Suspend Constitution

[acptulsa]

How is it mental gymnastics to point out that the side who hates the Constitution and never follows it is telling the side that believes in the Constitution that they have to follow it to the T to ensure that the side that hates the Constitution and never follows it remains in power?

You have to ignore the rather obvious fact that the way to fix that is to enforce it, not to sink to the level of your enemies. Or your false idols either.

And the advantage to not doing those mental gymnastics now is, you don't have to do more later when the megalomaniac you trusted to throw the ring you gave him into the fire, despite the fact that he already conspired with Nancy Pelosi to get it without your help, doesn't cooperate.

[Sonny Tufts]

Trump's statement should have come as no surprise. He had previously urged Pence to crap on the Constitution by rejecting certified electors.

[TheTexan]

Trump's statement should have come as no surprise. He had previously urged Pence to crap on the Constitution by rejecting certified electors.

Do you think Biden follows the constitution?

[fedupinmo]

I love it here. Watching the circle jerk spin on someone directly stating they would "terminate of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution".

Mental gymnastics reaching a new level at RPF.

That is gymnastics, but not very mental. His statement was that permitting the fraud to exist means the suspension of the rules and laws in the Constitution. Nowhere does he say it should be done or that he demands that it be done.
Reeeee indeed.

[LibertyEagle]

He was better than Trump. Iraq was a mistake.

You must be kidding. A "mistake"? One heck of a lot of people died. And he didn't make a boo boo. He intended exactly what he did. Bush started the whole War on a tactic.

[dannno]

You have to ignore the rather obvious fact that the way to fix that is to enforce it, not to sink to the level of your enemies. Or your false idols either.

I would agree except I don't see your strategy as being anywhere in the universe of being viable. If it was, I would certainly support it. That's why we all supported Ron Paul back in the day. The way things are now, not sure what else can be done. If you have a better idea with a viable path I'm all ears.

[acptulsa]

I would agree except I don't see your strategy as being anywhere in the universe of being viable. If it was, I would certainly support it. That's why we all supported Ron Paul back in the day. The way things are now, not sure what else can be done. If you have a better idea with a viable path I'm all ears.

A more viable path to what? Liberty? Or getting a dictator that you like, as opposed to one you don't?

[dannno]

A more viable path to what? Liberty? Or getting a dictator that you like, as opposed to one you don't?

Getting somebody into power who seems to fight for and respect the spirit of the Constitution, while occasionally skirting it for strategic purposes, as opposed to one who hates everything it stands for.

[acptulsa]

Getting somebody into power who seems to fight for and respect the spirit of the Constitution, while occasionally skirting it for strategic purposes, as opposed to one who hates everything it stands for.

That's worse than a waste of time. It's making yourself complicit, and gifting the tyrant a veneer of legitimacy.

You may suit yourself. I prefer not to sell my soul to the devil.

[dannno]

That's worse than a waste of time. It's making yourself complicit, and gifting the tyrant a veneer of legitimacy.

You may suit yourself. I prefer not to sell my soul to the devil.

More like trying to win a coin flip as opposed to a roulette wheel.. with 1000 numbers. 1:1 odds on both.

[Todd]

How is it mental gymnastics to point out that the side who hates the Constitution and never follows it is telling the side that believes in the Constitution that they have to follow it to the T to ensure that the side that hates the Constitution and never follows it remains in power?

Ok I admit that this can be read that way. I see everyone's point.

[TheTexan]

More like trying to win a coin flip as opposed to a roulette wheel.. with 1000 numbers. 1:1 odds on both.

Our opponents have a BAMN attitude.

If we don't adopt the same, we will lose.

[nobody's_hero]

You must be kidding. A "mistake"? One heck of a lot of people died. And he didn't make a boo boo. He intended exactly what he did. Bush started the whole War on a tactic.

Plus he bailed out the banks that should have gone under and still exist today. The same people who managed to use magic math to keep the economy from collapsing altogether under Bush are the same people doing it under Biden. 2008 should have been the end of the Federal reserve system.

[acptulsa]

Our opponents have a BAMN attitude.

If we don't adopt the same, we will lose.

You're talking to someone who thinks there's some sort of middle ground possible between us and the tyrants, and that Trump occupies it. I don't know why I wasted my breath.

[TheTexan]

You're talking to someone who thinks there's some sort of middle ground possible between us and the tyrants, and that Trump occupies it. I don't know why I wasted my breath.

I view Trump as a wrecking ball. He's gonna accidentally destroy whatever he's allowed to get in control of.

Which is what I'm hoping for.

[BSWPaulsen]

Our opponents have a BAMN attitude.

If we don't adopt the same, we will lose.

Leftists are Machiavellians. Machiavellians win at politics. Conservatives will lose. Their inherent morality demands they hold themselves to rules the other side will flout to improve their position.

As for Trump, he has a point. However, the point would be better made if it were not framed as an attempt at self-promotion. The solution to leftist control of powerful institutions is one that has nothing whatsoever to do with the law, morality, or the Constitution of the United States of America.

Naturally, that solution will never come. "Good" people find it unconscionable. Anyone that is not a leftist fully deserves the powers that be.

[Snowball]

scratch

[A Son of Liberty]

LOL

Someone is finally calling for what needs to be done and the big bad anarchists/libertarians who talk tough about armed resistance to tyranny jump on the MSM/Fed bandwagon and condemn him.

Uh... what?

[Snowball]

I view Trump as a wrecking ball. He's gonna accidentally destroy whatever he's allowed to get in control of.

Which is what I'm hoping for.

The moment we start believing that is the moment we have to think a little harder and not forget.

He had a horrid 2020. A lot of it was his own fault also.

[TheTexan]

The moment we start believing that is the moment we have to think a little harder and not forget.

He had a horrid 2020. A lot of it was his own fault also.

For better or worse, I think we're stuck with Trump. He still has a lot of support (for whatever reason).

I do think it's gonna end up exactly again like 2020 all over again. Which may even be a good thing.

[TheTexan]

Plus he bailed out the banks that should have gone under and still exist today. The same people who managed to use magic math to keep the economy from collapsing altogether under Bush are the same people doing it under Biden. 2008 should have been the end of the Federal reserve system.

Plus the patriot act.

[Madison320]

I view Trump as a wrecking ball. He's gonna accidentally destroy whatever he's allowed to get in control of.

Which is what I'm hoping for.

Biden's already doing that.

Trump doubled the size of government in only 4 years. Trump failed on a massive scale if you like liberty and limited government. I'd take any other Republican over Trump ... well maybe except for Lindsay Graham.

On the other hand just because I criticize Trump doesn't mean I'm pro-democrat. Trump is still better than any democrat. But he's just about the worst out of the republicans. I can just hear my sister, who is a hard core liberal democrat saying "Did you hear what Trump said!!!!!" As if that somehow proves that I should be supporting the communist, I mean democratic party.

It'll be interesting to see what happens if someone else besides Trump wins the nomination in 2024. My guess is that whoever it is will suddenly become even more evil than Trump in the media

[TheTexan]

Biden's already doing that.

Trump doubled the size of government in only 4 years. Trump failed on a massive scale if you like liberty and limited government. I'd take any other Republican over Trump ... well maybe except for Lindsay Graham.

This is true, Biden is indeed a wrecking ball in his own way. Or rather, Biden's handlers.

If I wanted the country to succeed... I'd take any other Republican over Trump.

But I don't

[Cleaner44]

You have to ignore the rather obvious fact that the way to fix that is to enforce it, not to sink to the level of your enemies. Or your false idols either.

And the advantage to not doing those mental gymnastics now is, you don't have to do more later when the megalomaniac you trusted to throw the ring you gave him into the fire, despite the fact that he already conspired with Nancy Pelosi to get it without your help, doesn't cooperate.

If you're dogmatic, you follow the rules. You're living in the world you want, and acting a little stuck up about it. = acptulsa

If you're pragmatic, you're practical. You're living in the real world, wearing comfortable shoes. = Trump

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/...atic-dogmatic/

There are problems with both positions. We are so screwed. I have doubts that the Constitution can be recovered.

We have serious criminals holding the reins of power and they laugh at those who follow the rules.

Personally I want to see the Constitution adhered to. Realistically its probably not going to happen.

Is the USA a lost cause?

[nobody's_hero]

If you're dogmatic, you follow the rules. You're living in the world you want, and acting a little stuck up about it. = acptulsa

If you're pragmatic, you're practical. You're living in the real world, wearing comfortable shoes. = Trump

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/...atic-dogmatic/

There are problems with both positions. We are so screwed. I have doubts that the Constitution can be recovered.

We have serious criminals holding the reins of power and they laugh at those who follow the rules.

Personally I want to see the Constitution adhered to. Realistically its probably not going to happen.

Is the USA a lost cause?

If we are it would only be because we're the first generation to fully succumb to the FUD. I'm sure there were a lot of people asking General Washington if the war against the British was hopeless but he just pushed those people down in the mud so his army could keep marching without getting their feet wet.

[ClaytonB]

If we are it would only be because we're the first generation to fully succumb to the FUD. I'm sure there were a lot of people asking General Washington if the war against the British was hopeless but he just pushed those people down in the mud so his army could keep marching without getting their feet wet.

[CCTelander]

Our opponents have a BAMN attitude.

If we don't adopt the same, we will lose.

If you become what you’re fighting you’ve already lost.

[TheTexan]

If you become what you’re fighting you’ve already lost.

That's a meaningless cliche in this case.

It's like saying, if you use violence against a violent attacker, then you've already lost.

[ClaytonB]

That's a meaningless cliche in this case.

It's like saying, if you use violence against a violent attacker, then you've already lost.

Also, it's important to be clear that the counterpoint to going on with the status quo abomination where the Mafia literally owns and runs the DC Establishment lock, stock and barrel, and the rest of the country stands by and pretends that this is still "America", is not running anarchy in the streets. A convention of 26+ States coming together to refound the Republic on essentially the same foundation with some added amendments to explicitly protect Life, Property, and so on, is not running anarchy in the streets. It's We the People coming together to do again what our ancestors did in 1776 and drive the invaders from our shores. They have passed by a thousand No Trespassing signs, they have broken and entered into the premises, they have stripped the entire Estate and auctioned it all off, ransacked every room in the house, defaced every family photo and set up some kind of San Francisco style street camp in our house, $#@!ting all over the carpet like dogs and then sleeping in it. But we're supposed to stand at the edge of our own Estate and shout to them to "please obey the laws of the land" while they blast heavy metal from a Mad Max: Fury Road-style sound stage. And of course, using any form of compulsion against them is supposed to be some kind of affront to all that is holy and good for reasons that no one can explain. OK, then...

[CCTelander]

That's a meaningless cliche in this case.

It's like saying, if you use violence against a violent attacker, then you've already lost.

Not at all.

The proposal on the table isn’t simply to respond to violent attack with deffensive violence. That would be fine.

But what’s being proposed is to respond to an opponent's unprincipled behavior by compromising or abandoning one’s own principles, to use their own tactics against them is how it’s usually phrased.

But no matter how you phrase it or try to pretty it up or justify it, it ammounts to abandoning principle in favor of expediency. You know, the very kind of thing the so-called “liberty movement” is constantly decrying in their opponents.

The worst part is that it’s completely unneccessary. There are better ways of achieving the goal, if the goal truly is liberty, that don’t require one to compromise or abandon even the tiniest fraction of their principles.