Late to the comment thread so this probably won’t be read, but no matter. I write things because I feel like it.

My memories of 2007-2012 arguments tend to be fuzzy. Since I usually would write a short one paragraph reply back then, then go on break from internet news for 4 weeks to 3 months. But if I recall, I did respond sharply to GB’s comment once, about the US military being loyal to the US Constitution, thus Hussein Could Not Declare Emergency Rule, so to speak. I contested that conclusion, not because I thought Hussein would use the military to declare a coup, since Hussein would more likely use his Civilian Security Force. You know, like BLM terrorists. I contested the conclusion because evil in DC was already infiltrating the US military. It’s not like the military is immune from Democrat Presidents in the past.

But back then I had 50-75% of my sources and reasons in reserve, which I never told anyone online about. Online being unsecured and also being spy bot copied by Google. It wasn’t worth it to “win” an argument. If I was right, people would see in a few years, if I was wrong, then that means God or whatever natural talent I had, cut me off.

I connected the dots, but to most people even if I explained the dots, it would just seem like I was making stuff up. So I’ll talk about some other stories and experiences I had, military related.

Some retired veterans used to always talk about revitalizing the US civic body with the draft. I contested that conclusion and theory by pointing out John Kerry and how Democrats could use the draft to get their enemies killed while deferring their family and allies. That’s because from my experience and second hand contacts, the military is a hierarchy and dictatorship, not a democracy where everyone had equal say. The President gave an order, and the US military carried it out. That kind of system is relatively easy to hijack, once you take out the President or replace the chain of command. It’s not going to be fast, and it wasn’t in 2012, but the story of “US military purges by Hussein” was at least known around then.

The Left’s Gramsci march through institutions was also known to me. Art has mentioned it before as well.

None of the above is from the half of the sources and reasons which I hide and refuse to tell people about, online. Maybe if I did, it would make more sense to people, but convincing people back in 2012 or even before then, was rather pointless. If Americans couldn’t figure out what hell this country was heading towards, it wasn’t up to me to change their hardened hearts. That was their own mistake and sin to deal with. My task, if anything, was merely to warn them. It’s not my responsibility to save them from themselves.

This way, later on they can’t accuse me of having hidden things from them, blaming me for where they helped get their country to. Although they will still blame people, like conservatives and Cruz now a days. That’s just how humans are. America has about 300 million of them. Things like that naturally collapse.

Since 2007, I wasn’t writing things to convince people. I was writing things to test people. All the paranoia and fear and anger people see in this election and a few years ago, about Hussein and Clinton, I felt all of that, except directed towards the Leftist alliance in the USA. All Democrats, all Leftists, all of them were the enemy. Yet online and in the public conscience, I found little to none of that. People were going along to get along, so I forwarded a few things to test them, see what their reactions were. People reacted about what I expected of them.

There are several sources and reasons behind why the Left was taking over the US military even before 2012, under Hussein’s Regime. I won’t point them out, since a lot of them are open data mined out by now. People can find out for themselves, if they truly want to know. If they cannot find out… well, then they weren’t meant to know in the first place. They can just sit and wait to see the results. It will be an interesting one, I can promise that.

Our boy in Boston now thinks Nascar is something New York City culture elites are in. Just because they can buy it up, doesn’t mean it’s the same culture.

As for human arrogance and pride, I wonder if Paul will fall on his sword and use his gun, if and when he turns out to be wrong. But it’s not something I expect humans to be capable of, taking responsibility for their actions. That’s why they pour all their power and hopes on the US President, that’s their Savior, in truth.

“You either MUST be assuming Chavez/Castro in the next four years or not.”

No. I am saying that if Hillary gets in, other than a successful Article V convention, there will be no remaining legal, peaceful way to avoid arriving at that Chavez/Castro destination.

Because… 25 million ‘undocumented’ democrats will ensure that eventuality. Because… a permanently liberal/leftist SCOTUS majority will ensure that eventuality. Because… ever deeper indoctrination of current and future generations into the Left’s memes and narrative will ensure that outcome.

Here’s what you evidently cannot face; Bernie’s supporters are growing (the young) and Cruz’s supporters (that would be us) are aging and dying.

“It is the same thing we heard in 2008, 2012, and now 2016”

Look at what Obama has done in both the foreign and domestic arenas and tell me that we are not closer to those predictions eventuating. That we aren’t there yet, in no way invalidates that we are much closer than we were in 2004. You refuse to see the tipping point ahead, evidenced by the dynamics I just elucidated and, I can only conclude that the reason is because you won’t let yourself see it.

It is a historical fact that Pinochet saved Chile from going down the rathole of leftism. Whether that was morally justified is a separate issue.

I have never said nor even implied that the possibility of Trump being a Pinochet is a “good thing”. I have said that taking that chance is the only practicable means of at least temporarily stopping the Left. Since if Trump is not elected, an Article V convention will be the only remaining means of stopping the Left and, that I am not hopeful that it could be achieved.

“I think we are now seeing more clearly where this debate is landing. There really isn’t a limit in some people’s mind in opposition to clinton. Whatever trump turns out to be, is acceptable.”

I can’t speak for others but I know you are mistaken with me. As example, I will not knowingly target children to preserve liberty, even in war. If Trump violates the Constitution, I will criticize him as fiercely as I do Obama. And I don’t find Trump ‘acceptable’ now. I simply see no viable alternative.

I mean that with Trump there is the worst case possibility that he will turn out to be a Pinochet. That was bad, as it is highly unlikely that all of the disappeared were bad people.

But from the standpoint of a society’s ability to recover from a horrific time, history demonstrates that a right wing dictator is much to be preferred over a left wing collectivist regime.

Though they are both tyrannical, I imagine that is because a right wing regime basically wishes to preserve the society’s traditional culture, whereas a left wing regime wishes to fundamentally transform society, which unavoidably leads to a totalitarian entity, that being necessary to its survival.

The EU is showing signs of just that dynamic, if they weren’t importing migrants from Islamic cultures, which could easily derail that path, Europe would fall into totalitarianism within perhaps a few generations. That is not just my own independently arrived at opinion, both George Orwell and Ludwig von Mises predicted that such an eventuality was unavoidable for socialistic systems.

Again. Time frame?!

You either MUST be assuming Chavez/Castro in the next four years or not.

If not in the next four years, then we do have an opportunity to turn it around with someone better, and therefore is not a certainty.

If, even without Chavez/Castro in the next four years, you say all is lost, your case is overwrought. It is the same thing we heard in 2008, 2012, and now 2016, only we don’t have an acceptable GOP candidate for some of us.

If it is Chavez/Castro within the next four years, your case is overwrought.

But you are admitting the possibility of Pinochet in the next four years (you’ve seemed to back off on your probability of this).
.

“My sense is you think (Pinochet is) bad. I do not. Pinochet saved Chile from going down the rathole of leftism.” – Frog to GB

@Frog – GB, not too long ago, made the same argument as you today.

I just have to wonder how much you guys have really tried to save anything over these past few years, that you express that having a possible Pinochet is a “good thing” now.

If trump were to be so, what world are you really trying to save with trump?

It surely isn’t the one I thought we were thinking about on this, a conservative blog.
.

“total Chileans killed or disappeared was less than 3000-4,000. Can’t overthrow a communist Allende without breaking a few eggs.” – Frog

4000 people are just a few broken eggs!!!! Unbelievable!

I think we are now seeing more clearly where this debate is landing. There really isn’t a limit in some people’s mind in opposition to clinton. Whatever trump turns out to be, is acceptable.

If he wasn’t acceptable, surely there’d be more acceptance and understanding of the criticism made here wrt trump, and less rigorous defense of him.

IDK. Just doesn’t seem too darn “reluctant”, as I can tell.

Philip Says:
September 7th, 2016 at 9:24 pm

DNW, that was a fascinating read …

2. The mention of U. S. Const. Art. II Sect. 2 noting that the President is not empowered to grant pardons in cases of impeachment — does this affect our judgement of President Ford’s preemptive pardon of Nixon?”

Philip, I tried to respond to your question but it did not take.

My answer was to the effect that as the punishment for an impeachment conviction was simply removal from office, and insofar as the articles referred by the Judiciary Committee to the House had not been formally taken up much less voted on, there was no actual impeachment.

“… he [The President] shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.”

Here, I would read “in cases of impeachment” to mean cases wherein the party had been impeached and by that means removed from office. To “pardon” that, would be for the executive to overturn the act of the legislative, since the only disability per se for such a conviction is the removal from office.

Nixon was out of office, and an impeachment trial and removal was pointless.

Thus Ford’s pardon was for possible offenses against the United States which might have arisen to notice during an impeachment trial but which would have to be criminally or civilly pursued after Nixon had left office.

I guess I could take a look at the annotated Constitution and see what it has to say, but this is probably enough for both of us considering the forum.

Regards,

Is there any reasonable doubt as to Hillary’s intentions?

Yes, nobody really knows what Trump will do, which of course includes you. So uncertainty vs certainty.

We have before us a choice between an advocate of an ideology that vehemently opposes individual liberty in favor of the collective. Versus an individual that, we do know favors authoritarian, crony capitalism. The certainty of a path that leads to Chavez/Castro VS the possibility of a Pinochet.

That’s all we have. Yes, it sucks. Make your choice. And, if in a state closely contested, a refusal to vote for Trump directly assists in the furtherance on the path to the collective. That is the reality which you deny. Would that it were different but there it is and no amount of, ‘reality is what we believe it to be’ will change reality in the least. To confirm it, jump out a ten story window and argue with reality all the way down.