The GOP Needs to Care About The Voters–Guest Opinion by Jon Moseley

By Jon Moseley What would happen if the voters of Delaware started to really believe – really, truly believe – that the Delaware Republican Party (DEGOP) cared about their problems and was going to fight for the voters’ well-being in their lives? What would elections look like if Delaware was convinced that Republicans cared more about life in Delaware than Democrats do? Long-time Republican activist Dave Jones posts here often and portrays himself as a defender of the Republican establishment in Delaware and strong opponent of conservative Delaware activists. Yet Dave Jones describes his extensive and excellent volunteer work in the community. Dave volunteers to build homes for low-income Delawareans, raise money for scholarships, and help feed the poor. Is that the understanding that most Delaware voters have of the DEGOP? Clearly, no. Dave’s caring for the community is not done under the DEGOP label. That isn’t part of any Republican organizational activities. Yet what if the Party actually followed Dave’s lead and example in his charity work and caring that occurs outside of the DEGOP label? Should the DEGOP have any goals or political agenda? One of the dividing differences is that establishment Republicans don’t believe the DEGOP should have any purpose and the conservative grassroots or tea party Republicans believe it must. Believing in things is divisive. If the DEGOP takes a stand on any issue, it is just an opportunity for someone to disagree or criticize. So the establishment believes the GOP must stand for nothing so that there won’t be anything for anyone to disagree with. For the establishment, all that matters is that we wear an “R” on our old-school ‘letterman’ jersey and they wear a “D” on their jersey. The whole game is for our “R Club” to beat their “D Club.” Why? Well, because we have an “R” and they have a “D.” That’s why establishment Republicans don’t use all the tools available: It’s just a friendly football scrimmage, after all. This reminds me of an old Star Trek episode (the original Star Trek series) where the Enterprise crew meets two races at war with each other: One race is black on the left and white on the right. The second race is the mirror image. So they hate each other and have been at war for generations. The pointlessness of that dispute resembles the DEGOP. The average voter rejects such “partisanship” because it is pointless, artificial, and meaningless. Disputes that have no purpose are just divisive while accomplishing nothing. It is like the difference between “constructive criticism” (which is difficult to actually achieve) and simply being mean. Being divisive for no reason is what independents and other average voters dislike and reject. Meanwhile, the conservative side of the DEGOP couldn’t care less care if “R’s” win elections – unless it changes things. This of course is blasphemy to establishment Republicans. They think conservatives are dangerous, destructive, harmful, and crazy because we don’t believe it matters if the “R Club” beats the “D Club.” Dave Jones described on a post here what is going on in Delaware: “The non educated can only work at gas stations, the educated are being paid less just to keep a job . . . Hospitals are getting ready to use temps more and more for why pay benefits if you don’t have to? [Unemployment] is really 16%. Two CPA friends of mine have had clients cry due to this years taxes. . . . 4 friends of my parents have had to take custody of their grandchildren due to the parents inability to care for them. It’s an absolute disaster out there. “None of my friends have a bought a new car since 07, talk of beach houses have been replaced with learning how to do workshops at home improvement stores. At my parish . . . our food bank gets hit 20 days a month, not from people driving 17 year old cars, but from people that look like my neighbor’s. Do any of these people feel like the DEGOP either knows or cares about what they are going through? What would happen to the DEGOP if it started to address and help these people in their real-life problems? Now, one challenge is that the easy, superficial, knee-jerk responses are liberal. Actually, it isn’t true that liberal solutions are any more obvious than conservative solutions. But we have been indoctrinated for decades with liberal ideas. So it is hard for us to avoid being sucked in to a big-government response. That isn’t natural. But it is familiar. We’ve been brainwashed. The DEGOP needs to offer solutions that actually work. Liberal solutions don’t work. We need to get creative and think things through. Republicans need to be ready to be persuasive that conservative policies will make life better for Delawareans who are suffering. Still, don’t you think that for any political party it is essential that the voters truly believe that the party cares about them and their lives? Democrats try to fake concern dishonestly. But Democrats are so obviously lying that even voters who are not paying attention realize it. The joke goes that sincerity is very important in politics. When you learn to fake sincerity you will go far. There is a simple and powerful way for Republicans to convince the voters that the DEGOP cares about their problems: Ready? Here it is: Republicans must actually care about their problems. “Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.” – Jesus. If Republicans actually started to care the way Dave Jones demonstrates in his life outside the DEGOP, it would change everything about all the ways the DEGOP thinks about everything. “As a man thinks in his heart, so is he.” — Proverbs 23:7. So why can’t the DEGOP have a purpose? What is the DEGOP’s purpose? Why does it exist? Why do Republicans want to win? To what end? Delaware’s conservative wing wants to leave a better country to our children and preserve their inheritance of a great country. But if Republican politicians aren’t going to fight for that, then it is more rational to actually spend quality time live, in person, with those children right now. There is no purpose in campaigning for an “R” who is going to produce the same results as electing a “D.” It’s better to take nieces and nephews, children and grandchildren to the park than to spend time fighting for one club over the other club. Establishment Republicans and/or moderates are frustrated and baffled by conservatives who don’t get it. They think conservatives are nuts or Trouble Makers ™. An agenda is irrelevant to them. Goals aren’t important. Often when people are fighting there are hidden differences lurking beneath the surface. People are not saying on the surface what they are really thinking down deep (often from “self evident” assumptions long buried within their subconscious). Therefore, no progress is made toward understanding one another. But perhaps the Republican Party is too stuck in old, familiar ruts. Remember: A rut is a groove in a dirt road so well-worn that the wagon wheels won’t go anywhere else but inside the rut. Maybe it is possible to think outside of old habits, clichés, and knee-jerk reflexes. NOTE: Let no one say that Jon Moseley is suggesting they do not care. What matters is what the voters believe, not what I believe. If you do care, is that what the voters are convinced of? ###

40 thoughts on “The GOP Needs to Care About The Voters–Guest Opinion by Jon Moseley”

  1. If you choose candidates that have no chance of winning an election or are only in it for publicity, then it would seem that you must not care about the well being of our state.

    The fact is that we need more Republicans in office at this point, period.

    It’s time to grow up and put your Lacey Lafferty, Sheriff Christopher, and Christine O’Donnell toys away, and get serious about our state, and the direction that we are headed.

  2. FBH, before you choose a candidate — or anything in any aspect of life — you first have to ask what are the criteria that are relevant: What is the GOAL? Until you settle on a goal or goals, you cannot determine what criteria to use in picking a candidate. And you can’t pick a candidate without knowing what the criteria are that matter.

    Certain candidates may seem self-evidently “better” to you — but that flows from applying the criteria that you believe are relevant.

    The biggest argument in favor of upstart conservative candidates is that the establishment Republicans aren’t stepping up to the plate themselves. When those with experience and qualifications aren’t performing as promised, then you start to look elsewhere.

    It is always better to focus on what you can do better, because you can control that. So instead of the establishment complaining about conservative upstarts, maybe the establishment should “up” their own game and show us all how it is done.

  3. FBH writes: “The fact is that we need more Republicans in office at this point, period.”

    WHY?

    We realize that you believe that. But that argument is not selling among conservatives. So to try to bring everyone together, let’s explore what you MEAN by that.

    One side is totally convinced that “The fact is that we need more Republicans in office at this point, period.”

    The other side is not buying it.

    So elaborate on that point. WHY do we need more Republicans in office regardless of whether they stand for anything, regardless of what they do in office, and regardless of whether they implement a Republican agenda?

  4. “So elaborate on that point. WHY do we need more Republicans in office regardless of whether they stand for anything, regardless of what they do in office, and regardless of whether they implement a Republican agenda?”

    Well, one thing we know for sure, is that a Democrat won’t implement a Republican agenda. Right?

  5. You see, FBH, an ability to do the job is not important — it’s the ability to mouth the right slogans that’s important to Jon Moseley, who, I should point out, has never gotten a candidate elected to anything.

    He does, however, have a world-class ability to forge excuses for his shortcomings.

  6. David Anderson, why are you allowing an out of state political agitator use your blog to trash one of the few NCC republicans who gives his time and money to Republican candidates?

    If you really want to close the divide in the DEGOP, stop posting nonsense from someone who keeps reminding us why we’re divided.

  7. fightingbluehen on May 4, 2014 at 08:02 said:

    “Well, one thing we know for sure, is that a Democrat won’t implement a Republican agenda. Right?”

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Yes. That is absolutely true.

    And for many Republicans — generally identified (roughly speaking) as being among the moderate or establishment wing, whatever that means — this makes it SELF EVIDENT that we should elect a Republican at any cost, no matter what.

    But what the conservative wing of the GOP thinks is self-evident is that there is no guarantee that a Republican elected official will vote for a Republican agenda, either.

    It is absolutely true that if the Democrat wins, the Democrat will vote for a Democrat agenda.

    But it is NOT necessarily true that if the Republican wins that the Republican will vote for a Republican agenda.

    And that is one of the main reasons for the civil war within the Republican Party.

    The “moderate” wing (or whatever we should call them) is convinced that any Republican is better than any Democrat.

    The conservative wing feels they have been “burned” too many times for decades by Republicans who vote like Democrats and are fed up with it and need to fight fire with fire to bring Republicans back to their roots.

    The conservative wing feels that the WRONG Republican in office will be almost the same as a Democrat and will vote for a Democrat agenda.

    And if we have a Republican in office who votes for the Democrat agenda, it destroys the public reputation of the Party not only in that race and in that State but in all elections nationwide, for years to come.

    It becomes harder and harder for any Republican to win anywhere, when the public doesn’t know what the GOP stands for.

    So if a Republican votes for the Democrat agenda, it hurts all Republicans in all elections everywhere.

    One of the problems with the civil war in the GOP is that both sides don’t UNDERSTAND what the other side is saying.

    At least if each side can start to COMPREHEND what the other side is trying to say and do, we might find that there is more agreement than it seems.

  8. Consider: One of the main responses to conservatives trying to bring our nations’ finances under control is the argument that conservatives did not criticize Republican (and White) President George W. Bush when he spent money in a way that would make a drunken sailor feel embarrassed.

    But we did criticize the Republicans in Congress during the Bush Presidency for spending money like there is no tomorrow and criticize President Bush.

    But the public perception that conservatives did not care about these issues until a Black man was elected President has done tremendous political / PR damage to the GOP.

    If the GOP does not CONSISTENTLY and reliably stand by its principles, it damages everyone in the Party, everywhere, for years.

    When the GOP spent most of the Bush Presidency spending taxpayer’s money like Barney Frank and Bernie Sanders,

    it is then hard for any Republican anywhere to run on a platform of fiscal discipline.

    Democrats then say we are only upset because Obama is a Black man.

  9. anon on May 4, 2014 at 08:51 said: “David Anderson, why are you allowing an out of state political agitator use your blog to trash one of the few NCC republicans who gives his time and money to Republican candidates?”

    By your reference to NCC, I assume you mean Dave Jones.

    I don’t see how recommending that the entire DEGOP should follow Dave Jones’ example, be more like Dave Jones, and listen to Dave Jones more when it comes to the platform and public perception of the DEGOP is “trashing” Dave Jones.

    It is true that Dave Jones does not count himself among the conservative wing and strongly disagrees on some social conservative issues and he blames conservatives as other moderates do.

    But if the DEGOP incorporated what Dave Jones does as private charity even a little into the DEGOP’s public face, Dave Jones could revolutionize the DEGOP in a positive direction.

  10. Nobody on May 4, 2014 at 08:39 said: “You see, FBH, an ability to do the job is not important ”

    You first have to decide what the job is before you can consider whether someone has the ability to do that job.

    One person may be an expert carpenter but not so good at repairing copy machines. An HVAC repairman might not make the best house painter.

    Where the moderate and conservative wing don’t agree on what the job is, they are not going to agree on who is the best person to do that job.

  11. “Where the moderate and conservative wing don’t agree on what the job is, they are not going to agree on who is the best person to do that job.”

    And as a result they won’t agree on much else, either. But that won’t stop the conservative wing’s loosest wingnut from declaring that it’s Democrats causing all the trouble between the two groups of Republicans.

  12. Anon, if saying that someone should be the model for Republicans is trashing them, trash me. This post is laudatory. He was inspired by Dave Jones and gives a very sound message.

    I found it to be true personally. I work endlessly in the community and people notice. You can have whatever you want in life, if you help enough other people get what they want, said the late, great Zig Ziglar.

  13. The fact is that we need more Republicans in office at this point, period.

    I’m an independent… but in order to do what? What have we supposedly all missed out on?

  14. Delaware seems the same as it’s been for a while now, other than the graying heads at Home Depot and Lowes. Something that I could explain and ramble about. (It’s the bankers and their processes of creating money out of nothing, as usual.) But it probably doesn’t really matter.

  15. mynym on May 5, 2014 at 10:51 said: “Delaware seems the same as it’s been for a while now, other than the graying heads at Home Depot and Lowes. Something that I could explain and ramble about. ”
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Well, I disagree with the “Blame the banksters” movement, which I don’t think even stands on its own, logically.

    But nevertheless, what would you have the DEGOP do or stand for that would help those people?

    When I was at a meeting in Sussex about 2 years ago, dang I am so bad with remembering names. It wasn’t Georgetown but nearby.

    I talked to the waitress about why the big restaurant was nearly empty at lunch time. I asked her thoughts AND LISTENED.

    She pointed out how the ROUTES and DESIGN of the buses and mass transit made no sense and were interfering with work opportunities — the ability to travel to a job — and with tourism.

    There was an idea. I asked. I listened. She had an idea: RATIONALIZE the buses and badly-run, mismanaged transportation services in Delaware. Now, is she right? I don’t know. I would have to research it. But that was her life experience with the situation there.

    What else would you do to make the lives better for those grey haired seniors who have to work at Home Depot instead of enjoying retirement? What would you do for young families in Delaware?

    As I said, the first instinct is to have the government spend more money or do new projects. Bill Clinton kicked off Hillary’s Presidential campaign last Wednesday at Georgetown University with an extensive lecture attempting to convince us that government spending with borrowed money — yes, he was explicit about the borrowed money part — really does grow the economy.

    mynym, if there is any policy debate that the “blame the banksters” people ought to have an opinion about, should you be energetically and vigorously addressing the “Let’s borrow more money and put the country deeper in debt to stimulate the economy” argument? Who benefits from the U.S. Treasury borrowing more and more money and putting our nation and our nieces and nephews, children and grandchildren in debt? Starts with a “b” and ends with a “k” (in the singular form). Why aren’t the “It’s all the Federal Reserve’s and private banks” fault pulling out the pitchforks and torches over the idea of borrowing more money and putting the country deeper into debt on the fools’ errand of trying to grow the economy by borrowing money from banksters?

  16. Well, I disagree with the “Blame the banksters” movement, which I don’t think even stands on its own, logically.

    That’s because, as I understand it, your argument is logically based on idealism. In reality, people want money and politicians (Even if they don’t realize that they’re a “pet.”) need Rothschild “money” and so on… that’s REALITY. Focus.

    Sure… “ideally,” politicians would be true statesmen following the Constitution that was partially developed based on a rebellion against the usual and largely Judaic conglomerations of wealth (Due to Jewish culture and tribalism/exceptionalism, if not the racial supremacy that Donald Sterling justifiably blamed his own racism on and so on. Did you hear that in the Media Inc.? Probably not. Trendy journalists, ruled. Although many are making an exodus at this point, Larry King to RT. Glenn “the crying 9/12 Judas goat” Beck to his own network. Cenk Ugar off of MSNBC Inc. and onto the internet. Etc.etc. Even the most dimwitted goys seem to get tired of being Judaized and “trended” away from certain topics and conclusions eventually, just as you’re trending the topic away from banksterism. No matter how transparently obvious it is, at this point.)

    In any event, the politicians are not statesmen and they are not following the Constitution. Like our Senator, most are too busy with being groomed and handled as “pets” and so on. And to think that a silly goy like Christine O’Donnell wouldn’t have voted for the war with Syria/Iran and sent Delawareans off to another war for Israel and foreign factions like the Qatari/Saudi axis* is silly. So that’s that.

    *That John “the ketchup king” Kerry openly said they would pay the American peasants incorporated in corporations.mil to fight, in petrodollars. Everything is fine until veterans come home and kill themselves. Everything is fine for a peasant until they have a serious health problem and realize that corporations.gov actually isn’t going to pay for it with their petrodollars. But the bankers and the politicians that aren’t following the Constitution anymore? They seem to have good healthcare and enough “money.” Imagine that.

  17. But nevertheless, what would you have the DEGOP do or stand for that would help those people?

    Follow the Constitution.

    That’s it.

  18. No, my thoughts about blaming the banksters are based upon the question of evidence and proof, not idealism.

    Now, are banksters innocent or perfect? No. But I don’t think that banksters are UNIQUELY responsible for all or anything wrong with our country or our world. Bankers are no more virtuous than anyone else, and they may play a role as fallen and flawed human beings in causing harm. Indeed, to the extent that one has more influence, their actions OR FAILURE TO ACT can have a disproportionate impact by one person different from other people.

    But my concerns about the obsession with banksters are that:
    o The main result is to give “cover” and a “pass” to people who are far more guilty, and
    o over whom we have a lot more influence and a much greater opportunity to fix the problem.
    o The obsession with the banksters is hopeless, in the sense that it offers no solution, no possible response, nothing that can be done to counter these dark, hidden conspiracies. Whether it is true or not, I don’t care, because it does not provide any course of action to make anything any better.
    o I do not believe that human beings are capable of organizing great conspiracies without (a) making mistakes and (b) letting the truth slip out.
    o I believe that human beings are infinitely more capable of stupidity and that events can be fully explained by human stupidity. (By stupidity, of course, I mean a momentary lapse of common sense by otherwise intelligent and otherwise normal people, such that I have my moments of stupidity just like everyone else. I mean a mistake which in hindsight makes people wonder “WHAT were you thinking….?” I don’t mean someone lacking in the mental equipment to avoid the mistake, for whom I have compassion.)
    o While I don’t believe in the capacity of humans to organize great conspiracies, I do believe in the power of people moving in the same direction spontaneously when they share common interests. People will do what is in their own interest. And when many people benefit from the same thing, they will all push that thing, even if they never talked to each other about it.

    But I repeat my challenge: If all of you ‘blame the banksters” people are so upset – and mynym is only one of millions out there pushing this theme — then why don’t you do something constructive, like fight against the government BORROWING MORE MONEY from the banksters?

    When we are $17 trillion in debt, bankrupting the country, WHO benefits? If you don’t like the banksters, you should be against politicians who won’t get federal spending under control, stop borrowing money, and getting us deeper into debt.

    If we started paying down the debt, wouldn’t that help weaken the leverage of your bankster friends over the U.S. Government? (According to your thinking, their power is infinite, but when the U.S.A. is $17 trillion in debt, that has to increase the bankster’s power over the U.S. Government, right?)

    In the meantime, WHAT ELSE would you have Delaware politicians do to make lives better for Delaware citizens?

  19. Why aren’t the “It’s all the Federal Reserve’s and private banks” fault pulling out the pitchforks and torches over the idea of borrowing more money and putting the country deeper into debt on the fools’ errand of trying to grow the economy by borrowing money from banksters?

    That’s partially what Occupy was about. Did you join them? Or was the way that the Media Inc. represented them as the Left enough to divide and conquer the base, as usual? “Let’s go to Bucky Bow Tie on Faux News for a patriotic report surrounded in Red and Blue!”

    Although they are the Left and generally and composed of people that trended to the left based on atrophied brains. Literally, as Joe Biden might say. That’s partially why they wandered around uselessly playing with arts and crafts instead of forming militias or infiltrating the masculine/Right side of the police $tate in some way. After all, that would be too manly. And masculinity is generally a joke in America now, until things go hyper masculine and therefore more openly fascist later like the people meandering toward the Golden Dawn in Greece… most likely.

    So that’s, that. We’re a long way from the symmetrical balance between Washington’s monument and the Capital Dome at this point. But like the Two Towers on 911, things can only be pushed so far before the pillars of the masculine and the feminine collapse and a new phallic symbol is built. Hyper masculinity will be the wave of the future, etc.

    It is pretty crazy how effective “trending” sheeple to the Left or the Right is though, huh? Apparently they can be sheared and slaughtered that way. Or left trying to borrow enough money/debt into existence to pay off debts based on the usury being practiced by the occulted/hidden/private banking Cartel Inc. that they’ve been incorporated in. All of that, instead of having a representative government of the people spend money into existence debt and interest free in their interests.

    There’s always the Constitution sitting there and the Founders that probably used their inner workings of the occult ruling class to develop it. Although it’s pretty much dead at this point.

    Shrug. (Nobody likes it when I shrug. I guess I’m supposed to be real mad about things, as if the American Revolution and the eventual emergence of the American middle class wasn’t an anomaly relative to peasants and serfs being totally ruled by an illuminated/”illuminati” type of ruling class instead.)

    Like Chicago, Delawareans will probably have to sell their parking meters or their toll roads and so on to foreign corporations that have been formed or are progressively in the process of being formed out of “their” own petrodollar forms of ponzi and their so-called “debt”/money eventually. (For libertarians…. but if oligarchies and corporations.gov didn’t exist to sell the roads later, then who would build the roads in the first place?? A libertarian joke, so about 10% of the population might get it.)

    Little wonder that the established GOP is little more than a social club for people that have profited off of the status quo while “the base”/conservatives are continually and rather easily divided with the wedge issues recommended by handlers like Karl Rove. (But sometimes the division doesn’t stop and things get out of hand for the handlers and then the other side of the established gentleman’s game and electoral Red vs. Blue circus act wins. Oops. Not that it really matters, though.)

    There’s probably nothing to be done about it, really. American peasants already have a big cheat sheet for dealing with the ruling class called the Constitution. Something drawn up for them by Masons which would work as if like magick against the bankers located on “33rd Liberty Street.” But Americans are generally just serfs that like their football, bread and circuses and reality shows more than focusing on reality. Perhaps they’ll focus on reality again when they have to. When bread hits $15 petrodollars a loaf or they’re expected to “bail in” the bankers that they already bailed out, like in Cyprus. Or they may be led to think that they’re focusing on reality by members of secret societies and occultists, if history is any measure.

    So that’s, that. I just hope that not many people whose hair is currently turning gray at the Lowes (not enough money, huh?) now need the healthcare.gov promised by politicians and supposedly provided by corporations.gov being financed by international bankers to actually WORK in their interests in some way later. Because just because you’re more interested in football or are ignorant and apathetic and have well groomed “representatives”/pets trying to borrow enough money into existence from international bankers while crime families run national security states financed with narco/petro dollars, etc.etc…. doesn’t mean that you deserve to die when it turns out that you don’t have “money” thanks to Congress. (Which “ideally,” should be issuing money instead of having it created out of nothing and then borrowing it into existence and so on. Otherwise your ideal or “logical” arguments about how Congress has all this power are generally just garbage in, garbage out…. logically.)

    Those of us out here that have enough information content to see synchronicity in our day to day lives (Day after day in the music of the spheres, seriously… it’s like everything is connected or somthin’.) and so on are busy with more of the War Inc. that Zionists keep trying to ignite.

    I guess we’re fortunate that even the most dimwitted serf didn’t want to go to war with Syria/Iran over “WMDs” for the sake of Israel or to cover over an “economic”/banking collapse. Seriously.

  20. No, I understand why you shrug. It’s just hard to reconcile all your shrugging with your revolutionary instincts.

  21. But I repeat my challenge: If all of you ‘blame the banksters” people are so upset – and mynym is only one of millions out there pushing this theme — then why don’t you do something constructive, like fight against the government BORROWING MORE MONEY from the banksters?

    Already done, with Bitcoin and Anonymous and networks forming even if the NSA or Israeli “We won’t outsource our own security like you goy do.” contractors knows about them and so forth. Get right down to it, there aren’t enough of them to police all of us.

    With respect to the ingenious idea of borrowing money into existence from a privately owned banking cartel apparently rooted in Rothschild Zionism instead of following the Constitution, perhaps the best that peasants can hope for is that the house of cards and game of loans lasts over their lifespan. Unless you want something more in life, like revolution. How exciting, in reality?

    I guess I’m “conservative” in the sense that I do not want a revolution.

    What does continuing to be incorporated in the house of cards look like, instead of basically moving in the direction of killing people or having the new weapons of the police $tate tried out on you? What does it look like instead of: “All these people need to be lined up and shot.” As Delaware Lemming once put it during the last rumble before they realized that they were a lemming, left standing alone? Herp, derp.

    What it seems to look like is SPENDING enough debt/money to keep things going while trying to direct it back down to the poor more quickly than the people creating it out of nothing can incorporate it in their systems of usury, seems to me. Or maybe not. Either way, it’s not that great. But it’s better than a revolution. Keep one eye on the astro logic too, I guess… given that the elite and Judaics are into that sort of thing. I think 911 was synchronized with a 400 year rabbinic prophecy. Like the cabala’s sacred six million, sometimes they seem to try to make stuff come true. It doesn’t really matter if the astrological aspects of it are “true” if people in the ruling classes of the world make plans around it. (Sort of like the founding of America itself, when things were aligned.)

    I would actually trust many Americans with a revolution if the gray haired people at Lowes trying to keep up with the banker’s debt/money couldn’t be inspired to drive around on Medicaid scooters to a Tea Party event to wave their “Made in China” flags. Then there’s the compartment of Glen Beck and Alex “Beck is a Jew das goat! Arabs own Hollywood!” Jones(town). Dumbocracy in action? Once the goy reach that level of revolutionary fervor against themselves again, it may be on like donkey kong… I guess. It reminds one of the compartmentalized flow chart of risk in a collateralized debt obligation, it’s all about risk management.

    I don’t know what the answers are. We’ll probably wait for stuff to start blowing up again or there’s another “economic”/banking collapse that centralizes more control in the hands of members of the tribe/secret societies.

    People usually wait until it affects them in a way that they can feel in their community. That’s the nature of being a peasant with roots in a place. And perhaps there’s nothing really wrong with that. Although they do lack imagination, given that they’ve been incorporated in a wider system and things could probably be otherwise if they “revolted.”

    But again, if history is any measure then peasants will be convinced to kill each other once again. So perhaps it’s best to refuse to be instigated, live simply, help people and generally avoid politics. (There’s always the Constitution, which is actually based on similar values… as far as being against politics. In a sense, the only “revolution” necessary is simply to abide by the supposed law of the land. But I’m open to argument on that.)

  22. Well, you say you don’t know what the answers are.

    Okay, there might be a lot of answers and none of us can even begin to grasp the whole problem and everything that should be done, step by step.

    But how about this as a pretty solid first step?

    Demand that Congress stop spending so much money?

    Stop borrowing money — from the banksters.

    Get our annual deficit down to $0.00, which STILL leaves us $17 trillion in overall debt.

    Start paying down our national debt.

    I think putting the country deeper and deeper in hock to the banksters wouldn’t be what “you” (collectively) would want.

    Or are you simply upset only about their being Jews in the world?

  23. But how about this as a pretty solid first step?

    Demand that Congress stop spending so much money?

    Then we might not have enough money to continue financing the “national debt” that’s been created. Default and calamity follows… there’s a reason that the corrupt degenerates running things have tried to run things into the ground slowly. And now we’re left with a fossil fueled generation raised on American Idol and Justin Bieber. What are they going to do… stage some sort of a dance, dance revolution against their owners?

    It’s all pretty funny. Comedic. Too bad it’s also tragic, though.

    Stop borrowing money — from the banksters.

    It’s more important to have a representative form of government issuing its own money based on the Constitution/law.

    Get our annual deficit down to $0.00, which STILL leaves us $17 trillion in overall debt.

    I think even the dumbest person in the dumbocrazy realizes that they’re never paying off all the national debt that’s been created by “Bankers built this!” politicians and banksters no matter how hard they work. After all, then they wouldn’t have enough money/debt to finance all the debt/money that’s already been created or to run the aspects of what remains of their representative government that actually are important anyway.

    You can’t stop spending unless you want the theatrical production of the “fiscal cliff” type stuff to happen for real or perhaps March of the Bonus Army type scenarios to happen again. Who is going to kill the veterans that brought us all the hopium and change before they kill themselves anyway? (Let’s go to Bucky Bow Tie of Faux News for another report! Etc.)

    I’m open to ideas about the “debt” and “fiscal cliff.” Like money…. it’s all just talk, until it isn’t. I can’t help but like the fact that the political circus act continues. Comedy and tragedy. It’s Mrs. “plastic surgery” Pelosi in one corner vs. John “I cry in the tanning booth.” Boehner in the other. Let’s have them wrestle over the “debt” next time.

    It’s all laughable until you go to corporations.gov and can’t actually get any healthcare, like the oligarchs in Congress can.

    Start paying down our national debt.

    Or stop spending it on War Inc…. since that’s generally what the Oligarchy is feeding on. Not to mention the “trickle back” effect of all the MRAPs and Fallujah type tactics and probably drones that will be used in Operation 9/12 American Pie Patriots eventually. “This is Bucky Bowtie from Faux News reporting on the alien Muslim Manchurian candidate that the blue states elected again!” Etc.

  24. Meanwhile, Feinstein/Schumer/Levin/Silverman/Goldstein/Bloomberg/Goldman might be successful in disarming “Mr. and Mrs. America.” while simultaneously arming some sort of DHS/Chertoff/”patriot act” police $tate that will have to be composed of… Mr. and Mrs. American Pie? At some level, it will have to be composed of the people that the oligarchy seeks to rule. (Minus a few hot headed sheriffs, I guess? What was that story, did he really flick a paper at him and then they got in a fist fight? Seriously.)

    I think putting the country deeper and deeper in hock to the banksters wouldn’t be what “you” (collectively) would want.

    Ideally.

    But the way people actually are, even if they’re given a magical Constitution (by people familiar with high level occultism, etc.) that would generally benefit them and their welfare.. they still refuse to support it.

    First, in Article I, Section 8, Clause 5 and Article I, Section 10, Clause 1, the Constitution adopts silver and gold coin exclusively as the money of the United States. The standard of value in this system is the “dollar,” as that coin historically existed in the late 1700s, containing 371-1/4 grains (troy) of fine silver. Constitutional Money

    I’m not sure about gold/silver at this point. Might need a Constitutional Amendment, given how the Wizard of Oz/gold has been given the ability to create monopolies on both the yellow brick road and the silver slippers used to travel it for a long time. How people form governments and issue currency for themselves, spent into existence by “representative” statesmen in their interests, should be debated… if the American people ever wake up from their stupor and refuse to be divided by Jewish factions, etc. I.e. it’ll probably never happen. Plus no sooner had the local GOP done something significant relative to the establishment then they’d be called antisemitic. Not that it would ever get to that point, given how easily divided most people are.

    The irony of the progressive/Left side is that we don’t even have what they seem to think we have. I.e…. a limitless central government creating money out of nothing without being limited by physical reality in some way (silver and gold) either. Instead, a private banking cartel is creating money out of nothing and lending it at interest to corporations.gov. So it’s naturally going to get stronger the more money that is spent. Perhaps at this point it would be best if it provided its own security services instead of turning Team America into its mercenaries, though.

    I wouldn’t even mind if a marginally “representative” (cough) government was creating money out of nothing without regard for the limitations of a gold/silver standard. (And the principle of linking money to reality that standard is supposed to represent, ideally. If the Wizard of Oz/gold didn’t exist…etc.)

    That would STILL be better than a global banking cartel doing it, while building national security states around its networks. (Not to mention its apparent tendency to create wars with any states not incorporated with it. Something that may lead to more than a resurgence of the “Cold War” eventually. I guess no one was paying attention to the all seeing eye that was put on the Ukrainian currency a while ago. That’s going well.)

  25. Start paying down our national debt.

    Mint a trillion dollar coin.

    I think Krugman said that. He seems to be an idiot. But he might have been on to something there.

  26. By 5%? You call that trounced?

    Tillis needed 40% to avoid a run-off. Pretty said that he got only 45.6% if he is so great. The Speaker of the NC House had 54% vote AGAINST him, after tons of money spent by the establishment.

    The argument against Thom Tillson I don’t think was that motivating.

    Plus there were 7 candidates. If the top 3 conservatives had not been running against each other, they would have taken 49.39% against Thom Tillis’ 45.69%

    Thom Tillis REP 222,408 45.69 %
    Greg Brannon REP 132,122 27.14 %
    Mark Harris REP 85,420 17.55 %
    Heather Grant REP 22,856 4.70 %
    Jim Snyder REP 9,370 1.93 %
    Ted Alexander REP 9,219 1.89 %
    Alex Lee Bradshaw REP 3,508 0.72 %

    LESSON: Conservatives and tea party people have got to STOP running multiple candidates against 1 superficial establishment hack.

  27. Isn’t running lots of candidates a typical establishment response to primary challenges? I know Democrats in Delaware’s General Assembly have done that to protect themselves from serious challengers; Harris McDowell had three challengers a few years back and won only a plurality that, under Delaware rules, gave him the nomination (we don’t have run-off elections between the top two finishers).

  28. Yes, Nobody, that often happens.

    But conservatives and tea party groups need to coordinate better as well.

  29. Oops, a tenant called while typing. 1 vote is a mandate, 2 votes are a landslide.

  30. Yes! The GOP beat the Tea party in NC and IN. Finally electoral sense is retuning to the party of Lincoln.

  31. @DaveJones: Not exactly accurate. The establishment beat the Tea Party candidates by adopting Tea Party positions. Doesn’t the Tea Party still win?

  32. “But conservatives and tea party groups need to coordinate better as well.”

    But they can’t because they are driven by inherently divisive ideological purity tests. Call me old fashioned, but I believe voters are primarily looking for someone with the temperament to govern, which is more often about finding reasonable solutions to problems amid competing viewpoints.

  33. People do care much more about effective governing then ideology. Up here it’s called the pothole problem. The person who stops the pothole from rattling at 4:00 am gets the vote.

  34. Nitpicker on May 8, 2014 at 10:19 said: “Call me old fashioned, but I believe voters are primarily looking for someone with the temperament to govern, which is more often about finding reasonable solutions to problems amid competing viewpoints”

    Your view is not correct. Or, rather, that may be your perspective on how it ought to be, and that is your valid opinion. I mean that is not how most people look at it. You are wrong that your criteria is what other voters are looking at.

    And this is one of the biggest divides in all of these disputes. It is important to take note of these ideas, because differences of opinion on this and a handful of other points is what the entire massive argument is about.

    You want someone who can go into office and figure out solutions from scratch, as if the world did not exist prior to the day the candidate-elect is sworn into office, as if no awareness, knowledge, or ideas prior to the candidate taking office ever existed.

    You feel very strongly about that model, as do Dave (Virginia-Retired), Dave Jones, Tom Ross, and all or most so-called establishment Republicans.

    Those who believe in that model are aghast at the presumption and arrogance of someone daring to run for office who has the credentials of just an ordinary person. You (collectively) feel that the U.S. Congress is supposed to be a gathering of the wisest and most qualified men and women to chart our future for us and solve problems.

    But most conservatives completely reject that model.

    For one thing, we have seen the results. We have tested that model, and it fails. Those who claim all kinds of credentials have been dismal failures, running our country into the ground, financially at the very least.

    So we have seen for decades that those candidates who are supposed to “have the temperament to govern,” are destroying the country.

    Theory aside, reality intrudes.

    Second, someone who is highly competent at doing bad things will simply be more successful at doing bad things.

    A person with the temperament or capacity to govern, who does not share our goals, is a monstrous evil, far worse than a person who does not share our goals but won’t know how to get bad things done.

    Adolf Hitler was highly competent as a leader, and he used his skills to do horrible evils.

    You may have heard the saying: “People won’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.”

    Unless a candidate wants to promote the right goals, I couldn’t care less about his or her abilities or temperament.

    If a candidate is not committed to using the office for the right goals, why do I care what his or her temperament for governing is, or his or her capabilities or credentials?

  35. dave jones on May 8, 2014 at 11:24 said: “People do care much more about effective governing then ideology.”

    No, they don’t, except in the sense that you have implied lots of ideas into those terms.

    Ideology means WHY you are governing — to what end?

    Effective governing can be seizing your house by eminent domain, very efficiently and aggressively, and building a stadium where your house ought to be.

    That might be very effective governing — but you wouldn’t like it one bit.

    Why not turn Delaware into a landfill for the rest of the country? Could bring in a lot of money. That might be problem-solving and make a lot of money. But the people of Delaware would not agree with that one bit.

    ____________________________
    dave jones on May 8, 2014 at 11:24 said: “Up here it’s called the pothole problem. The person who stops the pothole from rattling at 4:00 am gets the vote”

    But that IS ideology. There is a GOAL: Roads should be smooth and complete.

    When you elect a local candidate, you are looking for what he or she is going to DO If elected.

    You are not impressed by how effectively the candidate will do their own thing or something you hate.

    You are expecting the candidate to achieve the goals that you agree with.

    What if the government official solves the pot hole problem by closing down the road, confiscating your cars, and forcing you to ride a trolley on rails where the road used to be?

    Effective governing. Problem solved. The rails won’t wear down and develop pot holes.

    All the money the government used to save filling potholes will be avoided. The government can sell your car to raise the money to put in the trolley rails.

    Problem solving. Effective governing. But NOT what you wanted as a voter.

  36. Mr. Moseley,

    We held the Delaware house for close to 28 years and the caucus was a mixture of every political stripe known to man. The elected official’s ranged from a New Zealand transplant who was for socialism and campaigned in a black leather jacket, 4 member’s who carried the banner’s in the Labor Day parade to another who had a sign in his yard that read: hungry? eat your import. This group also included fiscal conservatives who read every line of the budget. In caucus meetings fist fights were the norm and many a metal water pitcher were thrown.
    Yet, we had the majority so we controlled the agenda and until you control the agenda you don’t matter. Rabble rousing, Glenn Beckian style fear are bad substitutes for fixing the pot hole.
    One style fits all is a losing idea in politics whereas getting 50.1% is a winning one. Campaign to fit your district and win.

  37. Jon: You keep asserting, without evidence, your notions of how people look at politics. I believe you are 180 degrees off course in your beliefs.

    Most people do NOT think about politics as you do. Most of them do not think about it at all, and think even less about governing philosophies and goals. The majority of people does indeed simply want politicians to find solutions — they tell this to every pollster who ever asks them about it.

    Your belief system is built on a false assumption — that the way you view politics is how most other people do. You could not be more wrong about it.

  38. The majority of people does indeed simply want politicians to find solutions…

    It seems that most want to be entertained even if solutions are not being found in reality. Politics is the hopium of the people?

    …they tell this to every pollster who ever asks them about it.

    Perhaps one eventually has to rate the ratings that people give their forms of entertainment in a dumbocracy. Look at the governor of Delaware now, what solutions to problems has he supposedly found? He’s working on solutions to changing the climate of the entire world? And then there’s our pet trying to vote for the war with Syria/Iran before he failed to vote against it. Stupid bumblers… it wouldn’t get to the point of American politicians being an embarrassment if they actually cared about their country more than their careers.

    It’s pathetic.

    Meanwhile, people or “the base” as the political handlers put it supposedly want their politicians to find solutions? Maybe. But for now most seem to want to be entertained, above all.

Comments are closed.