Hi guys! Sorry, went to San Diego for a few days. Del Mar and La Jolla are still heaven on Earth, even though they are in Commiefornia.
Anyways…
I think three days of rioting is “ok” in the sense that people won’t get too upset about it. Three weeks of rioting raises a lot of eyebrows. Three months of rioting…I think there could be massive reaction against it. Like a Trump 45 State landslide sort of reaction. I don’t know, of course: I am theorizing. Democrats seem convinced that chaos helps them: the implied threat is “vote Biden or this continues”. But Trump has his answer for that: sending in federal cops to arrest the BLM/Antifa types on federal charges (did you know merely spray painting a federal building can get you a year in jail?; the laws against vandalizing federal property have some teeth!). Trump is letting the American people know that their choice is him and peace or them and war. We’ll see how people decide: but I’m starting to run across deep blue people who have had enough.
Do keep in mind that we are already 2nd class citizens in our own country. That is an established fact: the St Louis couple who defended themselves have been charged with a felony while the rioters get their charges dropped. To be sure, the State AG is going to ride to the rescue, and that is good: but how many times will you and I be let off by liberal city politicians and how many times will the GOP AG ride to our rescue? We are the oppressed; not them. Their oppression is a made-up thing (so made up that they have to fake racist incidents) our oppression is real: our jobs and social standing is at grave risk merely for people finding out we’re Trump voters. Voting Trump is the only chance we’ve got to restore ourselves to full citizenship.
Kasich will speak at Biden’s convention. I think that Kasich will switch parties and run as a Democrat in 2024, myself. I think he also knows that Biden is doomed and he’s essentially going to build his brand as the man who can lead the Democrats out of the far left fever swamps starting in 2021. It won’t work: he doesn’t realize how much he’s despised by the left base of the Democrat party. Only a complete rejection of everything he’s ever stood for will be acceptable to them…and even then, they’ll just take the scalp and go with someone who has always been a true believer. Its not that Kasich isn’t willing to crawl…its that no one like a turncoat.
Planned Parenthood is ditching their founder, Margaret Sanger, over her support for eugenics. They won’t ditch the baby-killing, of course. After all, Hitler built the Autobahn…
This be ridiculous.
I don’t think teachers realize how much they are shooting themselves in the foot by insisting schools remain closed. Every ounce of goodwill they have is being wrecked. Kids don’t seem to catch the ‘Rona very much and they also don’t seem to transmit it very much. Meanwhile, store shelf stockers have been doing heroic work for months. My hope: this kills the very concept of public education.
Blogs For Victory 
It’s time to dox bunker boy. After reading this article I think he might really be Eric Feigel-Ding, who has been howling about the federal law enforcement officers “violating the Geneva Convention” because, well, just because. Evidently some vinyl gloves got some pepper spray on them.
This is Fubar. The Geneva Convention states that destroying medical equipment is a war crime violation. Yet, here we are in Portland.
Attacking medical units violates half a dozen conventions and international statutes, not only Geneva Convention but also International Criminal Court statutes. But hey, Chad Wolf, Bill Barr, and Trump say it’s okay!
You’ve got to admit, that makes-my-ears-bleed level of whining does sound like the bunker boy.
streiff set him straight in a post I envy for its clarity and take-no-prisoners approach:
Some facts. No, actually, the Geneva Convention does not forbid the destruction of ‘medical supplies,’ particularly those of the Walmart and CVS variety. No, the International Criminal Court does not have the power to create statutes. No, the United States does not recognize the ICC. No, destroying everyday over-the-counter items is not prohibited by a single international convention, much less half a dozen. No, there are no such things as international statutes. No, this is not a case of armed conflict so the Geneva Conventions do not apply. No, the Antifa goons in Portland don’t have ‘medical units’ and if they did, their personnel would still be subject to detention. No, the link Feigl-Ding (gotta love having a name that could belong to either a cartoon villain or possibly a rare type of genital wart) doesn’t support his assertion even if the Geneva Conventions did apply.
………………….
By this point, “Feigl-Ding” is becoming a synonym for “dragged on Twitter,” and he starts trying to backtrack but with a stunning lack of intelligence or imagination.
The Geneva Conventions were designed to reduce collateral slaughter in warfare and to protect those rendered hors de combat or captured from unnecessary injury. They have no place in civil law because the laws covering the use of force in civil disturbances are so much more stringent than those few rules in effect during armed conflict. If the Antifa “medical personnel” (I’m laughing as I imagine what that looks like) feel they have been wronged, then they can file a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act and seek compensation for the rags and potions they claim were destroyed.
…………………….
The significant point here is that Feigl-Ding seems to be endorsing the idea that what we see in Portland has passed beyond the point of insurrection. Now we are in an actual state of armed rebellion in which the rioters have morphed from mere felons-in-training to lawful combatants. That sounds bizarre, but if they want to go that direction, I’m all for it. They can keep their Walgreen-bought crap if I can have lethal Rules of Engagement.
(gotta love having a name that could belong to either a cartoon villain or possibly a rare type of genital wart)
LMAO!!
I think it was the “stunning lack of intelligence or imagination” coupled with the shrill hysteria about the bad men doing bad things and spoiling the fun that made it seem like a BB rant
Meanwhile, back in the real world…
Andrew Crespo, professor of criminal law at Harvard University, makes the argument that DHS is operating in opposition to the Fourth Amendment. (Oh yeah, this was the amendment that constitutional scholar Amazona said had nothing to do with anything happening in Portland.)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/portland-fourth-amendment-arrests/2020/07/24/c7e9822c-cceb-11ea-91f1-28aca4d833a0_story.html
(1) I never said that, and
(2) Andrew Crespo is an idiot
(1) I never said that, and
Yeah, you did.
I’ll just point out that people are being arrested or detained well removed from federal property. That is, there were not “on property where they were not entitled to be, doing things they were not entitled to do.” They were on public streets exercising their First Amendment rights. Remember the First Amendment?
(2) Andrew Crespo is an idiot.
Wow. Clever.
You don’t seem to even remember what you said a week ago. I’m beginning to think your so-called political philosophy is just made up day by day to fit current events.
I’ll just point out that people are being arrested or detained well removed from federal property.
And I’ll just point out that this does not matter. Probable cause for detaining someone for committing a crime on or against federal property does not mean the detainment has to begin on federal property.
And “exercising First Amendment rights” does not include vandalism, arson, destruction of property or assaults on anyone, including law enforcement officers. “Remember the First Amendment?” sneers the bunker boy. Oh yeah, I DO. You clearly don’t.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
“peaceably to assemble”. Not form mobs to riot, destroy or vandalize property, injure people or commit arson.
And what, exactly, is the grievance these thugs want the government to “redress”? Theoretically it is a free-form complaint about “police brutality” but that has clearly just been used as an excuse to engage in savagery.
Probable cause for detaining someone for committing a crime on or against federal property does not mean the detainment has to begin on federal property.
Roger Stone was accused of lying under oath but he was arrested in his home —by a federal SWAT team, filmed by CNN. I didn’t see any Democrat politicians getting the vapors over that, and he was an old harmless unarmed man accused of a simple process crime set up by the government., but he was hauled out in a pre-dawn raid, by heavily armed military-style cops in body armor, and handcuffed under search lights (or TV lights) .
Maybe you should do the research Mr. Crespo did not do. He was not even close.Let me help you get started;
Hague v. CIO 307 U.S. 496 (1939)
HAGUE, Mayor, et al., v. COMMITTEE FOR INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION et al.
“The privilege of a citizen of the United States to use the streets and parks for communication of views on national questions may be regulated in the interest of all; it is not absolute, but relative, and must be exercised in subordination to the general comfort and convenience, and in consonance with peace and good order; but it must not, in the guise of regulation, be abridged or denied.
307 U.S. at 515. For another holding that the right to petition is not absolute, see McDonald v. Smith, 472 U.S. 479 (1985) (the fact that defamatory statements were made in the context of a petition to government does not provide absolute immunity from libel).
The Supreme Court of the United States has held that the First Amendment protects the right to conduct a peaceful public assembly.[3] The right to assemble is not, however, absolute. Government officials cannot simply prohibit a public assembly in their own discretion,[4] but the government can impose restrictions on the time, place, and manner of peaceful assembly, provided that constitutional safeguards are met.[5] Time, place, and manner restrictions are permissible so long as they “are justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech, . . . are narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest, and . . . leave open ample alternative channels for communication of the information.”
Over in Raleigh near where I am they held a “peaceful” assembly wanting our Democratic Governor to veto his own bill because of a provision in it. Went on for some thirty days both at the capitol and in front of the Governor’s Mansion. Occasionally, they would block a street or thoroughfare for a short time but nothing worse. After all of this the Governor did veto his own bill and the “protestors” all went home. Hopefully, proud and happy with doing things the proper way.
bb, your syntax is a little messy. What I SAID was that what the feds were doing had nothing to do with the 4th Amendment. You know why I am so sure I said that? Because there it is, in print, referring to the actions of the feds: You even quoted me.
This has nothing at all to do with the 4th Amendment.” And it doesn’t. What the feds were and are doing are not related to the 4th Amendment as they are not violations of that amendment. Therefore, I am and was right. That is, that the 4th Amendment, or at least violations of it, have nothing to do with anything happening in Portland.
Sorry your mind is so chaotic and so totally controlled by your mental spasms that you automatically link things that are not related. Not my problem.
And yes, Crespo is an idiot if that is what he said. It was a profoundly stupid thing to say.
the government can impose restrictions on the time, place, and manner of peaceful assembly, provided that constitutional safeguards are met.[5] Time, place, and manner restrictions are permissible so long as they “are justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech, . . . are narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest, and . . . leave open ample alternative channels for communication of the information.”
This will need to be explained to bunkie.
Time, place, and manner restrictions are permissible so long as they “are justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech——— This means that the government can restrict a demonstration to a particular time, and/or place, and/or manner, as long as the content of the demonstration is not the reason for the restriction and as long as it is allowed to be presented, —–if the restrictions “are narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest”—in this case, the safety of the officers and the security of the federal property——but the government must “leave open ample alternative channels for communication of the information”——such as newspapers, radio, television pamphlets and the internet.
What I get from this is the government would be completely within its authority to set aside any venue it wants, such as an auditorium or arena (where attendees could be screened for weapons) and then allow those attendees to express their grievances without restrictions on content, as long as they have the ability to get those expressions out to the public via “ample alternative channels for communication of the information”. I think it would be a wonderful idea. Let the city or college or whichever supporting entity wants to sacrifice its property host a controlled demonstration, free of weapons, away from public property, with a dedicated television channel so the attendees could have unlimited air time for anyone who wanted to tune in.
Where do the Trail Blazers play? I am sure the NBA, being all up in social justice and all, would be thrilled to donate the arena. Comfy seats, air conditioning, nice toilets, they could hire a catering company. Take rioting to a whole new level.
Anyone “demonstrating” or “protesting” outside these restrictions would be arrested and charged.
“unlawful assembly”
Definition from Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary
“When three or more people meet with the intention of carrying out an unlawful act to deliberately disturb the peace.”
My unchanging “so-called political philosophy “ is that the United States is best governed by a federal government severely restricted as to size, scope and power, with most authority left to the states or to the people. It is that the Constitution lays out the terms of the delegated and therefore assumed duties of the federal government, and that anything not delegated to the government is within the authority of the states, or of the people, unless it is forbidden by the Constitution.
What’s yours?
What I SAID was that what the feds were doing had nothing to do with the 4th Amendment.
And I pointed to an article written by a former public defender and current professor of criminal law at Harvard University, which explains the connection to the Fourth Amendment. Look, at this point I don’t expect you change your mind about anything ever (or even read something that might challenge your thinking), but there are many other readers of this blog, and some of them may have an open mind.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/portland-fourth-amendment-arrests/2020/07/24/c7e9822c-cceb-11ea-91f1-28aca4d833a0_story.html
And he’s wrong.
Next…..
After all of this the Governor did veto his own bill and the “protestors” all went home. Hopefully, proud and happy with doing things the proper way.
And conservative tea party types armed with assault rifles shut down the Michigan state legislature for weeks, if not months. Hopefully, proud and happy with doing things the proper way.
More lies
My unchanging “so-called political philosophy “ is that the United States is best governed by a federal government severely restricted as to size, scope and power, with most authority left to the states or to the people…
What’s yours?
We’ve been down this road before. I mean, I can repeat it if you really want. I previously offered that the Bill of Rights was foundational, and all I got in response was criticism. One would think that we could at least agree on that, but apparently even the Bill of Rights is controversial in today’s conservative thinking. Not that that surprises me, given the behavior of the current occupant in the White House.
We’ve been down this road before. I mean, I can repeat it if you really want. I previously offered that the Bill of Rights was foundational, and all I got in response was criticism. One would think that we could at least agree on that, but apparently even the Bill of Rights is controversial in today’s conservative thinking. Not that that surprises me, given the behavior of the current occupant in the White House.
Half an answer. The Bill of Rights is just that, but not the blueprint for how to govern the nation. That blueprint is a template that wholly rejects the consolidation of power in the hands of a few, that demands the fullest participation possible from the citizens who make the laws they want in their own states, that refuses to let the federal government expand to try to solve or resolve every problem faced by the people. Instead of just parroting some half-assed non-response about the Bill of Rights being “foundational” and then veering off into typical lying snark about Trump.
The Bill of Rights is not “controversial” except as much as it is distorted by people wanting to wrap themselves in it while violating it.
More lies.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-14/michigan-cancels-legislative-session-to-avoid-armed-protesters
Get outside the US and see the world for what it is.
I have traveled overseas many times.
Next.
A happy announcement from Nicholas Sandmann:
“On 2/19/19, I filed $250M defamation lawsuit against Washington Post. Today, I turned 18 & WaPo settled my lawsuit. Thanks to [Todd McMurtry] & [Lin Wood] for their advocacy. Thanks to my family & millions of you who have stood your ground by supporting me. I still have more to do,” he shared on Twitter. “We have settled with WAPO and CNN. The fight isn’t over. 2 down. 6 to go. Don’t hold your breath [Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey].”
Don’t these riots seem to call for liberal applications of stink juice? Non lethal, less painful than tear gas but with longer lasting effects on skin and clothing, and difficult to defend against. Possibly gas masks would help, but I think the smell would penetrate, and the effort and cost to protect all clothing plus avoid smelling the stuff would sure limit the number of people willing or able to go through all that.
And it would offer protection from those big old scary meanies in cammies, driving around in (gasp!) UNMARKED CARS. No cop is doing to want a stink-juiced thug in his car with him.
We would also be able to pick out the rioters in airports, bus stations, etc just by the lingering smell. Dogs could pick up on it even after extensive deodorizing. But no running home to mommy, no getting back in the dorm, no roommates letting you in the door, no friends giving you a ride, no drivers letting you on the bus. And buying new fascist black clothes will get expensive after a while.
If the juice is applied in liquid form and not aerosolized, it could be limited to mobs and not spread through the air to neighbors. I think it’s time.
Okay, being confused–can anyone give me an example of ‘systematic racism’ with examples and documentation. I believe this is almost an impossibility.
On a completely different note. I would have to guess military service is out for Bunker and his compatriots but how about packing your backpack and joining the Peace Corps for a couple of years–I mean if they will take you. Even they have standards on education and things. Get outside the US and see the world for what it is…the African continent where slavery is still practiced or deep into S. America where living conditions and survival are a daily affair.
Meet some real Antifa, Drugs cartels and repression. Maybe Hong Kong where you could be on the forefront of getting your tongue cut out for speaking against the government but that won;t matter mush as you slave in forced labor camps. No worries though….just remember you are doing it for the NBA and others that kowtow for cheep forced labor so they can make millions.
Sounds like your kind of party.
Great points, DB—but don’t hold your breath. These people are not only intellectual lightweights, working off scripts provided by their masters, they are lazy and they are cowards.
And, of course, complete hypocrites.
On a completely different note. I would have to guess military service is out for Bunker and his compatriots but how about packing your backpack and joining the Peace Corps for a couple of years–I mean if they will take you.
This is a great idea, DB. How about we start with Donald J. Trump. And right after him, Don Trump Jr., Eric Trump, Ivanka Trump, Jered Kushner, and their spouses and children. For that matter, Baron’s a teenager now. I’m sure in a few years he’ll join the military or Peace Corps, too.
More crap
Okay, being confused–can anyone give me an example of ‘systematic racism’ with examples and documentation. I believe this is almost an impossibility.
Some light reading for you, DB.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case-for-reparations/361631/?gclid=CjwKCAjw0_T4BRBlEiwAwoEiAdDG2mat-I8L7zICGhcVZ7tPYd4vI1StGK0ItDbH6c4TYnTOvkj9UBoCnDQQAvD_BwE
“Light reading” is right—light on rationality, light on thought, light on reason, light on relevance.
You do realize that entire article was based on how the Democrats screwed over the blacks. But then again it has nothing to do with “systematic racism” any more than all of the other articles I have read. Systematic Racism is a paradox as well as the new loss leader for the Dems. Education might help but I doubt you would ever venture outside your bubble to explore. I guess you and Dr. Fauci can have wonderful fantasia together..
DB, you need examples of systemic racism?
I mean, start with slavery. It was the backbone of the economic system of the American South until it was abolished during the Civil War.
What about Jim Crow laws that enforced racial segregation after Reconstruction and well into the twentieth century?
What about professional sports leagues prohibiting blacks from participating?
Have you ever heard of the Chitln’ Circuit? It provided venues, lodging and restaurants for black performers who were prohibited from performing in the mainstream (white) venus, and staying in mainstream (white) hotels, and eating in mainstream (white) restaurants.
What about Redlining? It was absolutely systemic, and it still occurs in the twenty-first century per recent settlements with the Justice Department and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
What about the system exclusion of Blacks from post-World War II GI benefits?
Now, consider the effects of decades and generations of systemic denial of participation in the economy. People who did not have the ability to fully participate in the economy wound up with less wealth to pass to their children that those who did have that advantage, and this was compounded generation after generation.
I would suggest that you educate yourself on any of these matters.
As far as blaming the Democrats, we’ve been over this, but I’m happy to repeat. After the passage of the landmark civil rights and voting adits of the 1960s, white Americans have left the Democratic party. This can be shown by the fact that no Democratic candidate for president has won the white vote since at least 1976. They didn’t disappear. They flocked to the Republican party. Why do you think that is?
I was just scanning through old posts to make sure my memory is correct about listing the many ways the federal officers are not violating any Constitutional rights (it is: they aren’t, and many examples and explanations were listed.)
What struck me was the number of times bunkie threw some of his snot-nuggets out, they were debunked with details, and he then just skittered off to a new whine because had couldn’t respond to what had been presented. He just takes a dump and leaves it lying there to stink up the place, and even when it has been proved to be nothing but s**t it is still there, reeking.
He’s not here to talk or discuss. He is a blog vandal, just tossing his mental stink bombs onto the blog and then turning tail when too many facts pile up against him. I have no idea why some on the blog want him to be allowed to keep doing this, but it’s not my blog—though bunkie does like to claim it is.
I have never seen him be right about anything, and when he is wrong it is not just a legitimate error but a complete lie.
MODERATOR’S NOTE//I’VE LEFT BUNKER BOY’S POSTS UP IN THIS THREAD TO ILLUSTRATE TO THE NUMEROUS PEOPLE WHO READ THIS BLOG BUT DO NOT POST COMMENTS JUST HOW DEVOID OF INTELLECTUAL HONESTY THE LEFT REALLY IS. AND BUNKER BOY IS THE POSTER CHILD FOR INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY. I SUSPECT, AS AMAZONA HAS SPECULATED ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS, THAT HE/SHE IS A PAID INTERLOPER WHO HAS COME HERE UNDER NUMEROUS SCREEN NAMES OVER THE YEARS. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT IF HIS/HER POSTS BOTHER OTHERS HERE, THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION WOULD BE TO SIMPLY NOT RESPOND.
Well, isn’t that special? Just let those piles of steaming crap sit there, unanswered, stinking up the place with no rebuttal. That sends a lovely message to all those NUMEROUS PEOPLE WHO READ THIS BLOG BUT DO NOT POST COMMENTS.
And just how are these vast numbers of shy lurkers supposed to know the posts are “devoid of intellectual honesty” if the facts are not presented to counter them? Sounds like appeasement to me, just meekly letting the Left spread its propaganda.
That might appeal to people who love to wallow in the mental excrement of the Left but not to everyone, just as not everyone wants to immerse himself or herself in the toxic sludge of Joe Scarborough, et al.
And the other message is interesting as well—if you don’t like it, take a hike. And let the blog become just another venue for the spreading of the venomous spewing of the Left.
Well, isn’t that special? Just let those piles of steaming crap sit there, unanswered, stinking up the place with no rebuttal.
Excuse me! I love you dearly, but three fourths of this thread, mostly by you, has consisted of rebuttals to those steaming piles of crap. I happen to think you’ve done an excellent job of responding to those steam piles of crap. Your comments are rational and well researched and thought out, with just the right amount of snark. I can’t imagine any rational person coming here, reading through a thread like this and coming to the conclusion that Bunker Boy is ahead on points.
The theme of our pastor’s sermon this morning was about convictions; what do you feel so strongly about that you would lay down your life to defend. We Conservatives here know the answer to that question — we live it; express it on an almost daily basis. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I would, without hesitation, lay down my life to help insure that my descendants continue to live in freedom.
I can’t imagine for a second that anything Bunker Boy has said in this thread would be a hill he would be willing to die on.
Well, I was told that my choices are to let those steaming piles mount up because some moderators find them irresistible, continue to feel that they need to be addressed in spite of the fact that I think they should not be allowed to be here in the first place as I don’t for one moment believe they represent the true beliefs of an honest person looking for the truth but instead are merely propaganda looking for a gullible person willing to give it a venue, or I can shut up.
I’ve been on this blog for a long time, nearly since its inception back in the Bush days, and I have fiercely supported and defended it. I happen to think it should not become a receptacle for Leftist lies and propaganda, and that when this is allowed those lies should be debunked so they have no patina of legitimacy. But the onslaught of these lies, of this propaganda, is based on the strategy of simply overwhelming the other side with the sheer volume of deceit and libel. And this cannot succeed without the complicity of people who allow it.
While I have come to accept that there are some people drawn to this like flies to shit, that doesn’t mean I think they should let this blog become an outhouse so they can buzz around it to their heart’s content.
Defending against the rabble is useless when you have someone at your back holding the gate open because he thinks the rabble has some entertainment value.
Thank you, Mr. and Mrs. Moderator. I will just say that I agree that leaving my posts, and their responses, up is instructive for the lurkers. One thing that will be noticed is that I am the only one here capable of carrying on a discussion without resorting to name-calling, insults, and constructing imaginary personas for the other posters.
Well, if you define “discussion” as the dropping of scurrilous lies and then ignoring rebuttals. I suppose you can lay claim to “discussing”. If you consider lying about someone without using an actual pejorative, I suppose you can lay claim to the Higher Moral Ground, shaky as that would be. I suppose if you ridicule the beliefs of others and say you believe the people are lying about what they belief, I suppose you might be entitled to that smug smirkiness you exhibit here. I supposed if you insist that nicknames based on YOUR imaginary persona are somehow insulting, I guess you can complain about that too.
You really need to engage in some introspection. Dropping scurrilous lies? You claim I’m paid to post here. You claim I’m Eric Feigel-Ding. You claim I don’t have a political philosophy (after I respond to your request that I state a political philosophy).
You routinely ridicule the beliefs of others. That, in fact, is the purpose of asking other posters their political philosophy. You don’t actually want to know, you are just looking for more fodder to ridicule them.
Smug smirkiness? Pot meet kettle.
I am quite happy to have all of mine and your comments read by the lurkers out there.
No, I concede the field to you. You have an ally, who can now watch Joe Scarborough and MSNBC on TV and read you on the blog, and I guess it doesn’t get much better than that for him. After all, you two do go way back, and I guess it’s easier to corrupt a functional blog paid for by someone else than to start a new one.
It’s just the blog version of entropy, I guess. That is, the idea that everything in the universe eventually moves from order to disorder, and entropy is the measurement of that change. Sometimes it is inevitable, sometimes it needs some help. I did what I could to slow it. Whatever.
Looking for a record of a different subject, I ran across these notes from an old article. Worth repeating here:
(T)hey think of themselves as righteous soldiers of the Left charged with identifying and punishing those guilty of Wrongthink.
All you have to do is watch their smug self-satisfied smirking to see that they believe they have not just the right but the duty to prove their superiority and bring the rest of us to submission. This zeal calls for the implementation of any and all tools available, including lying, including spying, including slander and libel, including intimidation, including violence. Like all tyrants, they have taken it upon themselves to determine what is right, what is good and what is just, and then to bring us to heel if we have a different opinion.
So divisiveness is the fault of those who resist their tyranny, their groupthink, their determination that we must submit. If we would just stop fighting them, there would be no divisiveness and we would all march in lockstep to the same drumbeat. It’s all our fault.
That’s an excellent quote and gets right to the heart of the difference between Right and Left.
Like all tyrants, they have taken it upon themselves to determine what is right, what is good and what is just, and then to bring us to heel if we have a different opinion.
I do empathize with Conservatives who lose their jobs simply because of engaging in “Wrongthink,” but there are millions of us who DON’T fear retribution for voicing our opinions. We can only be brought “to heel” if we allow it. I, for one, don’t allow it. Now, to be honest, because of the area where I live and the people with whom I associate, I’m not confronted by people who wish to bring me “to heel,” so I can only imagine what I would do if the circumstances were different, and I have zero empathy for the person or persons who decide to test me.
I do empathize with Conservatives who lose their jobs simply because of engaging in “Wrongthink,” but there are millions of us who DON’T fear retribution for voicing our opinions.
Well, you’re retired now so you don’t have to worry about that.
But let me ask you a serious question. According to your avatar, you worked for the federal government for 25 years. Now you claim that the federal government is full of “deep state” actors who behave not in the best interests of the United States, but in ways designed to take down conservative administrations. How could you stand working in such an environment for 25 years? That’s a long time to suck it up.
How could you stand working in such an environment for 25 years? That’s a long time to suck it up.
That’s a fair question. I served from 1965 to 1989, much of that time in the Reserves. During that time I wasn’t a political/news junkie like I have been for the last couple decades, and the Navy (and the military in general) wasn’t nearly as politicized as it is now. I couldn’t have even told you the political affiliation of anyone I served with. During the entire time I served I can’t recall a director of the CIA blatantly lying to Congress or using his agency at the direction of the President to spy on and attempt to destroy an opposing political candidate, President-elect and President.
Sorry, this comment was just too divorced from reality to allow to remain//Moderator
The free market at work.
Any woman who still thinks the democrats still have their best interest at heart should read this.
https://headlineusa.com/ny-atty-settlement-15m-weinstein/?utm_source=HUSAemail&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=HUSAemail
The Democrat Party and their constituents have already executed a black Trump supporter, have killed many other innocent Americans, are actively attacking American cities across the country, and are waging war against Americans. There is no ignoring the fact that the Democrat Party has declared war against the USA and anyone who doesn’t recognize that yet is either blind, dishonest, or not paying attention.
There is no way out of this other than armed conflict. The Democrats have already started their armed assault … so when does our confrontation begin?
Well, first they have to elect this guy to lead them.
While I appreciate the humor I just don’t think many conservatives understand the gravity of the situation we’re in. The Democrats are actively waging an armed conflict against this country and in my opinion a much harsher response is warranted.
I choose to elect someone who understands that evil and is prepared to eliminate it … at all costs.