Hey, conservatives... You WON! ... ... by Bob Nelson

By:  @bob-nelson, one week ago
Comments: 62 ..


You didn't just win a little bit... You won everything!

You have the Presidency.

You have both Houses of Congress.

You already have the Supreme Court, and will soon lock it down definitively.

You can do anything you want to do!



What are you going to do?


I read a lot of news and commentary. I keep looking for "Republican policy propositions".

We've had a few:
 - end Muslim immigration
 - a wall on the Mexican border
 - a healthcare plan
 - infrastructure... maybe... or has that volatilized?

I'm disappointed by the rarity of anything concrete. The new head of the EPA seems decided to roll back a lot of stuff... but I haven't seen any details. We have a fine new Cabinet, full of generals and Wall Street bankers... but nothing seems to be happening.

So I'm asking our NT Conservatives about their intentions for our little NT world:

Will you continue to attack Dems/liberals/socialism/...  as you have continued to do since the elections... kinda like you don't know how to do anything else... or will you someday begin to discuss... umm... you know... governing??

Bob Nelson
link 03/20/17 06:44:33PM @bob-nelson:

GOP officeholders have purposefully done nothing whatsoever during the eight years of Mr Obama's administration. That was their strategy. OK. I get that.

But now what?

Long before the election, I tried to get our NT Conservatives to make some propositions for actually doing stuff... without much success. Maybe the idea of "doing" was incomprehensible with an alien Black atheist socialist Muslim foreigner in the White House.

But hey!! Don't you think it is time to start governing?


Petey Coober
link 03/22/17 12:55:52AM @petey-coober:

But hey!! Don't you think it is time to start governing?

What do you call putting a freeze on federal govt hiring ? Or does the federal deficit not matter ?

Bob Nelson
link 03/22/17 01:02:17AM @bob-nelson:

That's something, for sure. But IMHO it's a bit short for a program. 

Petey Coober
link 03/22/17 01:42:46AM @petey-coober:

IMHO it's a bit short for a program.

One has to start somewhere ...

Bob Nelson
link 03/22/17 07:42:48AM @bob-nelson:

One has to start somewhere ...

Of course. But surely... that's not the entirety of a conservative's program? Eight years of "no hiring"? That's all there is?

If "no hiring" is "just a start"... then what comes next? What is the program?

link 03/20/17 06:50:47PM @deepwaterdon:

...... 'time to start governing.' But, but, but, its' so hard!  crying

Bob Nelson
link 03/20/17 06:54:11PM @bob-nelson:

Who would have guessed that it's so complicated??   close call

link 03/20/17 06:59:04PM @deepwaterdon:

Anyone who has actually been governing. Liar Ted did  manage to get through 'Green Eggs and Ham', though.

link 03/20/17 07:01:43PM @jwc2blue:

Conservatives haven't won. We all lost. Conservatives are just not quite ready to admit it yet.

link 03/20/17 07:03:36PM @ambivalent:

Unfortunately, it takes mental stability to be the POTUS. Trump has none of this, has a serious problem with focusing, among other problems (such as lying and paranoia for a mere couple).

Bob Nelson
link 03/20/17 07:13:34PM @bob-nelson:

Please, people!! You're going to discourage our fine NT Conservatives. 

Just because they haven't posted much in the way of policy over the past yearpast few years, since the Bush administration, doesn't mean they have no detailed policies to propose.


Hal A. Lujah
link 03/20/17 07:22:36PM @hal-a-lujah:

The "policy of no" morphed into the "policy of we don't know how".  You can obstruct for only so long before you forget how to do your actual job.

link 03/20/17 07:38:02PM @big-brother:


To hell with  governing.  Nothing good comes from it.  Don't you know how many fucking a-holes are running around DC (especially LWFW's) looking to bend us over.  Not to mention the ones here on this site.

I say leave us the fuck alone and if you want to do anything then figure out a way to reduce the Federal government's involvement in our daily lives.  

Otherwise, you can stick your ideas of governing where the sun don't shine.

Is that clear?



Bob Nelson
link 03/20/17 07:41:49PM @bob-nelson:

Is that clear?

On one level, not at all. 

On another... perfectly. 

link 03/20/17 07:49:15PM @big-brother:

That's okay, no one expects you to understand anything Bob.

Keep the personal insults to a minimum, Cornholio.  D.

link 03/20/17 07:52:49PM @ambivalent:


Okay I'll get my spade handle.... Now bend over and take your pleasure.

link 03/20/17 07:56:46PM @big-brother:


I knew there was good reason I liked you.


link 03/20/17 08:00:16PM @ambivalent:

Gardeners are as kinky as a cheap garden hose.

link 03/20/17 08:21:05PM @johnrussell:

It is not really true that they can do whatever they want. As far as we know, the filibuster rule in the Senate will continue, which means that most new legislation needs 60 votes in the Senate and the Republicans only 52 seats. Given the extreme partisanship in Congress nowadays, big new programs (for example infrastructure, or comprehensive immigration laws), will need Democratic support. 

Bob Nelson
link 03/20/17 08:37:49PM @bob-nelson:

If the Dems do any serious filibustering, the Republicans will change the rules. 

link 03/20/17 08:53:53PM @randy:

The Democrats gained seats in both House and the Senate in 2016 and Trump, but more Ryan, is making it much more likely they will pick up many more in 2018. It might be smart for the Democrats to bide their time until then. They are going to need all of their fight because Ruth Bader Ginsburg is bound to want to retire, especially if the Democrats regain control of the Senate. Difficult (they have more seats to defend then the GOP) but Ryan and Trump seem determined to help.

Bob Nelson
link 03/20/17 09:21:13PM @bob-nelson:

Unless the Dems take both the Senate and the Presidency for the next several election cycles, the Supreme Court is going to be Republican for a very long time. The GOP has shown that it will do anything to to prevent prevent a justice being appointed by a Dem.

Once Gorsuch is aboard, a conservative majority is constituted. Replacing Ginsburg with a progressive would not change the majority. 

link 03/20/17 09:39:24PM @randy:

Not necessarily. Roberts himself has shown some independence and Kennedy has been a swing vote several times such as in cases that involved gay marriage and the ACA. Plus there is always the possibility of Thomas retiring. Still this was the court that voted on the disastrous Citizens United case. As for that it's up to Congress to fashion a new law that counteracts that effect and will pass muster with the Constitution.

Bob Nelson
link 03/20/17 10:03:10PM @bob-nelson:

Citizens United

link 03/20/17 10:09:38PM @randy:

That's what I said. But gay rights. ACA.

Bob Nelson
link 03/20/17 10:11:17PM @bob-nelson:

Half full or half empty I guess... 

link 03/20/17 10:12:51PM @randy:

Beats drowning.

Besides I don't look at the glass as half full or half empty. I just look at it as time to order another drink.stunned

Bob Nelson
link 03/20/17 10:20:59PM @bob-nelson:

link 03/20/17 10:24:33PM @randy:

laughing dude That's me and scotch....which reminds me....

dennis smith
link 03/26/17 08:45:26PM @dennis-smith:

For the last 8 years the government where was immigration reform or infrastructure policy from the WH? 

link 03/26/17 08:56:57PM @randy:

The past 6 years they've been blocked by the GOP Congress. The first 2 years of the Obama administration he and the Democrats were busy trying to pull us out of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression (a mess handed to him by the previous administration) and getting healthcare reform done.

Steve Ott
link 03/20/17 09:23:24PM @steve-ott:

Personally, I like it when no one is governing. They do less harm that way. 

Bob Nelson
link 03/20/17 09:30:45PM @bob-nelson:

You favor anarchy, then? 

Steve Ott
link 03/20/17 09:35:35PM @steve-ott:

I'm still exploring that. At the moment, I prefer a minimal state, something proposed in Robert Nozick's book Anarchy, State and Utopia. 

Bob Nelson
link 03/20/17 09:59:50PM @bob-nelson:


How do we get there from here? 

Who decides what services would remain? 

Steve Ott
link 03/21/17 10:32:18PM @steve-ott:

Who decides what services would remain? 

Who decides now? It certainly doesn't seem to be you and me.

Just imagine any other scenario where those receiving/paying for the services are the ones who decide. What do you see? Invision a world where there are no nation-states as we know them, but communities living as they wish and thriving, or not. 

I can't give you a road map to there. I haven't met with a burning bush that will give me a full blown way to get there. What I do know is this: I don't like the system as it is. I don't like that people want government to do for them what they should do themselves. I don't like the fact the people don't know/care about history and won't think for themselves. 

How do we get there from here? Perhaps the same way the the original inhabitants of Turtle Island did, we wander in and see what's there.

Bob Nelson
link 03/21/17 11:17:01PM @bob-nelson:

So... You have an ideal, but no real-world implementation. 

Steve Ott
link 03/21/17 11:51:30PM @steve-ott:

Perhaps my ideal is an acre in the mountains with no neighbors and no government telling me I can't live the way I choose as long as I hurt no one. Is that too much idealism?

Do you not have ideals, nothing to which to aspire. Or are you happy with system as it is?



Bob Nelson
link 03/22/17 12:33:12AM @bob-nelson:

I also have an idea of what the world should be. But I also know a mechanism for getting there. (Not that I delude myself into imagining that my ideas will become reality any time soon.) 

Buzz of the Orient
link 03/20/17 10:19:07PM @buzz-of-the-orient:

It appears to me (from afar, so according to at least one NT member I'm not entitled to "Speak my Mind") that any American who announces that Trump is not his/her president has already chosen the path to anarchy.

Bob Nelson
link 03/20/17 10:23:51PM @bob-nelson:

No Red Rules on this one, Buzz. 

link 03/22/17 12:00:04AM @cerenkov:

"any American who announces that Trump is not his/her president has already chosen the path to anarchy"

Or psychosis. 

link 03/22/17 12:07:03AM @randy:

IMHO Donald Trump is a turned Russian asset and is therefore not my President.

link 03/22/17 01:32:28AM @cerenkov:

Too bad that reality requires evidence that doesn't exist only in your mind....

link 03/22/17 01:53:00AM @randy:

The FBI investigation continues.....and so far there is evidence that the Russians were definitely involved in trying to influence the election. Now the only question is which Trump associates were colluding with the Russians and how deep was Trump involved. I believe he is in it up to his neck and sinking fast. My money says he drowns. I'll be happy to throw him an anvil to help.

Petey Coober
link 03/22/17 02:08:41AM @petey-coober:

so far there is evidence that the Russians were definitely involved in trying to influence the election.

By all means enlighten the rest of us about this "definite" evidence ...

Petey Coober
link 03/22/17 06:01:20AM @petey-coober:

The NYT is a proven falsifier of info . It has a strongly liberal bias in all reporting & should not be taken as factual w/o backup evidence . This was the rag that reported the myth that many women are subject to beatings on Superbowl Sunday based on some lies by feminists . Fortunately that was debunked by other more objective media ...

link 03/22/17 09:25:44AM @ambivalent:

?? No! The New York Times is a 6 time Pulitzer Prize winning newspaper, plus a few more: Lasser Bloomberg for one. If this is what you call a 'rag' what exactly is your standard for excellence Petey?

link 03/22/17 11:36:14PM @randy:

The National Enquirer. I saw their front page at the drug store today and it says that they have absolute proof the President Obama personally planted the wiretaps and part of the cover shows a picture of Barack with headphones on. Wait for Trump to claim it proves he was right. good one

link 03/22/17 02:58:57AM @big-brother:

That's fine if Trump is not your president. The good news is HRC is no one's president.

Buzz of the Orient
link 03/22/17 06:40:35AM @buzz-of-the-orient:

As long as she doesn't take another shot at it in 2020. In the meantime, she COULD be someone's mayor.....LOL

link 03/22/17 04:22:03AM @pj:

Personally, I like it when no one is governing.

Well then you must be ecstatic these days because NO ONE is governing.  

They do less harm that way. 

I would disagree that no harm is being caused by the way this group is NOT governing.  You seem to be stuck in the 70's.  I suggest putting the joint down.  lol

Petey Coober
link 03/22/17 06:05:35AM @petey-coober:

Well then you must be ecstatic these days because NO ONE is governing.

If that were true then why is there so much animosity towards Trump ?

link 03/22/17 08:33:23AM @pj:

If that were true then why is there so much animosity towards Trump ?

Well my animosity has always been there so I'm not a good one to measure it by BUT I would offer from reading many of the other member's comments that maybe there is animosity towards Trump and his band of idiots BECAUSE there is no governing happening only self inflicted wounds one tweet at a time.   

Steve Ott
link 03/26/17 08:17:50PM @steve-ott:

Didn't really smoke a lot, much preferred psychedelics. The 70's I am "stuck" in would be the 1670's. 

Do you believe that the more laws Congress passes the better off we are?


Share This

Who is online

Visitors: 32