Yes you did put the concept together nicely. You nailed it. I've been guilty and may again in general elections but I do hold my nose. I am still a huge proponent of Congressional term limits, but understand that this is going nowhere. Everybody likes "their guy" and I'm no different. I think Mike Pence is the real deal and I will vote for him again. But in most cases I think if a guy ran supporting term limits for Congress and hammered the point he would be hard to beat. You can get on the band wagon if you wish.

2009-10-18T21:44:42

Conservatives need a new party. It is time I think.

2009-10-20T16:27:21

Hey it's mm....

Checked out the email, and I'm definitely cool with that.

<<SHHH ... Don't wanna tip our hat haha>>

moonbatsdie@yahoo.com

2009-10-20T20:31:52

Well put, RWR! As to a new Conservative's party...I really liked th' Federalist Platform attached to your site...& think that the Federalist Party might be an interesting concept.

Lastly,,,How 'bout them PHILS?!?!?!

2009-10-20T21:19:01

Yeah on both counts, Doc.

The whole point of the Federalist Party Platform was to find the common ground among the major conservative factions available at the time. The Conservative Party was as yet unknown to me, as were a few others that I've seen. We MUST unite somehow under one banner if we're going to beat back the major socialist parties, and I figured bringing Libertarians and Constitution Party members, New Federalists, and conservative Republicrats would do the trick rather nicely.

As to the Phils, all I can say is wow. It's just amazing how they are able to just find a way to win, no matter what gets thrown at them. That is the mark of a true competitor, and regardless of who wins the pennant over in the American League, you can bet they're going to have it pretty tough against a lineup that can hurt you no matter how deep into it you go.

We are going to be seeing us some REALLY GOOD BASEBALL in this World Series, regardless of who plays or wins.

RWR

2009-10-21T04:57:42

You absolutely nailed it RWR.
All these years I thought I was a Republican; but should have realized, I am a Reagan Republican.

2009-10-22T16:20:56

RWR & ALL!!!!!!!!!!!Phillies are-a-goin' to th' World Series...AGAIN!!!

And God Bless Ronald Reagan!

2009-10-22T17:22:59

It won't ever work as long as abortion is such an important plank for so many people. That issue alone fragments the base disproportionately.

2009-10-22T18:19:14

It won't ever work as long as abortion is such an important plank for so many people. That issue alone fragments the base disproportionately.

I disagree.

The way I see it, a pro-life or anti-life Federalist needs only take that stance and show his Constitutional reasons for doing so. Let the voters decide how they feel about it.

The main thing is that people are using the Constitution to make their decisions, and not just whatever "feels good".

RWR

2009-10-22T23:55:03

Nine hundred posts! Good job. I'm still fartin' around 600. Get a good rant or two in the next hundred.

2009-10-23T01:51:17

For you, Ol' BC, I will gladly do so.

RWR

2009-10-23T15:26:25

The problem, as I see it, can be summed up in the word "interpretation". There will be people who believe that their interpretation is closer to the founders original vision on a given issue, and that the subsequent disagreement that will come as a result will put everyone back at square one, which is where the naysayers have us now. A case in point would be the misunderstanding of the interpretation of the word "Militia" in the Constitution. I have recently emailed the governor of my state with a petition as to why we do not have the apparatus in place to reinstate the Militia when it states very clearly in both the US, and NH Constitutions that "it(militia) is necessary to the security of a free state". His Constitutionally challenged aide's answer was that "we have the National Guard for this purpose". I responded that there was no National Guard on April 19, 1775, and that the national crisis was much the same then as now. I have yet to receive comment on this historical tidbit that I laid on his doorstep. My point here is that we will need to educate ourselves beyond the level of our passions in order to present any kind of united Conservative front. I think it can be, and must be done, but it will take both enlightment, and compromise to make it happen.

2009-10-23T17:24:08

Excellent post, bro!

2009-10-23T17:30:55

His Constitutionally challenged aide's answer was that "we have the National Guard for this purpose"

The problem with this is that the National Guard, while under the jurisdiction of the State Governor, is subject to the jurisdiction of Congress as well ...

More importantly, the National Guard maintains a unique "dual status" - both State and Federal - that no other service or component has. This dual status is rooted in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, which states that "Congress shall have the power ... To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress."

What ability does the State Militia have to defend the State against federal intrusion if it is simultaneously subject to the jurisdiction of federal authority?

Stay on it, Sage!

RWR

2009-10-23T18:50:33

In the case of "federal intrusion" as you call it, the state would be in violation of an individual's "inalienable rights to the pursuit of happiness" as it relates to the Declaration of Independence. In this instant, it would be the duty of the state commander to take control of the local militia brigades in defense of the individual freedom of the members of his local community. Although the "dual status" of the National Guard that you referred to "has its roots in the Constitution", based on the wording of the document, there is no mention of "the Militia of the several states" ever being a part of the regular army which the National Guard in fact is.
I simply reminded him(the aide)that the National Guard was not in existence on April 19, 1775, but the Miltia of the State of Massachusetts was. Unfortunately, people view the militia as some kind of armed radical group that is terroristic in form, and function. My ideal for the militia, which is consistent with the original, presents a model defense for the demonstration of the individual's legal, and authoritative right to freedom based on its definition in the Declaration of Independence. It is well thought out, and researched. I will post it in detail.

2009-10-24T00:59:34