. That would involve a Reaganistic type leadership coup under Trump, something he has thus far shown to be incapable of doing. He will either be a one time blip on the screen or will have transformed the party into a populist one meaning we will have a neo-socialist party for the left, a populist party for populists, and no party for conservatives. In other words, no party to fight for small government, the Constitution, balanced budgets, and fiscal responsibility etc. Moderates will be left to choosing between a hardcore left wing party and a party that embraces whatever the populist sentiment of the day is.
1.5 conservatives 1 semi left leaning moderate the rest lunatics why is this advertised as a conservative blogging site?
Vote for a stark raving mad rich guy that is an accused child rapist, wants boys in the girls room, and for us to soften our approach on murdering babies, compulsive liar.
Better than Hillary , no your cheese for that trap is really moldy, try it on the desperate.
You have put the Democrats back in the White House Congratulations.
@another vet –
The Republican party to become a populist movement? You would hope not. Most populist movements haven’t been able to stand the test of time. They succumb to large scale corruption and become authoritarian to maintain power. TR tried to reshape the GOP into a populist party since he was one himself. He ended up splitting the party, handing victory to Woodrow Wilson. Think echoes of 1912 playing out again.
Point two – Trump has said repeatedly that he is his own best national security policy advisor, and that he has become qualified in that capacity by watching the Sunday morning talk shows. He has said in the military there is no such thing as an unlawful order, and they will carry out unlawful orders or face the repercussions. Really?
Point three – Trump has said repeatedly the Iraq war shouldn’t haven’t been fought because there were no WMDs. He has also alluded Saddam was not terrorist enabler. ISIS is a direct consequence of the Iraq war. Last time I checked, we still militarily crushed AQI. Obama’s in attentiveness allowed AQI to reconstitute as ISIS. Not only is he channeling Obama’s line of thought, but also the trolls here in these threads about the Iraq and Afghan wars.
Time indeed will determine what will happen ahead. But, Trump will still not receive my vote. As @retire05 has said many times over, replacing one charlatan with another is not a solution. And, neither is choosing one ethically-challenged candidate over another.
@retire05: 6
Let me qualify that as to the modern era. I said this: “Trump will (if elected) be probably the best qualified by experience ” While I agree on George Washington, I don’t know about Coolidge, never read much about him. Lincoln I would put closer to the bottom of the heap as the cause of the civil war and confusing the US with a dictatorship. He clearly wiped his butt on the Constitution. Eisenhower, not as well qualified as MacArthur, and no business experience at all. So, it’s my opinion.
@secret admirer: Don’t know who ‘secret admirer’ is but sounds like one of them stark raving mad lefty liberals that come by and troll the site.
Who is he(it) describing here? Bill Clinton? Hillary? Bernie? Obama?
@Redteam:
Not to get off subject, but how do you figure that? As you know, my position is that the main cause of the CW was two conflicting views of state’s rights, in particular whether or not a state had the right to secede. It was a given at that time that secession would mean war. Lincoln based his response to secession on Andrew Jackson’s response to South Carolina’s threat of secession during the Nullification Crisis of 1832. They even turned to the same general (Winfield Scott) to develop the invasion plans. It’s hard to imagine that there would not have been a war regardless of who was President at the time. War was avoided by his predecessors because they kicked the can down the road much like what happened with AQ in the ’90’s, ISIS today, and our ballooning National Debt.. And yes, I do believe a repeat of 1861 is possible given the toxic environment that exists in this country today. And that actually in a way brings us around to the topic at hand of this thread, because if wasn’t for this toxic environment, Trump would not be in the position he is in today
@another vet #12 –
You made the case I was going to make. I would add the Southern States had viewed the institution of slavery as a states’ rights issue. An outright ban to slavery would be an outright challenge to those states who allowed its practice, infringing on their rights of “lawful” slavery. You are very much correct in the assessment the can was being kicked down made. The current, politically charged environment would be less if Obama had governed more like any of his predecessors. It doesn’t mean he had to give up his agenda, but made a halfway reasonable effort to respect the institutions and traditions of governance. And, if Obama did, I would agree Trump would not be in this position.
Typo: “You are very much correct in the assessment the can was being kicked down made.”
Should read: “You are very much correct in the assessment the can was being kicked down the road.”
@another vet:
A little off-topic – but this is one skeleton in the US’ closet that nobody talks about.
This country was founded on the idea that when people feel that a government no longer represents their interests, they have the right to split away from it.
“…whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
The US supported the secession of many countries – the former Yugoslavian states, former Soviet states, the former Spanish colonies, and firmly pushed the UK into abandoning it’s colonial empire after WWII. But when the South decided to secede, they were not allowed to. Granted, slavery was a black mark on the South, but if the people of the South really did not want to live under Washington DC, by what right did the US have to force them to stay?
@another vet:
I agree with that. If the Republicans in Congress were actually functioning as Republicans they would oppose many of the things that Obama has gotten us into. But they have totally joined the rascals.(let me point out that Cruz and Rubio were amongst these in the Congress) Even when they do put forth a little effort and stop something drastic, Obama just writes an illegal Executive order and does whatever the hell he wants to do. Even when a court rules against him, he just goes ahead and does what he wants to do. Trumps message, whether he will or not, is to make America great again. Many people would like for America to be great again, some don’t. But back to the issue about Lincoln. If the southern states chose to secede, they had the right to do so. The Constitution needed to be amended to change that. Lincoln decided to enforce his version of the law, even though it did not agree with the Constitution. When he gave orders to move forces against the south, that was clearly something he did not have the right to do. Especially ordering Virginia to supply troops to attack other Southern states. The Emancipation Proclamation was clearly illegal, it was never approved by the states as a constitutional amendment. Did the US survive because of Lincoln or in spite of Lincoln. I don’t know the answer to that. I don’t think any president has the right to suspend the Constitution just because it suits their needs. I think slavery was on it’s way out without the civil war, but we’ll never know.
@Dreadnought: Expanding on that, no where in the Constitution does it mention secession, only statehood. I reject the argument made that the CW laid to rest the idea that states have the right to secede. What the CW showed was that the North had a manpower and materiel advantage the South couldn’t overcome once the North adopted the strategy of a war of attrition. Given the South inflicted more casualties on the North despite its vastly numerically inferiority in those areas, I would argue that the South only had to come close to matching the North in those areas, they may very well have won.
@another vet:I agree with 17, but:
True, and if it is not ‘banned’ or ‘prohibited’ by the Constitution, then it is Constitutional. If Congress wanted to ban a state, or make it illegal, then a Constitutional Amendment was necessary. No one wanted to do that.
@Petercat:
I agree. Best place for Ted Cruz where he can do the most good.
@retire05:
That’s not what I meant and you know it. Cruz implicitly and quite clearly indicated that it was his particular branch of Christianity that would be his guide as president. Washington, Adams etc. who believed in God and did rule morally, but none of them ruled as theologians. Cruz’ message made it pretty darn clear that he would govern as a theologian which is NOT a position I will support from any candidate.
You are babbling. I never said anything supporting the very dangerous gender-bender bathroom issue nor the far leftist war on traditional families and biological facts.
@David: Unfortunately people have a misguided view of what the CW was about. The current PC atmosphere dictates that we need to feel good about ourselves (the left anyway), therefore it was all about freeing the slaves.
The Obama supporters are just as much to blame as the Republican establishment for Trump’s rise. I find it amusing that they voted for Mr. Divisiveness himself and then complain about Trump’s divisiveness. Hypocrisy at its best.
@RedteamGotta run. I’ll respond in more detail when I get back!
@Ditto:
I agree except that I think it should be established first that he is an American citizen. That still hasn’t been cleared up. (I’m not talking ‘natural born’ here, just plain old citizen)
That way we could be sure he’s not just interpreting the Constitution to fit him.
@Redteam:
I still haven’t been convinced that Cruz’ mother gave up her citizenship. Everything I’ve seen making such claims has been posted on various rather questionable websites. Therefore I’m giving the benefit of the doubt that she didn’t, and that Ted has Triple-citizenship. That does not disqualify him for the Supreme Court.
@David: and Another Vet–Trump is a Populist. Conservatives are thinkers not fighters-the reason they lose so often. Ryan and the Conservative base have been pushed into a corner by Trump—the future of the Republican Party is threatened–Ryan and other Conservs. look like they might finally fight for survival.
Judge Napolitano says Trump will mold the Republican Party in his image–“like Lincoln and Reagan did.”-and he said it with a straight face..
This would be great comedic theater if the consequences were not so serious. IfTrump wins it will mark the end of the Grand Old Party. If he loses Conservatives will rise up and claim The Presidency in 2020—is there any surprise why they’d be against him now?
@Richard Wheeler:
Ryan is not a conservative by any stretch of the imagination, which has been completely proven by how he has run as Speaker. He is all establishment, a progressive which only claims to being of the “fiscal conservatives,” yet who surrenders completely to the progressive out of control spending of Obama, the Democrats and his fellow RINOs. Claiming Ryan is a conservative is either delusion, an attempt to dissemble, or naive wishful thinking on your part.
@Ditto: Next you’ll tell me Trump IS a Conservative—he’s a Populist plain and simple—Conservative Repubs. worst nightmare–they’ll fight him tooth and nail even though, as mentioned, they’ve proven to be weak pugilists.
@Ditto:
I don’t even question whether she gave up her citizenship or not. I just question whether the required paperwork was ever filed for a foreign birth to be properly recorded in the US. There is no evidence that it was done.
I’m just guessing that they only appoint US citizens to the Supreme Court.
@Ditto:
But Ditto, Rainbow Richie doesn’t know any better. He thinks he is showing political smarts when he refers to RINO’s as Conservatives. Ryan doesn’t have a Conservative bone in his body. He is just purely Washington establishment. I certainly will not argue that Trump is a conservative, he doesn’t need to be. He just doesn’t need to be ‘establishment’. Establishment can’t get anything changed, they are too busy playing ball, to maintain their own ‘status quo’. Ryan is deeply devoted to doing that.
Kinda like Rainbow Richie saying McCain is a war hero, but he can’t name one single heroic thing he ever did.
@Ditto: The good news for Conservatives is a Trump defeat, which they will assist in securing, will re-establish them as the heart and soul of the G.O.P.–Conservatives like 05 and David, Cruz and Rubio won’t feel too bad about the thrashing Trump is gonna take.
Deluded Trumpists like Bill, Petercat, Nan and RT, Christie and Giuliani will be accepted back in the fold..Conservatives are magnanimous that way.
@Richard Wheeler:
Rainbow Richie is still having problems keeping his lists straight. When and where did I ever claim to be a Trumpist? If you can’t get that right, how can you pretend to be able to identify the difference in a Conservative and a Socialist.
Anyone that would vote for a Clinton (and that would be Rainbow Richie) doesn’t understand politics anyhow.
Are you promising to leave the country if Trump gets elected? Michael Moore was on Kelley, sounds just like Rainbow Richie, is that your alter ego?
@Ditto: One thing George AND RT can celebrate is Trump’s acceptance of gay and lesbian rights–It also seems that RT is the only one of us who has actually said he supports HRC—For many months he was assuring all that she would not even be the nominee
@Redteam:
I concur.
Again, I concur. I never said I was a solid Trump backer, nor did I have anything to do with his campaign. I only stated that out of those running, that I could vote for him because I think that he will get immigration under control and he will finally ensure that the wall is built.I had no confidence that any of the other candidates would do that. If Trump also succeeds in re-industrializing the US, produces a job creation economy, keeps his promise in doing away with Obama’s terrible (and in some cases illegal,) Presidential orders and directives, and if he is able to clean house and get rid of the waste and reduce the bloated size of government, he will have done more than any of the so called “conservative” Washington establishment politicians since Reagan have done. Will that make Trump a “Conservative”? Who cares, so long as Donald does what the GOP has been promising the conservative base for the last three decades.
Richie seems to think you support Hillary. I think he is clueless in not understanding why you want Hillary to win nomination. Hillary is damaged goods just as Carter was. Millennials don’t like her, women don’t like her, White males don’t like her, no one trusts her, even Hispanic and Black support is shaky where Hillary is concerned. The press and polls wanted everyone to believe that Reagan didn’t have a chance against Carter. We all know how that worked out.
@Redteam: Neither Cruz nor Rubio shied away from publicly criticizing Obama, something a lot of people wouldn’t do out of fear of being called “racist”. .
As for Lincoln, a large number of people in the North believed the South had no right to secede. Had he not acted in re-supplying Ft. Sumter, he would have been finished as President. Ditto if he had not acted after it was fired on. Three top Union generals- McClellan, Grant, and Sherman all took to the battlefield because they believed states had no right to secede. None of them went to fight to fight to “free the slaves”. They all believed it was a Southern problem that the South should solve as did most Northerners outside of the Abolitionist movement. Sherman went so far as to call Southern slavery as the best form of slavery in the world. He himself owned slaves. His animosity toward the South was because of their decision to secede.
And I agree. Slavery would have gone away on its own as it was an obsolete form of labor.
@another vet: As you know the revolt against Trump within the Party is not only coming from establishment Repubs–many rock solid Conservatves oppose him.
Does Populist Trump really care? His goal is to win . He’ll move to the middle–he’ll be fine with Planned Parenthood–women’s vote .He’ll put the Wall and illegal immigration on hold–Hispanic vote.
His best issue is jobs and Make America Great Again. A good slogan
btw–For Cruz to support Trump he’d have to put his manhood in a jar and lock it away.Won’t happen.
Reince Priebus looks and acts like a doe caught in the headlights–He doesn’t know whether to s—t or go blind
@another vet:
That’s what I find so impossible to understand. How can people, especially only 80 years or so after having gained independence for pretty much the same reasons, think that it is legitimate to force half the country to stay when the populations of those states wanted to leave.
@Dreadnought: Grant’s reasoning was that if the Founders wanted to give the states the right to secede, they would have put in the Constitution. He also cited Texas as an example stating how much the country sacrificed to help them gain their independence and later statehood thus making it wrong for them to secede. Right or wrong, that was one explanation. CW historian James McPherson examined various forms of correspondence between soldiers on both sides to try and determine why they fought. In the North it was to preserve the Union. In the South, it was for independence, often times citing the Revolution.
@Richard Wheeler: Time will tell what Trump’s effect will be. If he loses, he’ll be a blip on the screen. If he wins, the success of his presidency will determine whether or not he was the second coming of Andrew Jackson or a slightly bigger blip on the screen. I underestimated him once and don’t want to do it again.
@another vet:
The right to Secede is in the Declaration of Independence. It transcends the Constitution. The Constitution describes how the government should work. The Declaration of Independence describes what happens when the Government no longer works for a particular constituency (mainly geographical, though this is not explicit)
Anyone ready to go all Moby Dick or tilt at a windmill?
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/278929-ten-third-party-candidate-names-at-top-of-never-trumps-list.
There are more than just the 2 corrupt political parties.
@Ditto:
And what “branch” of Christianity would that be?
Have you read the complete writings of Washington, Adams? Many of their writings could be considered “theological” in subject. And you ignore that their Christian “theology” guided their actions.
@Redteam:
Define “establishment.”
@Dreadnought: That would lend credibility to the South’s argument which was that since the Union was formed by the states, they certainly had the right to withdrawl from it if they felt it no longer represented them.
@retire05: Define ”Establishment?”
Where’s you been?
The GOPe (e = establishment) is the group that failed to secure the border even when in control of the White House AND congress.
The GOPe is the group that refused to support Ken Cuccinnelli in Virginia.
The GOPe is the group that played the ”race card” in Mississippi to re-elect Thad Cochran.
The GOPe is the group that paid Democrats to vote in the Republican primary in Mississippi.
The GOPe is the group that vowed to crush the TEA Party everywhere.
The GOPe is far more interested in maintaining its stranglehold on power in DC than it is on serving the interests of the people who it’s members make promises to in order to get into office.
@Richard Wheeler:
Well Rainbow, which is it? Am I a Trumpist or for Hillary? Can it be both? Sure, you can believe that I’m voting for Hillary like I believe you’re not a Rainbow Warrior. You sure are one confused lad? (assumption?).
@David:
I agree 100%. There are lots of parallels to what is happening now and what happened back in Antebellum America. As a conservative/libertarian now, I can see why there was animosity. The South contributed a lot to the founding and expansion of our infant nation. Many historians believe the Revolutionary War was won in the South. The War of 1812, which finally laid to rest the British idea that we were still somehow subordinate to them, had most of its opposition in the North but strong support in the South. Jackson’s victory at the Battle of New Orleans was won by a mishmash force comprised mainly of Southern militia, Lafitte’s pirates, and Free Blacks. Only a fraction of his army were Federal regulars. It rallied the nation and created a new found nationalism after a near defeat even though the war ended beforehand. Fast forward to the war with Mexico which added a great amount of territory to the country and allowed the dream of Manifest Destiny to be fulfilled. Once again, opposition was centered in the North even though the biggest lobbyists pushing Polk were Northern industrialists. Once again, who supplied a large number of those fighting? In the end, who got the most economic benefit from the war- North or South? The answer is found in the geography. The lands won weren’t exactly conducive to cotton and slave labor. So I c an see where the South took exception to the North treating them like bastard step children, which isn’t to say the South didn’t have their faults or never got their way either. The Compromise of 1850 and Dred Scott decision both favored the South.
That brings us to the today. The last seven years has seen Obama and his leftist enablers relentlessly attack and demonize those who oppose him, mainly conservatives. He has called us the enemy just like certain left wing trolls here have called us the biggest threat to the nation. He has unleashed the power of his IRS and DOJ on conservatives to get us in line with his way of thinking. Like the South in the 1800’s, conservatives have contributed lots to the country. As an example, look at the composition of our Armed Forces, the ones who have volunteered to fight GWOT and make sacrifices, sometimes the ultimate one. The majority are of conservative bent meaning cons have contributed while libs (only 8% of our military according to a 2014 Military Times’ survey) sit on the sidelines, sharpshoot those who served, and embrace organizations like Moveon.org and Code Pink. And the Obama administration? Their thanks has been long waiting times at the VA, denied care, death for the Vets, and bonuses for those responsible. As an added bonus, if you served overseas in a warzone, you may qualify to be on a terrorist watch list.
So there are definite parallels. It’s easy to see why a person like Trump can emerge like he did. When people have had enough, they turn to someone who is fiery even though he may may be a wolf in sheep’s clothing. That is why John Calhoun and Jefferson Davis resonated in the South. We are very much a divided nation perhaps to the point of no return. I realize I am preaching to the choir on this.
@Richard Wheeler:
Name a couple of these ‘rock solid’ conservatives. I don’t think I know any. I don’t think you understand what a Conservative is. You’ve been boarding with the liberal socialists out there in Gayfornia too long.
Do you really know some political candidates that do not have a goal to win? Not much point in running if your goal is not to win, is there? You should be using some of your political expertise to help your girl Hillary, she’s going to need all the help she can get. I’m still not sure she’s going to be the candidate, I’m still pulling for her because she’ll certainly be the easiest to defeat. Well, other than Bernie.
@Nanny G:
Unlike you, pushing conservative values for 4 decades.
And who put those very “Establishment” people into office, time after time after time? And who funded the campaigns of those very “Establishment” people? Oh, that’s right; people like Donald Trump who gave Mitch McConnell’s reelection PAC $60,000.00 on one day alone (10/21/2014, just a short year and a half ago for the math challenged), a fact you Trumpeteers just ignore.
So while you whine about the “Establishment” remember that you have carried the water for someone who facilitated said “Establishment” with his money.
@another vet:
That certainly didn’t make Grant correct. As you well know, If the Constitution says you have a right to: then you do. But also, any power not retained by the Federal government, was left to the states. The Federal government did not retain the right to prevent a state from seceding, so that right was left to the states. Just because those in the North didn’t want the Union to break apart, didn’t mean that they didn’t have that right. Now I haven’t re-read the Constitution to verify it, but I believe states still have a right to secede. I think they would be foolish to do so.
Basically I agree with most of your comment.
@retire05:
Well, let’s start here:
Cruz
Rubio
Ryan
Romney
McCain
Flake
and then add those that Nanny G listed.
and add those that have failed to pass any meaningful legislation even tho they control both houses. It’s not because we have a president that would veto anything, they don’t even attempt to pass anything to force his hand. They are dead wood in congress and we need to replace them with someone that actually wants to accomplish something.
I realize I probably missed many that should be on the list, such as Mitch McConnell, but hey, can’t always be perfect.
Prominent Conservatives against Trump include Erick Erickson, Bill Kristol, Bill Wicterman , Bob Fischer and of course Retire05.
They look to find a candidate to run 3RD Party –have reached out to C.Rice and Gen Mattis who have declined.