Senator Cruz Introduces Constitutional Amendment for Term Limits

[Englebert]

17 minutes ago, Remmus said:

Who's group? 

You're second statement fails the sniff test.

If you think it fails the sniff test then you probably hold the same prejudicial views as the Liberals. I thought you said you did a lot of studying on the Civil War?

[Remmus]

23 minutes ago, Englebert said:

If you think it fails the sniff test then you probably hold the same prejudicial views as the Liberals. I thought you said you did a lot of studying on the Civil War?

Sure did.  Quit trying to throw me in the liberal pot and start telling me how you admire one General Edmund J. Davis. 

[Englebert]

15 minutes ago, Remmus said:

Sure did.  Quit trying to throw me in the liberal pot and start telling me how you admire one General Edmund J. Davis. 

I don't care what pot you fall under. If you want to try to dictate how I live my life with a superior, condescending and belligerent attitude, then I will label you a Liberal. If not, I don't care to label you at all.

I mentioned the Civil War because the same attitude I espoused was the same attitude that brought us into the war. That same sentiment is growing, but not just in the southern states, but in the majority of middle America and most of rural America. This sentiment is why I support secession...again. The constant berating by Liberal groups is comical. But when the government gets involved and starts dictating through laws and executive orders, then it becomes a tad bit more serious. I'm a little more hopeful that these little Nazi wanna-be groups will be quelled after there abysmal showing in the last election, but I'm not optimistic the government is going to take their boot off of the citizen's neck either. 

What about Davis? I couldn't remember who he was and had to do a Bing search. I've heard of him but know very little about him. So my opinion of him is that of no opinion. What leading point are you trying to make by that question?

[Reagan]

48 minutes ago, Remmus said:

Sure did.  Quit trying to throw me in the liberal pot and start telling me how you admire one General Edmund J. Davis. 

You have thrown yourself in the liberal pot by your own statements, Mr. Centrist!  LOL!

[Remmus]

42 minutes ago, Englebert said:

I don't care what pot you fall under. If you want to try to dictate how I live my life with a superior, condescending and belligerent attitude, then I will label you a Liberal. If not, I don't care to label you at all.

I mentioned the Civil War because the same attitude I espoused was the same attitude that brought us into the war. That same sentiment is growing, but not just in the southern states, but in the majority of middle America and most of rural America. This sentiment is why I support secession...again. The constant berating by Liberal groups is comical. But when the government gets involved and starts dictating through laws and executive orders, then it becomes a tad bit more serious. I'm a little more hopeful that these little Nazi wanna-be groups will be quelled after there abysmal showing in the last election, but I'm not optimistic the government is going to take their boot off of the citizen's neck either. 

What about Davis? I couldn't remember who he was and had to do a Bing search. I've heard of him but know very little about him. So my opinion of him is that of no opinion. What leading point are you trying to make by that question?

Condescending is the key word IMO when it comes to that tribe.

Interesting comparison with the Civil War and current times.  I can't fully agree because of the big elephant in the room during that time.  I had an excellent conversation in this forum about the civil war.  I don't believe (nor is it true) that the Civil War started solely over slavery.  Slavery was a major point for the Radical Republicans/abolitionists (like Gen. Davis) and Southern states didn't like government interference in their way of life (which included keeping slaves).  Regarding General Davis I threw his name out there to see what response I'd get.  The history book I read stated Texans hate(d) the guy.  Partly for being a big government proponent and also because he was basically forced upon Texans due to Reconstruction.  Many believed his administration was corrupt and the limitations on the governor found in the current Texas constitution have roots in the response to ousting Gen. Davis.

Them Nazis, supremacists, and paramilitary groups have been indirectly re-energized by Trumps run, particularly his stance on immigration.  I'm not blaming Trump for firing them up, but you take a 2 term African American President and mix it with some of Trumps proposed policies and you get some Hitler youth all lathered up.  Those guys have to stop mixing in with conservative groups or at least break the perception that they're mixed in.  If the mass of Liberals would read some of the well articulated points expressed in this forum, the discussion would be more about policy and less about hot button divisive issues.

[Englebert]

21 minutes ago, Remmus said:

Condescending is the key word IMO when it comes to that tribe.

Interesting comparison with the Civil War and current times.  I can't fully agree because of the big elephant in the room during that time.  I had an excellent conversation in this forum about the civil war.  I don't believe (nor is it true) that the Civil War started solely over slavery.  Slavery was a major point for the Radical Republicans/abolitionists (like Gen. Davis) and Southern states didn't like government interference in their way of life (which included keeping slaves).  Regarding General Davis I threw his name out there to see what response I'd get.  The history book I read stated Texans hate(d) the guy.  Partly for being a big government proponent and also because he was basically forced upon Texans due to Reconstruction.  Many believed his administration was corrupt and the limitations on the governor found in the current Texas constitution have roots in the response to ousting Gen. Davis.

Them Nazis, supremacists, and paramilitary groups have been indirectly re-energized by Trumps run, particularly his stance on immigration.  I'm not blaming Trump for firing them up, but you take a 2 term African American President and mix it with some of Trumps proposed policies and you get some Hitler youth all lathered up.  Those guys have to stop mixing in with conservative groups or at least break the perception that they're mixed in.  If the mass of Liberals would read some of the well articulated points expressed in this forum, the discussion would be more about policy and less about hot button divisive issues.

I used the Civil War as a general analogy, not as a perfect fit. I'm still not getting the relevance to Davis in the context of this discussion. I read his bio on Wikipedia. I knew about the hate for the Reconstructionists, but didn't recall that he was one of them.

The little Nazis wanna-be Liberal hate groups were energized in the last eight years plus, not just in the last year when Trump announced his candidacy. Obama and the Liberal media are the owners of the uprising of the groups, not Trump. Trump was just used as the target of hate, as would any of the inevitable Republican candidates. Whoever won the Republican Primary was certain to be labeled a racist, homophobe, xenophobe, misogynist, etc., etc., etc. Sadly, it is the Democrat way ever since the Liberals took over the party. McCain and Romney were both on the receiving end of these bogus labels.

[Remmus]

4 minutes ago, Englebert said:

I used the Civil War as a general analogy, not as a perfect fit. I'm still not getting the relevance to Davis in the context of this discussion. I read his bio on Wikipedia. I knew about the hate for the Reconstructionists, but didn't recall that he was one of them.

The little Nazis wanna-be Liberal hate groups were energized in the last eight years plus, not just in the last year when Trump announced his candidacy. Obama and the Liberal media are the owners of the uprising of the groups, not Trump. Trump was just used as the target of hate, as would any of the inevitable Republican candidates. Whoever won the Republican Primary was certain to be labeled a racist, homophobe, xenophobe, misogynist, etc., etc., etc. Sadly, it is the Democrat way ever since the Liberals took over the party. McCain and Romney were both on the receiving end of these bogus labels.

Agree that Liberals and Democrats use all the stereotypes of Republicans to energize and solidify their base.  That's wrong and divides the country ...and loses elections. The Republicans (at least their advisers) were going on talk shows after the 2nd loss to Barak stating the horrible condition of the party and how they needed to be more inclusive.  Make it a true big tent party.  The Republicans can usually win on subjects like the economy and jobs ...they have to figure out a way to shed their image on race/gender/sexuality.  

Barack coming to work African American is all those hate groups need.  Hypothetically he could have been the second coming of Reagan and the hate groups wouldn't see past skin color.  It's sorta their job...lol.

 

 

[Englebert]

12 minutes ago, Remmus said:

Agree that Liberals and Democrats use all the stereotypes of Republicans to energize and solidify their base.  That's wrong and divides the country ...and loses elections. The Republicans (at least their advisers) were going on talk shows after the 2nd loss to Barak stating the horrible condition of the party and how they needed to be more inclusive.  Make it a true big tent party.  The Republicans can usually win on subjects like the economy and jobs ...they have to figure out a way to shed their image on race/gender/sexuality.  

Barack coming to work African American is all those hate groups need.  Hypothetically he could have been the second coming of Reagan and the hate groups wouldn't see past skin color.  It's sorta their job...lol.

 

 

The hate groups were energized because they knew Obama and the Liberal media was on their side and would protect them. They were free to spew their hate without repercussions. Obama's skin color had nothing to do with that. If Hillary would have won the little monsters would be even more energized to silence anyone that disagrees with their hate filled speech.

And you wouldn't have wanted to be anywhere near me when some of those Republicans were spouting that "big tent party" nonsense. How I never broke my TV is beyond me. My dogs would run outside anytime one of these RHINOs appeared on my TV. The neighbor kids would run home scared. These RHINO pinheads were actually suggesting that Republicans had to change their belief set. If that is the case, why even believe in anything. I think many on the Conservative side took note of these pinheads spouting that nonsense and quickly became anti-establishment. And thus Donald J. Trump.

[Remmus]

2 minutes ago, Englebert said:

The hate groups were energized because they knew Obama and the Liberal media was on their side and would protect them. They were free to spew their hate without repercussions. Obama's skin color had nothing to do with that. If Hillary would have won the little monsters would be even more energized to silence anyone that disagrees with their hate filled speech.

And you wouldn't have wanted to be anywhere near me when some of those Republicans were spouting that "big tent party" nonsense. How I never broke my TV is beyond me. My dogs would run outside anytime one of these RHINOs appeared on my TV. The neighbor kids would run home scared. These RHINO pinheads were actually suggesting that Republicans had to change their belief set. If that is the case, why even believe in anything. I think many on the Conservative side took note of these pinheads spouting that nonsense and quickly became anti-establishment. And thus Donald J. Trump.

You really believe a group dedicated to hating based on race is going to be that pragmatic?  Come on man.  Liberals are not the world class haters.  If you called them on something you felt was hate filled, they wouldn't have a clue why.  Same thing can be found on the conservative side.

Agree about Trump's movement.  He pulled a lot of democrats too.

[Englebert]

2 minutes ago, Remmus said:

You really believe a group dedicated to hating based on race is going to be that pragmatic?  Come on man.  Liberals are not the world class haters.  If you called them on something you felt was hate filled, they wouldn't have a clue why.  Same thing can be found on the conservative side.

Agree about Trump's movement.  He pulled a lot of democrats too.

Yes, Liberal leaders are filled with hate for anyone that isn't in lock step with their beliefs. Their sheeple conform to their beliefs and eventually adopt the hate. It is as simple as that.

Trump pulled the Democrats that finally got fed up with the Liberal hate.

[Remmus]

2 minutes ago, Englebert said:

Yes, Liberal leaders are filled with hate for anyone that isn't in lock step with their beliefs. Their sheeple conform to their beliefs and eventually adopt the hate. It is as simple as that.

Trump pulled the Democrats that finally got fed up with the Liberal hate.

Calling Liberals a hate group is really pushing reality to the extreme.  They may disagree with your beliefs, but that doesn't mean they hate (isn't that same thing we hear from Conservatives).  Perhaps we should define hate.  The Righty's can't call their dogma a disagreement and then call the Lefty's dogma hate.  

[Englebert]

4 hours ago, Remmus said:

Calling Liberals a hate group is really pushing reality to the extreme.  They may disagree with your beliefs, but that doesn't mean they hate (isn't that same thing we hear from Conservatives).  Perhaps we should define hate.  The Righty's can't call their dogma a disagreement and then call the Lefty's dogma hate.  

I've never met a Liberal that wasn't filled with hate. I've met a bunch of Democrats that are good honest people that just disagree with the extent of the government's role in our lives. There is a huge disparity between Liberals and Democrats. All Liberals are Democrats but want to constantly push the party further Left towards Socialism. Not all Democrats are Liberals. I thought we went through this before.

[Remmus]

7 hours ago, Englebert said:

I've never met a Liberal that wasn't filled with hate. I've met a bunch of Democrats that are good honest people that just disagree with the extent of the government's role in our lives. There is a huge disparity between Liberals and Democrats. All Liberals are Democrats but want to constantly push the party further Left towards Socialism. Not all Democrats are Liberals. I thought we went through this before.

Yes we did and I didn't know anyone on the conservative side made a distinction between democrats and liberals.  I guess its the same as Conservatives and establishment Republicans.

[LumRaiderFan]

13 hours ago, Remmus said:

Yes we did and I didn't know anyone on the conservative side made a distinction between democrats and liberals.  I guess its the same as Conservatives and establishment Republicans.

Hmmmmm, open mouth and....