Conquer Club

Don't know if any of you have heard of this, but every year the republican party has a contest to see who can garner the most support on social media, such as Facebook, Twitter, etc. This year, it's down to the final two, and the contest ends today, June 8th, at 5PM Eastern. The two remaining contenders are Justin Amash and Vern Buchanan. Justin Amash is a freshman congressman from Michigan, who has voted against every bill in the house which he does not see as within the confines of the constitution. sounds a lot like Ron Paul. Let Conquer Club help push him to a win! Like his facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/repjustinamash
subscribe to his youtube here:
http://www.youtube.com/user/RepJustinAmash

And look for him on any other social media you use. This is a good man, and he deserves our support. Long Live Liberty.

Taxed by the mile! Demand smaller government now!

New Auto Driving Tax: Your Car Will be Tagged with a Chip
States across the nation are experimenting with a new system of taxation. In addition to taxing gasoline, states will also tax miles driven.

That’s right. It’s called double taxation. You pay at the pump for the fuel you need to drive. Then you pay for the miles driven.

So small government ans must be obsessed with U.S. politics? This thread is improperly titled.

DoomYoshi wrote:So small government ans must be obsessed with U.S. politics? This thread is improperly titled.

If you would like to post up some pages of European politicians who are equally dedicated to reduction of the size of governemnt, I would be happy to take a look.

Mr_Adams wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:So small government ans must be obsessed with U.S. politics? This thread is improperly titled.

If you would like to post up some pages of European politicians who are equally dedicated to reduction of the size of governemnt, I would be happy to take a look.

Perhaps you could link to some Americans who aren't competing to be sponsored by one of the two political parties governing the US?

Here's a quick hint, the Republicans are a massive governmental institution within the US, running states, dictating policy, you may even remember a few of them who reached office and started the odd war or two.

Small government? Republicans? Seriously?

Symmetry wrote:

Mr_Adams wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:So small government ans must be obsessed with U.S. politics? This thread is improperly titled.

If you would like to post up some pages of European politicians who are equally dedicated to reduction of the size of governemnt, I would be happy to take a look.

Perhaps you could link to some Americans who aren't competing to be sponsored by one of the two political parties governing the US?

Here's a quick hint, the Republicans are a massive governmental institution within the US, running states, dictating policy, you may even remember a few of them who reached office and started the odd war or two.

Small government? Republicans? Seriously?

Republicans like Ron Paul. Absolutely. You are thinking of the old Republican party.

We are making some changes to the Republican party, if you haven't heard...Lots of Republicans have been kicked out over the last 2 years. The party may be transformed as soon as this November.

Symmetry wrote:

Mr_Adams wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:So small government ans must be obsessed with U.S. politics? This thread is improperly titled.

If you would like to post up some pages of European politicians who are equally dedicated to reduction of the size of governemnt, I would be happy to take a look.

Perhaps you could link to some Americans who aren't competing to be sponsored by one of the two political parties governing the US?

Here's a quick hint, the Republicans are a massive governmental institution within the US, running states, dictating policy, you may even remember a few of them who reached office and started the odd war or two.

Small government? Republicans? Seriously?

Which is exactly why Conservatives and Libertarians are working to replace Republicans.

Night Strike wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

Mr_Adams wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:So small government ans must be obsessed with U.S. politics? This thread is improperly titled.

If you would like to post up some pages of European politicians who are equally dedicated to reduction of the size of governemnt, I would be happy to take a look.

Perhaps you could link to some Americans who aren't competing to be sponsored by one of the two political parties governing the US?

Here's a quick hint, the Republicans are a massive governmental institution within the US, running states, dictating policy, you may even remember a few of them who reached office and started the odd war or two.

Small government? Republicans? Seriously?

Which is exactly why Conservatives and Libertarians are working to replace Republicans.

It sort of seems like they're just joining the Republicans. Replace seems kind of an odd word choice for people who are campaigning and being elected as Republicans.

Symmetry wrote:It sort of seems like they're just joining the Republicans. Replace seems kind of an odd word choice for people who are campaigning and being elected as Republicans.

You really don't understand American politics do you? The Democrats and Republicans have put very strict rules in place to make sure other parties are not even put on the ballot, muchless actually elected to governmental positions. That means that the only viable way to remove a party is by voting for the other party or by changing one party from within. There is no way that the current Democratic party would ever nominate someone who is fiscally responsible, so the only way to get fiscally responsible individuals into the government is to remake the Republican party. They get to use the rules that are already in place that benefit Democrats and Republicans while making sure responsibility is returned to the government. Conservatives and Libertarians are remaking the Republicans, not joining them.

Night Strike wrote:

Symmetry wrote:It sort of seems like they're just joining the Republicans. Replace seems kind of an odd word choice for people who are campaigning and being elected as Republicans.

You really don't understand American politics do you? The Democrats and Republicans have put very strict rules in place to make sure other parties are not even put on the ballot, muchless actually elected to governmental positions. That means that the only viable way to remove a party is by voting for the other party or by changing one party from within. There is no way that the current Democratic party would ever nominate someone who is fiscally responsible, so the only way to get fiscally responsible individuals into the government is to remake the Republican party. They get to use the rules that are already in place that benefit Democrats and Republicans while making sure responsibility is returned to the government. Conservatives and Libertarians are remaking the Republicans, not joining them.

It's getting a little cute this "I'm Nightstrike and only I understand America" line of weirdly displaced patriotism you feel the need to fall back on so often.

Take a few steps outside and realise that the libertarians aren't working from within- they're being co-opted at an electoral level, then either figuring out that they're out of their depth or just being nuisances when elected.

Libertarians are not some third party disinterested in political machinations- as you point out, they're a movement within Republican government.

Pretending otherwise is just pure indoctrination- a bunch of rich and powerful career politicians persuading you that you're not supporting the establishment when you vote for the Republican candidate who'll fall into party line the moment they get elected.

"Small government fans" should be voting for libertarian Facebook pages.

Symmetry wrote:Pretending otherwise is just pure indoctrination- a bunch of rich and powerful career politicians persuading you that you're not supporting the establishment when you vote for the Republican candidate who'll fall into party line the moment they get elected.

Yeah, ok. So what you're saying is that establishment Republicans are getting defeated by establishment Republicans in primaries.

Night Strike wrote:

Symmetry wrote:Pretending otherwise is just pure indoctrination- a bunch of rich and powerful career politicians persuading you that you're not supporting the establishment when you vote for the Republican candidate who'll fall into party line the moment they get elected.

Yeah, ok. So what you're saying is that establishment Republicans are getting defeated by establishment Republicans in primaries.

Thanks for the smiley, but that wasn't what I said. I appreciate, however, that your position would be more comprehensible if that was actually what I was arguing, but I'm sorry, you'll have to try again.

Symmetry wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

Symmetry wrote:Pretending otherwise is just pure indoctrination- a bunch of rich and powerful career politicians persuading you that you're not supporting the establishment when you vote for the Republican candidate who'll fall into party line the moment they get elected.

Yeah, ok. So what you're saying is that establishment Republicans are getting defeated by establishment Republicans in primaries.

Thanks for the smiley, but that wasn't what I said. I appreciate, however, that your position would be more comprehensible if that was actually what I was arguing, but I'm sorry, you'll have to try again.

Most of the Tea Party representatives are NOT following the party line. It's why there was real debate over the debt ceiling and other perpetual governmental spending. Many of them are actually writing budgets and legislation that the establishment is balking at the same as the Democrats. That's precisely why we have to get MORE conservatives into the government, not less of them.

Night Strike wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

Symmetry wrote:Pretending otherwise is just pure indoctrination- a bunch of rich and powerful career politicians persuading you that you're not supporting the establishment when you vote for the Republican candidate who'll fall into party line the moment they get elected.

Yeah, ok. So what you're saying is that establishment Republicans are getting defeated by establishment Republicans in primaries.

Thanks for the smiley, but that wasn't what I said. I appreciate, however, that your position would be more comprehensible if that was actually what I was arguing, but I'm sorry, you'll have to try again.

Most of the Tea Party representatives are NOT following the party line. It's why there was real debate over the debt ceiling and other perpetual governmental spending. Many of them are actually writing budgets and legislation that the establishment is balking at the same as the Democrats. That's precisely why we have to get MORE conservatives into the government, not less of them.

Sadly the reform you're talking about is not actually reform of government, but reform of an established political party, with a long history as members of the establishment. You should accept that the Tea Party, and indeed libertarian movements have been so thoroughly co-opted by the establishment that they really can't be seen as independent political movements anymore- they're vocal members of the Republican government.

Symmetry wrote:Sadly the reform you're talking about is not actually reform of government, but reform of an established political party, with a long history as members of the establishment. You should accept that the Tea Party, and indeed libertarian movements have been so thoroughly co-opted by the establishment that they really can't be seen as independent political movements anymore- they're vocal members of the Republican government.

Why should I accept your statements when they aren't true? The Tea Party people are still actively fighting for a smaller government at ALL levels of government (not just federal), so most of them were definitely NOT co-opted by the establishment. They may be operating in government under the name of being "Republicans", but they are working to make sure they do not govern like the Republicans of the prior decade. And we don't even have a Republican government at the federal level anyway, which makes it hard to govern from even a Republican viewpoint, muchless a Conservative viewpoint. That's why Romney needs to defeat Obama and have a large majority of Tea Party conservatives and libertarians in Congress to push responsible legislation to Romney's desk. There's no way Obama will sign a conservative piece of legislation, but Romney will.

Night Strike wrote:

Symmetry wrote:Sadly the reform you're talking about is not actually reform of government, but reform of an established political party, with a long history as members of the establishment. You should accept that the Tea Party, and indeed libertarian movements have been so thoroughly co-opted by the establishment that they really can't be seen as independent political movements anymore- they're vocal members of the Republican government.

Why should I accept your statements when they aren't true? The Tea Party people are still actively fighting for a smaller government at ALL levels of government (not just federal), so most of them were definitely NOT co-opted by the establishment. They may be operating in government under the name of being "Republicans", but they are working to make sure they do not govern like the Republicans of the prior decade. And we don't even have a Republican government at the federal level anyway, which makes it hard to govern from even a Republican viewpoint, muchless a Conservative viewpoint. That's why Romney needs to defeat Obama and have a large majority of Tea Party conservatives and libertarians in Congress to push responsible legislation to Romney's desk. There's no way Obama will sign a conservative piece of legislation, but Romney will.

I've never asked you to accept my statements when they aren't true. I've asked you to take a step back from the propaganda you've clearly been fed and take a look around.

You've gotten so caught up in the propaganda of the Republican party in the US that I think you find it incomprehensible that anyone not fully indoctrinated could ever understand. Indeed, that your arguments are merely repetitions of doctrine or affirmations to the already faithful.

The point at which you realise how thoroughly you've been bought and sold will be when you carry the courage of your own convictions and cease to parrot lines from Fox News.

How can I parrot Fox News when it has been a while since I've watched Fox News? By the way, how are all conservative points considering parroting or not thinking for yourself but if you speak liberal points, you're considered an independent thinker? It's not propaganda to believe that our government is spending WAY too much money and must be reigned in. It's not propaganda to recognize that too many Republicans have been part of that problem and must also be replaced by fiscally responsible individuals.

Army of GOD wrote:"Small government fans" should be voting for libertarian Facebook pages.

I think they already do.

you are comin at it all wrong Symmetry. So many facets you are unaware of. You remind me of this guy for some reason...


Ron Paul Republicans (very Libertarian) totally dominated the convention in my state, along with many other states. We control the shiznit now. We make the rules.

We rapes the Republican party of Minnesota, and further pave the way for more Libertarian minded candidates in the future.

THIS IS WHAT DEMOCRACY LOOKS LIKE!

Night Strike wrote:Most of the Tea Party representatives are NOT following the party line. It's why there was real debate over the debt ceiling and other perpetual governmental spending. Many of them are actually writing budgets and legislation that the establishment is balking at the same as the Democrats. That's precisely why we have to get MORE conservatives into the government, not less of them.

That is why we have to get more constitutionally minded, and voting representatives into office at all levels and get this country back to the foundation that made this country great!

Look at the 2010 election results on a county level.



Grassroots

I think Symm and NS both have valid points. NS on the one hand, points out that third parties were intentionally crushed by joint action of the Democrats and Republicans when they kneecapped their competition in the Progressive Party and Silver Republican Party. The legal hurdles to succesfully running as a third party candidate in the US has resigned groups like the Libertarian Party (capital L) and Green Party to little more than book clubs.

Symmetry, however, notes that libertarians (lowercase L) are welcomed into the Republican Party because the realities of machine politics mean an endless succession of compromise and accomodation that leaves a watered down agenda.

The de facto requirement of affiliating with one of two (effectively) government sanctioned political parties as a pre-requisite for participation in the political process is the hallmark of an oligarchy. On the other hand, the US government - though clearly not democratic - is clearly one of the most enduringly stable. What should be more important in a nation with 8,000 nuclear weapons on a hair trigger - popular government or stable government? I am undecided.

Justin Amash seems like a bright, young fellow. Enthusiasm for what he can accomplish should be tempered by the fact that he is one of 500 legislators, instead of one of 1 executives. He also looks like he's 18.