There is a Ranger4Life on this forum as well. Probably not related to the other(s).

Quote from: quiller on August 12, 2014, 07:16:51 AM
There is a Ranger4Life on this forum as well. Probably not related to the other(s).

He is from our last board we were on, and the sister board also.  He comes and goes off and on.  But as I remember Ranger4Life is very Conservative.  He is a x military Ranger.

Quote from: Darth Fife on August 05, 2014, 08:36:51 AM
"If you do what you've always done, you'll get what you've always gotten."

-Tony Robbins

Since the election of Bush 1, we Conservatives have been held hostage by the moderate wing and their political advisers.

The Narcotic Anonymous basic text has this to say about this type of behavior: Insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results.

-Darth

The same can be said for third parties, conservatives, constitutionalists and libertarians have tried time and time again running third parties and have always (at least since after 1864) failed.

It's a reason why the CPA supports the Democratic party instead of running as a third party. Better to infiltrate and change GOP from within than to fight from the outside.

Quote from: Mountainshield on August 20, 2014, 10:49:52 AM
The same can be said for third parties, conservatives, constitutionalists and libertarians have tried time and time again running third parties and have always (at least since after 1864) failed.

It's a reason why the CPA supports the Democratic party instead of running as a third party. Better to infiltrate and change GOP from within than to fight from the outside.

Correct! CPUSA has made amazing inroads into the Dim party, to the point, they got a Marxist elected, he had their full support and they were not afraid to say so.

Quote from: Solar on August 20, 2014, 12:19:03 PM
Correct! CPUSA has made amazing inroads into the Dim party, to the point, they got a Marxist elected, he had their full support and they were not afraid to say so.

Why is it that you consider Obama a Marxist, exactly? I'd say at worst he is a socialist, whereas Marxism and pure Communism are quite a few levels beyond that, in my opinion.

If he was a full socialist he wouldn't be as reticent as he is, he would be constantly demanding press conferences, calling people to action, there are many things he could do if he were truly so ideologically different that the current state of affairs appalled him to his very core. Truthfully his ineffectiveness as a president goes beyond the blockades we have placed around him. Honestly though I am not certain I have seen a truly effective president since after Ronald Reagan. Certainly Bush Jr. changed a lot with his Patriot act, but it was an easy response to unprecedented violence in US soil (other than Pearl Harbor). Truly effective change has to be acceptable to the populace yet unexpected to his peers. Meaning of course, not that the idea has not been thought of, but that it is considered too rash to be worthy of a solid careerist. No, real change isn't done by the ineffectual senators of the late Roman Republic, real EFFECTIVE change is done by the subtle Octavian or the mercurial and straightforward Caesar. Yes Caesar's methods clearly place one's personal safety at somewhat of a risk, and any change can lead to unintended consequences, but only with Direct action can we see ourselves thriving.

Quote from: Aristophanes on August 23, 2014, 10:14:56 PM
Why is it that you consider Obama a Marxist, exactly? I'd say at worst he is a socialist, whereas Marxism and pure Communism are quite a few levels beyond that, in my opinion.

If he was a full socialist he wouldn't be as reticent as he is, he would be constantly demanding press conferences, calling people to action, there are many things he could do if he were truly so ideologically different that the current state of affairs appalled him to his very core. Truthfully his ineffectiveness as a president goes beyond the blockades we have placed around him. Honestly though I am not certain I have seen a truly effective president since after Ronald Reagan. Certainly Bush Jr. changed a lot with his Patriot act, but it was an easy response to unprecedented violence in US soil (other than Pearl Harbor). Truly effective change has to be acceptable to the populace yet unexpected to his peers. Meaning of course, not that the idea has not been thought of, but that it is considered too rash to be worthy of a solid careerist. No, real change isn't done by the ineffectual senators of the late Roman Republic, real EFFECTIVE change is done by the subtle Octavian or the mercurial and straightforward Caesar. Yes Caesar's methods clearly place one's personal safety at somewhat of a risk, and any change can lead to unintended consequences, but only with Direct action can we see ourselves thriving.

You mean aside the fact that he joined a local communist party chapter when running for Senate, or the fact his mentor was a communist, or that all those he associates with were communists?

Oh, I don't know, maybe it's just a hunch...

Are you freakin serious?
If you learn nothing new this year, then take a crack at understanding Fabian Socialism, it's founding, why it was founded and it's end goal.
Then compare it to the communist in the WH and his policies then get back to me, and I'll bet you money, you come back wondering why the media never mentions the obvious.

But I'll save you the trip, they know exactly what he is and have worked damned hard to keep it off the lips of the public.
The simple fact is, the Dim party has been taken over by Marxists, it really is that simple.
Vote TEA!

Question for Solar (since I don't want my Ted Cruz thread "derailed")

I agree with you 100% about 3rd Parties. In fact, I was there before you.  But tell me EXACTLY what you're gonna do if Romney or Bush or Christie becomes the Republican nominee? Sit out the election? Vote 3rd Party? Write in a candidate?

In 2008 I made the choice to vote Constitution Party. I still don't regret it, though Obama is still worse than McCain, but McCain is pretty bad. But I didn't despise Romney like you do now. I happily voted for him in 2012 and would do so again, though I want a FIGHTER and not someone to "reach across the isle." 

But what will YOU do in 2016 if YOU fail to convince the rest of the country to support YOUR choice?

Quote from: carlb on September 11, 2014, 03:55:44 PM
Question for Solar (since I don't want my Ted Cruz thread "derailed")

I agree with you 100% about 3rd Parties. In fact, I was there before you.  But tell me EXACTLY what you're gonna do if Romney or Bush or Christie becomes the Republican nominee? Sit out the election? Vote 3rd Party? Write in a candidate?

In 2008 I made the choice to vote Constitution Party. I still don't regret it, though Obama is still worse than McCain, but McCain is pretty bad. But I didn't despise Romney like you do now. I happily voted for him in 2012 and would do so again, though I want a FIGHTER and not someone to "reach across the isle." 

But what will YOU do in 2016 if YOU fail to convince the rest of the country to support YOUR choice?

Write in, absolutely! I think Mitten is a nice guy, probably make good friends, but sadly, he epitomizes RINO, more corporate cronyism, bigger govt and all that entails.
I supported Newt until he said he would do nothing about ethanol/farm/corn subsidies early on.

Point is, stating this early in the game that you'll vote for a RINO regardless, sends the wrong message to the establishment, one I'll call out every time a member concedes defeat, in the same way RINO have always done with the left, which is why we are where we are today.

We're at war for our very way of life, the future of this great Nation rests in the hands of the victor, so either we let the same old shit continue, guaranteeing socialism, or we draw the line and stand our ground and vote TEA.

And if we were to, by some freak chance fail, so be it, we'll still control both houses, that means far more than the Presidency when you have Conservatives kicking ass.
Remember, gridlock can be a good thing.

We're a TEA forum, and nothing less. Keep that in mind when making qualifying statements.

I'm going to piss many of uyou off, but I'm just saying what people are to angry to say...  Conservatives are apart of the GOP party.  Conservatives believe in the same GOP founding principals the difference between them and RINO's is that the Conservatives believe them so strongly that they act on them.  Rino's don't. 

Quote from: washington on September 12, 2014, 03:12:21 AM
I'm going to piss many of uyou off, but I'm just saying what people are to angry to say...  Conservatives are apart of the GOP party.  Conservatives believe in the same GOP founding principals the difference between them and RINO's is that the Conservatives believe them so strongly that they act on them.  Rino's don't.

There is no doubt in my mind you have no clue what being a Conservative means.
These RINO are closer the Dims than they are Pubs, they don't give a damn about principles, values, only that they hold onto power and do the bidding of their corporate masters, and piss on the voter.

They don't see the voter as their constituency, because we're not the ones giving them money to campaign, the money to garner votes came from but a few sources, the GOP being one of them, and it was bought off long ago by special interests.

But being just a kid, I wouldn't expect you to have that kind of historical reference to make the connection.
Hell, you're too young to grasp the concept of True Conservative.

Quote from: Solar on September 12, 2014, 04:23:43 AM
There is no doubt in my mind you have no clue what being a Conservative means.
These RINO are closer the Dims than they are Pubs, they don't give a damn about principles, values, only that they hold onto power and do the bidding of their corporate masters, and piss on the voter.

They don't see the voter as their constituency, because we're not the ones giving them money to campaign, the money to garner votes came from but a few sources, the GOP being one of them, and it was bought off long ago by special interests.

But being just a kid, I wouldn't expect you to have that kind of historical reference to make the connection.
Hell, you're too young to grasp the concept of True Conservative.

I told you guys you wouldn't like it...  Don't say i didn't warn you.  Btw, you already know enough about me after 18 posts to determine I'm not a true conservative?  That's actually funny.  Way to premature there. 

See I don't disagree with you at all.  Not with anything you wrote before you got personal with me.  See the so called RINO's used to be called conservatives, but they fell away from the GOP true conservative beliefs and simply loved power and tried everything to keep it.  Us conservatives are the real GOP and what the GOP was founded on and we believe in our beliefs so strongly that we will sick to our principles and act on them no matter what. 

My prediction is on the financial side of conservatism the Rino's will cut government spending and our national debt pretty good. They don't have a choice and their budgets prove they know what they have to do and how drastic it has to be.  Also, I foresee a GOP full take over by 2016 of all of congress and the Executive branch and they will undo all this crap and pass slicing and dicing budgets and create more tax payers, which means more revenue and way less debt.   

Quote from: washington on September 12, 2014, 05:27:39 AM
I told you guys you wouldn't like it...  Don't say i didn't warn you.

And you'd be wrong, my issue is spouting shit you know nothing about. We have a faithful following on this forum, and when some kid comes in touting to be the nail to the hammer, I pound them into the wood.
Again, the only irritant is your misrepresentation of what being a Conservative is.

QuoteBtw, you already know enough about me after 18 posts to determine I'm not a true conservative?  That's actually funny.  Way to premature there. 

To the contrary, being a Conservative means far more than being political, it's a way of life.

QuoteSee I don't disagree with you at all.  Not with anything you wrote before you got personal with me.

Nothing personal, I simply showed you why you're wrong, you have no historical reference to base your statements on.

QuoteSee the so called RINO's used to be called conservatives,

This is where you're wrong, the GOP has never been a Conservative party, ever!

Quotebut they fell away from the GOP true conservative beliefs and simply loved power and tried everything to keep it.

Yes, to a point you're correct. There was a time in America that 90% of the Nation was Conservative, so it was easy for the GOP, they merely needed to be the gatekeepers of Capitalism, but as the nation started leaning left, these Polls needed to make more money for campaigns, and as the Dims started attacking Capitalist interests, corporations poured money into GOP coffers and the rest is history.

QuoteUs conservatives are the real GOP and what the GOP was founded on and we believe in our beliefs so strongly that we will sick to our principles and act on them no matter what. 

Again, yes an no, the GOP never was principled, which is why they abandoned their base.

QuoteMy prediction is on the financial side of conservatism the Rino's will cut government spending and our national debt pretty good. They don't have a choice and their budgets prove they know what they have to do and how drastic it has to be.  Also, I foresee a GOP full take over by 2016 of all of congress and the Executive branch and they will undo all this crap and pass slicing and dicing budgets and create more tax payers, which means more revenue and way less debt.

We're pretty much in agreement, but had it not been for TEA, all would be for naught.

Quote from: Solar on September 12, 2014, 06:17:40 AM
As if I should care?
To the contrary, being a Conservative means far more than being political, it's a way of life.
Nothing personal, I simply showed you why you're wrong, you have no historical reference to base your statements on.
This is where you're wrong, the GOP has never been a Conservative party, ever!
 
Yes, to a point you're correct. There was a time in America that 90% of the Nation was Conservative, so it was easy for the GOP, they merely needed to be the gatekeepers of Capitalism, but as the nation started leaning left, these Polls needed to make more money for campaigns, and as the Dims started attacking Capitalist interests, corporations poured money into GOP coffers and the rest is history.
Again, yes an no, the GOP never was principled, which is why they abandoned their base.
We're pretty much in agreement, but had it not been for TEA, all would be for naught.

I'm not wrong at all. Also there is plenty of historical information to go on.  Look at how many times the republican party has changed since the the Whig party that produced Lincoln.  About every 30-40 years it goes through a transition period.   

Here I'll make the connection for you.  When candidates get to washington political correctness takes over and they abandon their principle.  I'm of the belief that the reason why the GOP abandoned principle was because of the power potential they could have and the fear of losing their seats in congress.  That's why I'm in favor of shorter congressional terms.  Conservatives are human and humans do things like sin or go away from their beliefs for power.  History proves this over many thousands of years.  The other thing right now that is making it harder is that the establishment has all the campaign funds the majority of the money which is needed to win elections, which means suck up to the establishment.  There's very few congressional leaders willing to risk their seats by opposing their own party.  In this regard I admire Cruz and paul, but it's not enough to win the Presidency. 

I can understand why the conservatives back then became rinos today.  This finanical shift will force them more to the right and after this Nov election you will see a very different GOP congress.  You'll be saying where was this the last 6 years?!? 

Quote from: washington on September 12, 2014, 06:55:35 AM
I'm not wrong at all. Also there is plenty of historical information to go on.  Look at how many times the republican party has changed since the the Whig party that produced Lincoln.  About every 30-40 years it goes through a transition period.   

Here I'll make the connection for you.  When candidates get to washington political correctness takes over and they abandon their principle.  I'm of the belief that the reason why the GOP abandoned principle was because of the power potential they could have and the fear of losing their seats in congress.  That's why I'm in favor of shorter congressional terms.  Conservatives are human and humans do things like sin or go away from their beliefs for power.  History proves this over many thousands of years.  The other thing right now that is making it harder is that the establishment has all the campaign funds the majority of the money which is needed to win elections, which means suck up to the establishment.  There's very few congressional leaders willing to risk their seats by opposing their own party.  In this regard I admire Cruz and paul, but it's not enough to win the Presidency. 

I can understand why the conservatives back then became rinos today.  This finanical shift will force them more to the right and after this Nov election you will see a very different GOP congress.  You'll be saying where was this the last 6 years?!?

Are you seriously that naive to think these people aren't groomed for the position by huge investors?
That politics! And the GOP is packed full, which is why, "WE" as TEA will for the first time in the party's history, force it to be a Constitutional party, whether they like it or not..

Which is the purpose of this thread, to expose the ignorance in the thought a 3rd party has a shot, because the crony capitalists/socialists have corporate interests backing them, corporations that no longer have Americas best interests at heart, and if that means pushing the nation left, then that's what they'll do.

Capitalist does not equate to Conservative, that's why you're wrong, as referenced to your post below.

Quote from: washington on September 12, 2014, 03:12:21 AM
I'm going to piss many of uyou off, but I'm just saying what people are to angry to say...  Conservatives are apart of the GOP party.  Conservatives believe in the same GOP founding principals the difference between them and RINO's is that the Conservatives believe them so strongly that they act on them.  Rino's don't.

I along with others refused to vote in 2008 for a RINO and voted for the Constitution Party. We wound up with the worst liberal leftist leaning president in the history of the U.S. who's agenda is to bring down this country.  In addition, the first two years of his presidency we saw a full Democratic majority.  I feel my vote was a mistake as clearly the RNC/GOP establishment didn't get the message ... they backed another RINO in 2012; Romney...and they lost.

Even IF we have a majority in the House and Senate in 2016 it s absolutely no guarantee that they are going to be able to accomplish anything and get past the corruption and veto power of Obama. 

If in 2016 I am faced with voting for a RINO or a Democrat I will more than likely vote RINO as I learned the first time and secondly, TEA is getting stronger and I do believe that a RINO in the oval office along with a GOP House and Senate will be "swayed" to lean more to the right.

You also need to consider that in 2018, we face losing either the Senate or House again ... at that point, can we really afford a Democrat in the oval office? No.