You are certainly a rare one Ced--A Repuplican Drone

Quote: Cedric wrote in post #10

---

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #9

---

When a party has two consecutive nominating conventions and specifically excludes a two term President from attending because he is so radioactive, he was a disaster.

---

No, he was a great President.

Shame on all those to the right-of-center who forsook him when he came under (unfair and dishonest) attack by Soros, the Dems and the MSM.

---

Zitat

---

I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

---

Zitat

---

There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism.

---

I encourage you to read that speech. Washington nailed it - and had we listened to him - we might not be in the mess we're in today.

Quote: conservgramma wrote in post #18

---

Quote: Cedric wrote in post #10

---

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #9

---

When a party has two consecutive nominating conventions and specifically excludes a two term President from attending because he is so radioactive, he was a disaster.

---

No, he was a great President.

Shame on all those to the right-of-center who forsook him when he came under (unfair and dishonest) attack by Soros, the Dems and the MSM.

---

You know Ced your continual attempts to defend weak members of the GOP ad infinitum, even when they go against the Constitution (aka current members for the sake of 'bi-partisanship' attacking the 2nd amendment) is getting tiresome. I can only presume you care more about party loyalty than the Constitution. Shame on you.

You need to read Washington's Farewell Address and learn something. Here's what he had to say about party loyalty:

Zitat

---

I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

---

Zitat

---

There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism.

---

I encourage you to read that speech. Washington nailed it - and had we listened to him - we might not be in the mess we're in today.

---

Quote: Cedric wrote in post #20

---

Quote: conservgramma wrote in post #18

---

You need to read Washington's Farewell Address

---

You need to read Washington's Farewell To Invidious Grammas Address.

---

Quote: Cedric wrote in post #22

---

Quote: conservgramma wrote in post #18

---

You know Ced your continual attempts to defend weak members of the GOP ad infinitum, even when they go against the Constitution (aka current members for the sake of 'bi-partisanship' attacking the 2nd amendment) is getting tiresome.

---

You know, Gramma, your continual, wolf-in-gramma's-clothing, attempts to destroy the only currently viable, right-of-center, national, political party in America (AKA using AKA for the sake of using AKA) is getting more loathsome than irksome.

---

Quote: Cedric wrote in post #24

---

Quote: conservgramma wrote in post #23

---

...the Constitution, and when shown that the founders did not share your view you mock it.

---

I wasn't mocking the Constitution or the founders.

I was mocking you.

{I'll make myself more clear from now on.}

---

** OFF TOPIC ALERT **

Has anyone seen Dick Cheney lately ???

OMG !! He has gained weight and looks and talks like he is 50 years old again !!

He looks terrific .......maybe he will run against Hillary ??

** OK - OFF TOPIC ALERT IS OVER - PLEASE RESUME "THE GOOD "W" FIGHT" **

Quote: Cedric wrote in post #24

---

Quote: conservgramma wrote in post #23

---

...the Constitution, and when shown that the founders did not share your view you mock it.

---

I wasn't mocking the Constitution or the founders.

I was mocking you.

{I'll make myself more clear from now on.}

---

Quote: conservgramma wrote in post #25

---

Quote: Cedric wrote in post #24

---

Quote: conservgramma wrote in post #23

---

...the Constitution, and when shown that the founders did not share your view you mock it.

---

I wasn't mocking the Constitution or the founders.

I was mocking you.

{I'll make myself more clear from now on.}

---

Cedric, Cedric, Cedric.....

When you put party over Constitution you mock both the founders and the Constitution.

---