I voted in the 2018 election!

[malakos]

Yikes. Sounds like Trump’s your man.

I would say that the Vice President is closer (though still far off).

I appreciate President Trump's stances on some issues. But those he is capitalizing on are mostly superficial, and in most cases I question his sincerity. For example, The Wall was campaign plank #1, yet we're 2 years in and we haven't even begun construction yet!

Mr. Trump is a neoliberal at the root, just like the rest of our politicians. Their underlying interests are inevitably at odds with a traditionalist and nationalist vision for America.

And like I said, I think liberal democracy is the big dumb, so there's no point in me voting for anyone in the current system. Better to spend my time berating it than bothering with the vanity of the ballot box.

 

[Braalian82]

I would say that the Vice President is closer (though still far off).

I appreciate President Trump's stances on some issues. But those he is capitalizing on are mostly superficial, and in most cases I question his sincerity. For example, The Wall was campaign plank #1, yet we're 2 years in and we haven't even begun construction yet!

Mr. Trump is a neoliberal at the root, just like the rest of our politicians. Their underlying interests are inevitably at odds with a traditionalist and nationalist vision for America.

And like I said, I think liberal democracy is the big dumb, so there's no point in me voting for anyone in the current system. Better to spend my time berating it than bothering with the vanity of the ballot box.

Explain what you mean when you say you don’t want political decisions made by people who don’t have the right “heritage”.

 

[malakos]

Explain what you mean when you say you don’t want political decisions made by people who don’t have the right “heritage”.

Some families have been integrated members of this nation for multiple generations, and understand the Euro/Anglo cultural and philosophical foundations of the USA, and wish to honor and preserve this heritage. Others are less in touch with it, or not at all, and some even wish to undermine it. What I would like to see for our nation is a return to favoring that former perspective and rewarding it with enfranchisement, while subordinating the latter as undeserving of the same status.

 

[Klingsor]

And like I said, I think liberal democracy is the big dumb, so there's no point in me voting for anyone in the current system. Better to spend my time berating it than bothering with the vanity of the ballot box.

I applaud your choice, and wholeheartedly support your decision not to vote.

 

[ou8my9x6]

I don't know if you were serious or not, but even if not there are plenty of people who do indeed think this way. We all have our ideas of who we actually want to vote. Most of us don't really have faith in the democratic process. I certainly don't. I want to direct any of my activities that relate to American democracy towards the replacement of it with something more coherent.

Not sure I agree but here's why. I think the people whom have no faith typically are slightly ignorant to actually how our Constituional republic works. That I blame our public un-educational system. They don't teach the when, how and why, rather their ambiguous personal rhetoric.

The process itself is brilliantly drafted by our founding fathers, if looked at objectively. Our problem trends towards the infiltration of people that entrench themselves and wrap blankets of protection around themselves through precedents and unconstitutional laws that are never challenged. The Constitution was designed to protect the people from the autocrats, not the other way around, as history is showing us as being done.

The moral here is about how we should see ourselves as Americans first, prior to being classified as one group or another. We would much better controls over what is going on in our republic. Shit, then again we wouldn't be talking about this online then, right?

 

[Braalian82]

Some families have been integrated members of this nation for multiple generations, and understand the Euro/Anglo cultural and philosophical foundations of the USA, and wish to honor and preserve this heritage. Others are less in touch with it, or not at all, and some even wish to undermine it. What I would like to see for our nation is a return to favoring that former perspective and rewarding it with enfranchisement, while subordinating the latter as undeserving of the same status.

So you’re just flat out advocating for taking away the vote from minorities who don’t sufficiently honor “Euro/Anglo” phillisophical foundations?

Putting aside how batshit racist that is, how do you even define and quantify any of it?

What the fuck is “Euro/Anglo” philosophy? And what philosophical foundations of the USA are you talking about? It’s apparently you cherry-picking which parts fit your personal opinions. Two can play at *that* game. The aspects of my white heritage I choose to honor include English representative democracy and Common Law. And The French Revolution and the Rights of Man and Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. Those are all part of our white heritage.

And, even in your suppposed system, how do you define “honoring and preserving”? How do you qualify who’s deserving of franchise? Are white people automatically enfranchised? Or only those who support the right people, or have the right amount and proper type of patriotic fetish-shit on display?

 

[TheMeatyProfessor]

Some families have been integrated members of this nation for multiple generations, and understand the Euro/Anglo cultural and philosophical foundations of the USA, and wish to honor and preserve this heritage. Others are less in touch with it, or not at all, and some even wish to undermine it. What I would like to see for our nation is a return to favoring that former perspective and rewarding it with enfranchisement, while subordinating the latter as undeserving of the same status.

Please note that the poster's username translates to "asshole" in Greek. I'll just go with that, thanks.

 

[malakos]

Not sure I agree but here's why. I think the people whom have no faith typically are slightly ignorant to actually how our Constituional republic works. That I blame our public un-educational system. They don't teach the when, how and why, rather their ambiguous personal rhetoric.

The process itself is brilliantly drafted by our founding fathers, if looked at objectively. Our problem trends towards the infiltration of people that entrench themselves and wrap blankets of protection around themselves through precedents and unconstitutional laws that are never challenged. The Constitution was designed to protect the people from the autocrats, not the other way around, as history is showing us as being done.

The moral here is about how we should see ourselves as Americans first, prior to being classified as one group or another. We would much better controls over what is going on in our republic. Shit, then again we wouldn't be talking about this online then, right?

Much of what I am saying about democracy, a qualified electorate, and honoring our British heritage can be found in the writings of the Founding Fathers, actually.

 

[gr8gatsby]

I voted early and against racism, hate and bigotry. I followed the advice of President Trump that a vote for Republican candidates was a vote for him and voted every for Democrat. I consider myself socially liberal but fiscally conservative, the current Republican Party represents neither of these values, instead they create divisiveness by inflaming cultural wars.

 

[ou8my9x6]

I voted early and against racism, hate and bigotry. I followed the advice of President Trump that a vote for Republican candidates was a vote for him and voted every for Democrat. I consider myself socially liberal but fiscally conservative, the current Republican Party represents neither of these values, instead they create divisiveness by inflaming cultural wars.

It's believable only if you listen to the mass media or social media. Otherwise ask yourself, how many conservatives have assaulted democrats in restaurants? How many liberals have assaulted republicans in restaurants?

The libs create isolationism through classification. Republicans try to make people understand we are Americans first. Not sure how that's a bad thing.

I think the problem here is the misconception that the government is suppose to take care of us. Not true. We were founded on the ideology that we are equal yet individual. That means we succeed on our individual merit. When our government fails, it's because we fail as an individual society. Remember, we the people run the government, not the other way around, because we ARE the government.

 

[Klingsor]

How many liberals have assaulted republicans in restaurants?

None that I'm aware of.

The libs create isolationism through classification. Republicans try to make people understand we are Americans first. Not sure how that's a bad thing.

It's a bad thing when only some of us get to be Americans first.

I think the problem here is the misconception that the government is suppose to take care of us. Not true. We were founded on the ideology that we are equal yet individual. That means we succeed on our individual merit. When our government fails, it's because we fail as an individual society. Remember, we the people run the government, not the other way around, because we ARE the government.

We the people should take care of your ourselves. But since we ARE the government, that means the government IS supposed to take care of us.

QED.

 

[gr8gatsby]

It's believable only if you listen to the mass media or social media. Otherwise ask yourself, how many conservatives have assaulted democrats in restaurants? How many liberals have assaulted republicans in restaurants?

The libs create isolationism through classification. Republicans try to make people understand we are Americans first. Not sure how that's a bad thing.

I think the problem here is the misconception that the government is suppose to take care of us. Not true. We were founded on the ideology that we are equal yet individual. That means we succeed on our individual merit. When our government fails, it's because we fail as an individual society. Remember, we the people run the government, not the other way around, because we ARE the government.

I see a huge difference between a Republican and a Trumpublican, perhaps I should have made that more clear ... I'll be waiting on the next John McCain

 

[StormfrontFL]

It's believable only if you listen to the mass media or social media. Otherwise ask yourself, how many conservatives have assaulted democrats in restaurants? How many liberals have assaulted republicans in restaurants?

The libs create isolationism through classification. Republicans try to make people understand we are Americans first. Not sure how that's a bad thing.

I think the problem here is the misconception that the government is suppose to take care of us. Not true. We were founded on the ideology that we are equal yet individual. That means we succeed on our individual merit. When our government fails, it's because we fail as an individual society. Remember, we the people run the government, not the other way around, because we ARE the government.

Being vocal and disturbing a meal is not assault. I'd rather my meal be interrupted than have a bomb or anthrax mailed to my home. So to use your question, how many liberals have mailed bombs to conservative homes and offices?

 

[ou8my9x6]

None that I'm aware of.



It's a bad thing when only some of us get to be Americans first.



We the people should take care of your ourselves. But since we ARE the government, that means the government IS supposed to take care of us.

QED.

I would usually say I don't know where to start but in this case, start with understanding how our government was founded and how it works. You couldn't be more wrong in your philosophy regard one taking care of the other. So I ask, what is the original intent of our federal government?

Regarding libs assaulting republicans in restaurants, there have been 4 in the last 6 weeks. Look it up. Why won't the try to do that to me? Lol!

 

[StormfrontFL]

I see a huge difference between a Republican and a Trumpublican, perhaps I should have made that more clear ... I'll be waiting on the next John McCain

Exactly. Whatever these things are now they aren't Republicans. Even their sainted Ronald Reagan wouldn't be accepted by this current lot. They'd see him as too soft and too far left.

 

[ou8my9x6]

Being vocal and disturbing a meal is not assault. I'd rather my meal be interrupted than have a bomb or anthrax mailed to my home. So to use your question, how many liberals have mailed bombs to conservative homes and offices?

That's kinda funny in actuality, as the Unabomber was a liberal. Secondly, yes, they were assaulted by definition of the law. Ask me how I would know that. ;-)

 

[gr8gatsby]

I would usually say I don't know where to start but in this case, start with understanding how our government was founded and how it works. You couldn't be more wrong in your philosophy regard one taking care of the other. So I ask, what is the original intent of our federal government?

Regarding libs assaulting republicans in restaurants, there have been 4 in the last 6 weeks. Look it up. Why won't the try to do that to me? Lol!

Wow, 4 in 6 weeks, how many of them received bombs in the mail? Oh, none...

 

[StormfrontFL]

I would usually say I don't know where to start but in this case, start with understanding how our government was founded and how it works. You couldn't be more wrong in your philosophy regard one taking care of the other. So I ask, what is the original intent of our federal government?

Regarding libs assaulting republicans in restaurants, there have been 4 in the last 6 weeks. Look it up. Why won't the try to do that to me? Lol!

What has happened in restaurants is not assault.

 

[StormfrontFL]

That's kinda funny in actuality, as the Unabomber was a liberal. Secondly, yes, they were assaulted by definition of the law. Ask me how I would know that. ;-)

My nephew is a cop. I know plenty of cops. None view this as assault. Disturbing the peace maybe but not assault.

Shall we list the political affiliation of several mass shooters? Funny how your type likes to pull the old "so and so was a liberal" but fail to acknowledge when the perp is one of yours.

More on the Unabomber
Why the Men of the Far-Right Love the Unabomber Ted Kaczynski

He may have started out liberal but in time he was extremely in line with the right wing so much so that to many he's a hero.

 

[ou8my9x6]

Wow, 4 in 6 weeks, how many of them received bombs in the mail? Oh, none...

Come on gr8. You didn't read my response. That said, Mr van mail guy has not been vetted by the FBI report as to what his motive was, but the Commie Network News was forst out with their perceptual slander.

Beside that, they haven't even revealed whether those devices would be even functioned. Have you seen them. I know a thing or two about this stuff and when I saw them I laughed.