Milo tapped as Keynote Speaker at CPAC

Darth Omar said:
I'm pretty sure Reagan would advocate for rule of law. Presently, our border and immigration policy is [was?] founded on lawlessness. In fact, that's where so many establishment republicans---who famously invoked Reagan at every turn, only to go AWOL on immigration.

And then they, amazingly, wonder how we ended up with Trump. Trump launched his campaign on immigration and never looked back.
Click to expand...
Reagan was an advocate of the ruke of law but go back and listen to his speeches on immigration, very very different from Trump. Hell Reagan signed an amnesty bill of all things.
 
Midas Whale67 said:
Trump doesn't need to speak eloquently. We see what we got out of that for the last 8 years.

We need his words to translate into meaningful results. You know like the Dow Jones... 20,624.05
Click to expand...

It the stock market is the measure of success then Obama can state his term was an economic success when that wasn't the case.
 
cawacko said:
Reagan was an advocate of the ruke of law but go back and listen to his speeches on immigration, very very different from Trump. Hell Reagan signed an amnesty bill of all things.
Click to expand...

Even Reagan wasn't a good conservative on some points.

I'm done with chasing ideological purity in politicians, anyway: they almost always let you down. Trump is the man; he's the only horse in the barn, so the choice is either ride him or walk to the next town.

I'm not walking.
 
Darth Omar said:
Even Reagan wasn't a good conservative on some points.

I'm done with chasing ideological purity in politicians, anyway: they almost always let you down. Trump is the man; he's the only horse in the barn, so the choice is either ride him or walk to the next town.

I'm not walking.
Click to expand...

You are correct that no one is ideologically pure, it's just not possible (for an elected official at least). But people like Trump and Milo have nothing to do with conservatism.
 
cawacko said:
It the stock market is the measure of success then Obama can state his term was an economic success when that wasn't the case.
Click to expand...

How can you say that when he helped get us out of the Bush recession which would have been a depression had not Obama implemented tried and true, time tested and proven Keynesian economic policies instead of some Supply Side fantasy nonsense?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
How can you say that when he helped get us out of the Bush recession which would have been a depression had not Obama implemented tried and true, time tested and proven Keynesian economic policies instead of some Supply Side fantasy nonsense?
Click to expand...

We have to go back to the 1920's, and that was just a four year term, to find a President who didn't have a single year of 3% economic growth during their term.
 
cawacko said:
We have to go back to the 1920's, and that was just a four year term, to find a President who didn't have a single year of 3% economic growth during their term.
Click to expand...
Yea well only FDR and Lincoln inherited a bigger mess than Obama and neither of them had an obstructionist do nothing Congress to deal with. Now I'm not saying Obama ranks with those two but a little context please. Obama had his hands full after succeeding one of the worst U.S. Presidents ever.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
He's a troll. He even said so in Maher's interview. I mean he's got a point that hyper partisan people need to get over themselves and Milo knows he's trolling or he wouldn't laugh at himself when told to "Go Fuck Himeself" when he insults people. As for speaking the truth, as I said earlier, anyone who makes you laugh is probably speaking a truth or you wouldn't be laughing. That's not the same as one always speaking the truth or even being right about a particular issue.

Anyone who takes Milo seriously on either side of the aisle needs to grow up and get over themselves.
Click to expand...

hes a troll the way I am a troll. He says things that grab attention but that doesn't mean he doesn't beleive what he's saying or thst there isn't a point he is making. I know someone that works for him, milo is the real deal
 
K I L L said:
hes a troll the way I am a troll. He says things that grab attention but that doesn't mean he doesn't beleive what he's saying or thst there isn't a point he is making. I know someone that works for him, milo is the real deal
Click to expand...
I agree. He's a real snarky little troll.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Yea well only FDR and Lincoln inherited a bigger mess than Obama and neither of them had an obstructionist do nothing Congress to deal with. Now I'm not saying Obama ranks with those two but a little context please. Obama had his hands full after succeeding one of the worst U.S. Presidents ever.
Click to expand...

I'm not turning this thread into an argument over Obama's record but eight years without exceeding 3% growth once speaks for itself.
 
cawacko said:
What leading historical conservatives have preached nationalism?
Click to expand...

Trump isn't a Nationalist in any classical sense. A populist yes. Milo is a smart guy, but he's in it for his own fame. This doesn't mean he's wrong about his claims, only that he's more interested in self promotion, like every other fame seeker.
 
cawacko said:
I'm not turning this thread into an argument over Obama's record but eight years without exceeding 3% growth once speaks for itself.
Click to expand...
Unhuh and one immoral war, failing in another against a nation who protected the terrorist and utterly ignoring the nation that terrorist were citizens of. Not to mention ignoring a major city during a natural disaster then sending in unqualified and incompetent political appointees to manage the disaster and being asleep at the wheel while greedy Wallstreet bankers precipitated the worst economic disaster in this nation since the Great Depression which had global consequences and destroyed the lives of millions and that's not even counting the tens of thousands of innocents who died in Iraq and the thousands of U.S. Soldiers killed or maimed for life by his immoral war in Iraq speaks volumes about Obamas predecessor.

There's a reason why Obama is respected worldwide and ranked as an above average US President and why his predecessors Bush is panned as one of the five worst US presidents in our nations history.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Unhuh and one immoral war, failing in another against a nation who protected the terrorist and utterly ignoring the nation that terrorist were citizens of. Not to mention ignoring a major city during a natural disaster then sending in unqualified and incompetent political appointees to manage the disaster and being asleep at the wheel while greedy Wallstreet bankers precipitated the worst economic disaster in this nation since the Great Depression which had global consequences and destroyed the lives of millions and that's not even counting the tens of thousands of innocents who died in Iraq and the thousands of U.S. Soldiers killed or maimed for life by his immoral war in Iraq speaks volumes about Obamas predecessor.

There's a reason why Obama is respected worldwide and ranked as an above average US President and why his predecessors Bush is panned as one of the five worst US presidents in our nations history.
Click to expand...

Well said...
 
Darth Omar said:
Even Reagan wasn't a good conservative on some points.

I'm done with chasing ideological purity in politicians, anyway: they almost always let you down. Trump is the man; he's the only horse in the barn, so the choice is either ride him or walk to the next town.

I'm not walking.
Click to expand...

I don't ever want to hear a motherfucking Trumptard talk about ideological purity after the 1992, 1996, 2008, and 2012 elections.

This is worth reposting:

Pocahontas said:
A Brief History of Retards in America (Since 1992):

1992: A bunch of retarded proles decided that Bush Sr wasn't conservative enough, so they either didn't vote, or voted for lunatic "George Bush is going to ruin my daughter's wedding" Ross Perot. A southern contingent of rubes decided to vote for BJ Clinton, because he's one of them. These same imbeciles voted for Carter in 1976 for the same idiotic reason. #SouthernPride

1994: Republican Revolution. YAY!!

1995: "They can take our lives, but they can never take - OUR FREEDOM!!" Braveheart released in theatres

1996: Bob Dole not conservative enough. Many more stay home than in 1992, while fewer vote for Perot and his lovely Reform Party this time.

2000: So McCain isn't conservative enough, so, to avoid not showing up in November, compassionate conservative W Bush is nominated, thanks to the worst state in the Union and its aversion to black babies. With a true conservative on the ticket, Online Al is defeated in the Electoral College, amid lots of excitement and Lulz.

2001-2003: The "true conservative" proceeds to fuck shit up.

2004: Thanks to an economic recovery and lots of terrorism (and Kerry being nearly as boring as Online Al), W Bush is re-elected easily.

2005-2007: W Bush back to work, fucking shit up. But at least he's not his father, Bob Dole, or John McCain, those phony conservatives!

2008: In an unwinnable year, phony McCain gets the nomination we probably definitely should have given him in 2000. Dems ensure victory by giving us an unqualified hack who just happens to meet stronger DNC quotas than Hillary (sorry ladies!!).

2009-2015: Obama challenges W Bush for a race to the bottom in terms of terrible foreign policy and big spending. His ability to speak English has largely prevented most Americans at this point from judging him more harshly. In 2010, Republicans take back the House and in 2014 they also capture the Senate, largely due to reaction to Obama's quaint little policies like ACA.

2012: Republicans nominate phony conservative (and friggin' heretic Mormon!) Romney, who can now be nominee after losing to phony conservative McCain in 2008. He is blamed for creating federalism/Constitutional ObamaCare in Massachusetts (and the Big Dig!). As in 1992, 1996, and 2008, many proles stay home. I mean, they GAVE US CONGRESS TWO YEARS AGO AND IT WON'T SHUT OBAMA DOWN!!

2016: In a nice twist on things, the same people who have been bitching about the GOP nominating phony conservatives since 1992 (or 1988?) decide to rally behind Donald J. Trump, because he's NOT CONSERVATIVE AT ALL!! This is basically nominate the "compassionate conservative" 2.0, except this time it will work and take DC and the mega EsTaBliShMeNt by storm! Trump launches a populist revolution and repudiates the history of the GOP since 1964 (except Reagan). He hilariously repudiates W Bush (WHO WAS MORE CONSERVATIVE THAN MCCAIN!!). #NeverTrump folk such as myself are denounced when we complain that Trump isn't conservative enough. WHAT THE FUCK THREEDEE?!!? DO YOU EXPECT ALL OF YOUR CANDIDATES TO BE PERFECT? IDEOLOGICAL PURITY TESTS WILL GIVE HILLARY THE WHITE HOUSE! DO YOU WANT CROOKED HILLARY TO BE YOUR PRESIDENT?!!? (Thanks, guys, for being so diplomatic all these years, and not helping to get BJ Clinton, W Bush, and Obama elected president - MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Mott the Hoople said:
Unhuh and one immoral war, failing in another against a nation who protected the terrorist and utterly ignoring the nation that terrorist were citizens of. Not to mention ignoring a major city during a natural disaster then sending in unqualified and incompetent political appointees to manage the disaster and being asleep at the wheel while greedy Wallstreet bankers precipitated the worst economic disaster in this nation since the Great Depression which had global consequences and destroyed the lives of millions
Click to expand...

gosh you're right; we nearly forgot about Syria and Chicago.....
 
Pocahontas said:
I don't ever want to hear a motherfucking Trumptard talk about ideological purity after the 1992, 1996, 2008, and 2012 elections.

This is worth reposting:
Click to expand...

dude....all that proves is that your as much of an asshole as those who didn't support the party candidates in 92, 96, 08, and 12......birds of a feather, fucked together........

at least this time we didn't need you.....
 
Pocahontas said:
I don't ever want to hear a motherfucking Trumptard talk about ideological purity after the 1992, 1996, 2008, and 2012 elections.

This is worth reposting:
Click to expand...

maybe the things people stayed home for are different from what you think they are.

It is worth saying that there is a significant divergence between GOP party line voters and the people that voted for Trump. If you look at the Toomey race and the Trump race in PA they got about the same number of votes but coming from very different areas. Meaning Trump brought in a new set of voters which would not be included in your calculations. Marrying the two factions is the #1 job of the gop at the moment and would ensure more wins in the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top