Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
A VERY important interview.
A VERY important interview.
By Doug1943
29 Jul 2022 5:16 am in No Holds Barred Political Forum
29 Jul 2022 5:16 am
https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/pres ... reation-2/
This fellow understands exactly what is happening to America now.
This fellow understands exactly what is happening to America now.
29 Jul 2022 5:22 am
The Claremont Review is a joke.Doug1943 » 29 Jul 2022, 5:16 am » wrote: ↑ https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/pres ... reation-2/
This fellow understands exactly what is happening to America now.
**** troll
29 Jul 2022 11:03 am
Now, now. Just because they use big words you can't understand and don't have a lot of drawings ... to each his own. We don't criticize the things you read ... well, not 'read' but look at. It's a free country.
29 Jul 2022 2:36 pm
Yes, you should really go back to listening to Alex Jones, like all of the woke Democrats do. They hang on Alex Jones' every word.
29 Jul 2022 3:06 pm
When did you first learn about Claremont Review?Skans » 29 Jul 2022, 2:36 pm » wrote: ↑ Yes, you should really go back to listening to Alex Jones, like all of the woke Democrats do. They hang on Alex Jones' every word.
29 Jul 2022 3:08 pm
Until it threw its lot behind the Grifter, Claremont enjoyed a veneer of respectability.Doug1943 » 29 Jul 2022, 11:03 am » wrote: ↑ Now, now. Just because they use big words you can't understand and don't have a lot of drawings ... to each his own. We don't criticize the things you read ... well, not 'read' but look at. It's a free country.
Now it's just Heritage with better diction.
29 Jul 2022 3:21 pm
Doug1943 » 29 Jul 2022, 5:16 am » wrote: ↑ https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/pres ... reation-2/
This fellow understands exactly what is happening to America now.
29 Jul 2022 4:18 pm
The mission of the Claremont Institute is to restore the principles of the American Founding to their rightful, preeminent authority in our national life.
"To return to limited government, conservatives must return to the principles of the American Founding. The Claremont Institute provides the missing argument in the battle to win public sentiment by teaching and promoting the philosophical reasoning that is the foundation of limited government and the statesmanship required to bring that reasoning into practice."
Sounds like a decent enough organization. You may not agree with their philosophy, but what's your beef with them?
29 Jul 2022 5:13 pm
Very obvious TDS. He seethes with it.Skans » 29 Jul 2022, 4:18 pm » wrote: ↑ The mission of the Claremont Institute is to restore the principles of the American Founding to their rightful, preeminent authority in our national life.
"To return to limited government, conservatives must return to the principles of the American Founding. The Claremont Institute provides the missing argument in the battle to win public sentiment by teaching and promoting the philosophical reasoning that is the foundation of limited government and the statesmanship required to bring that reasoning into practice."
Sounds like a decent enough organization. You may not agree with their philosophy, but what's your beef with them?
Please seat yourself.
I like the very things you hate.
I like the very things you hate.
29 Jul 2022 5:16 pm
Reread my post.Skans » 29 Jul 2022, 4:18 pm » wrote: ↑ The mission of the Claremont Institute is to restore the principles of the American Founding to their rightful, preeminent authority in our national life.
"To return to limited government, conservatives must return to the principles of the American Founding. The Claremont Institute provides the missing argument in the battle to win public sentiment by teaching and promoting the philosophical reasoning that is the foundation of limited government and the statesmanship required to bring that reasoning into practice."
Sounds like a decent enough organization. You may not agree with their philosophy, but what's your beef with them?
It sold out to Trumpism.
29 Jul 2022 5:17 pm
How long have you known about Claremont Review?
29 Jul 2022 5:20 pm
Answer: **** you, stupid.
Please seat yourself.
I like the very things you hate.
I like the very things you hate.
29 Jul 2022 5:23 pm
Perhaps you should take that stapler to your leaking cooze..
29 Jul 2022 5:28 pm
Blackvegetable » 29 Jul 2022, 5:23 pm » wrote: ↑ Perhaps you should take that stapler to your leaking cooze..
I can't help it if you're an asshole.
Please seat yourself.
I like the very things you hate.
I like the very things you hate.
29 Jul 2022 5:46 pm
Skans » 29 Jul 2022, 2:36 pm » wrote: ↑ Yes, you should really go back to listening to Alex Jones, like all of the woke Democrats do. They hang on Alex Jones' every word.
AOC is a fan of Alex Jones in your mind,
29 Jul 2022 5:47 pm
Okay, interesting! I had thought, wrongly, that all the Lefties here were sub-literates, but Black Vegetable clearly is in another league, since he (she?) knows something about the history of Claremont Review and the Claremont Institute (which puts him ahead of many conservatives, I suspect. I wonder if he/she is happy with the turn of the Left against free speech, and its no-nothing attitude and rejection of Western civilization?).
I'll try to write something brief about this publication, since conservatives should know about the major intellectual tendencies within their movement. But not now.
For the moment, we'll just note that the Claremont Review caused a stir six years ago, when it published a piece by Michael Anton, called 'The Flight 93 Election'. The sort of people who read the Claremont Review -- pointy-headed academics and the like -- were the sort of people who would naturally be repelled by Trump, and either sit out the election, or support Hillary. (I confess I'm in the latter group. Forgive me, Father, for I have sinned.)
In that article, Anton argued that we -- patriots -- were in the position of the passengers aboard United 93, when the adherents of the Religion of Peace hijacked it on 9/11. We could sit and do nothing, and then our doom was assured. Or we could make a desperate rush for the cockpit, and try to wrest the controls from the hijackers ...and then, maybe, land. We might well die in the attempt. But if we did nothing, we would certainly die.
Liberals -- and many conservative intellectuals -- flipped out over this essay. The conservative intelligentsia had been largely anti-Trump, even 'never-Trump'. And here was a heavyweight case being made for him. A typical response is here: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/20/arts ... trump.html
I didn't read it at the time. I continued to support Hillary (and lost $100 doing so). If I had read it, I might have changed my mind. But since then, observing the direction of motion of the Left (of which I was a part for twenty years), I can see why Anton was right. He gets it. We're no longer in politics as usual. The Left has gone insane, and is destroying America. The rules of politics have to be put aside, and replaced by the rules of war.
But read the original and decide for yourself:
https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/digi ... -election/
I'll try to write something brief about this publication, since conservatives should know about the major intellectual tendencies within their movement. But not now.
For the moment, we'll just note that the Claremont Review caused a stir six years ago, when it published a piece by Michael Anton, called 'The Flight 93 Election'. The sort of people who read the Claremont Review -- pointy-headed academics and the like -- were the sort of people who would naturally be repelled by Trump, and either sit out the election, or support Hillary. (I confess I'm in the latter group. Forgive me, Father, for I have sinned.)
In that article, Anton argued that we -- patriots -- were in the position of the passengers aboard United 93, when the adherents of the Religion of Peace hijacked it on 9/11. We could sit and do nothing, and then our doom was assured. Or we could make a desperate rush for the cockpit, and try to wrest the controls from the hijackers ...and then, maybe, land. We might well die in the attempt. But if we did nothing, we would certainly die.
Liberals -- and many conservative intellectuals -- flipped out over this essay. The conservative intelligentsia had been largely anti-Trump, even 'never-Trump'. And here was a heavyweight case being made for him. A typical response is here: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/20/arts ... trump.html
I didn't read it at the time. I continued to support Hillary (and lost $100 doing so). If I had read it, I might have changed my mind. But since then, observing the direction of motion of the Left (of which I was a part for twenty years), I can see why Anton was right. He gets it. We're no longer in politics as usual. The Left has gone insane, and is destroying America. The rules of politics have to be put aside, and replaced by the rules of war.
But read the original and decide for yourself:
https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/digi ... -election/
29 Jul 2022 5:54 pm
Doug1943 » 29 Jul 2022, 5:16 am » wrote: ↑ https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/pres ... reation-2/
This fellow understands exactly what is happening to America now.
one excerpt from that pile of garbage he linked to
Trump has done a few things that go beyond the vices that the imperfect vessel is allowed, even while doing God’s work. For example, in 2020 he lost Georgia for the Republicans, which cost them the Senate.
So another politician losing an election in Georgia counts as
1 Trumps fault
2. A vice, like smoking or drinking.
I don’t know what’s more galling.. the pretentious language that is couched in, or the stupidity.
29 Jul 2022 6:03 pm
Doug1943 » 29 Jul 2022, 5:16 am » wrote: ↑ https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/pres ... reation-2/
This fellow understands exactly what is happening to America now.
Sorry to tell you, but if he doesn't talk about the race war that is being waged against whites, then, no. You're incorrect in your OP. He does NOT understand what is going on - or is lying about it by omission.
When you complain, ur friends roll their eyes and ur enemies rejoice
"Because I SAY I am" is a todler's tantrum, not "science"
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not a friend
An opinion you won't defend is not your own
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
"Because I SAY I am" is a todler's tantrum, not "science"
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not a friend
An opinion you won't defend is not your own
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
29 Jul 2022 6:04 pm
Where a fellow is heard saying something has no relevance to what the fellow said.
Which makes your response to what he said irrelevant.
And you pretend to be educated - you're truly a **** idiot.
When you complain, ur friends roll their eyes and ur enemies rejoice
"Because I SAY I am" is a todler's tantrum, not "science"
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not a friend
An opinion you won't defend is not your own
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
"Because I SAY I am" is a todler's tantrum, not "science"
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not a friend
An opinion you won't defend is not your own
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
29 Jul 2022 6:05 pm
No questions, dick sucker.
When you complain, ur friends roll their eyes and ur enemies rejoice
"Because I SAY I am" is a todler's tantrum, not "science"
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not a friend
An opinion you won't defend is not your own
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
"Because I SAY I am" is a todler's tantrum, not "science"
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not a friend
An opinion you won't defend is not your own
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
Who is online
In total there are 2938 users online :: 17 registered, 19 bots, and 2902 guests
Registered users: Vegas, Johnny You, *Roshambo, Blackvegetable, Zeets2, Buck Naked, ROG62, ConservativeWave, *GHETTO BLASTER, MR-7, Beekeeper, jerra b, PhiloBeddo, SouthernFried, Deezer Shoove, 31st Arrival, Fuelman
Bots: GPTBot, SiteLockSpider, DuckDuckBot, DuckDuckGo, Not, Kinza, LCC, proximic, ADmantX, CriteoBot, facebookexternalhit, app.hypefactors.com, YandexBot, Googlebot, Applebot, linkfluence.com, bingbot, Mediapartners-Google, curl/7