text:
Mark Noonan
Where Defeat Is Not An Option
January 3, 2021 January 3, 2021 Mark Noonan
Trump rally in Georgia tomorrow, Georgia election Tuesday, Stop the Steal Rally in DC on Wednesday. Here's the thing about all that: Trump hasn't quit. Let's face it, the chances of Trump getting sworn in on the 20th are vanishingly small…but he's still out there, day after day, fighting on our side. Once W left office, we – his most ardent supporters – ceased to exist. He neither fought for us nor even so much as quietly mentioned that 90% of Trump's "deplorables" are people who voted for him in 2000 and 2004. I think you can recall how vigorously I defended Bush…when did he ever defend me?
The Trump years have brought clarity.
A growing number of GOP Senators and Representatives are going to officially object to the Electoral Vote of the disputes States on the 6th. Now, to be sure, a lot of this is mere playing to the base: GOPers doing what we want because they know it'll make them popular with us. There's a bit of cynicism in there – but less cynicism than, say, a McCain running as a Conservative his whole career while knifing Conservatism in DC between elections. I'd rather have people who are pandering to me…at least, then, they aren't pandering to the Left. Most of all, I like the fight (Democrats went ballistic on social media yesterday as this unfolded). There is simply no reason to quit and concede.
Side note: Democrats are already prepping for Trump's Strange New Respect Award: remember, by 2024, the GOP nominee will be the Worst Person Ever so Trump will be demoted to A Really Bad Person But Nothing Like This New Guy status.
New House rules eliminate hate-filled words like "father". I guess they can't have a Catholic priest say the opening prayer any longer. However, I am advised that "son of a bitch" and "bastard" can still be freely used to describe Congress.
Comey and the destruction of the FBI. Rely on it, after Comey I will never, ever speak to a federal law enforcement agent without a lawyer present and even then only after a full grant of immunity. I don't care if an FBI guy wants directions to 7/11: he ain't getting it from me. We can't trust them: we'll never know when they are lying to entrap.
Open ThreadElectoral Vote, President Trump, Stop_The_Steal
Previous Article Open Thread
Next Article America on Edge
118 thoughts on "Open Thread"
Jeremiah January 4, 2021 / 2:55 am
One good thing I think we have on our side, considering that many in the senate and house are waking up to support a true independent audit of the election fraud, and I think more will in the next couple days, but they have one thing they fear the most, and that's an angry populace. Especially armed! Some believe that the Constitution has been changed in such a way that it has been weaponized against the American citizenry, and in order to fix what has been wrong in our country, would lead to all the states sending their national guard and law enforcement to Washington D.C., and mowing all the patriots down, but I have to question that scenario…would every state send their national guard and law enforcement? Would they dishonor the Constitution and break their oath to the United States? The same as, if there were confiscation and seizure of guns from the citizenry, would law enforcement and military break their oath to enforce such a mandate? Maybe in some states, but I don't think it would fly in many other states. I just don't see people in law enforcement and military going against their own family and friends to fulfill such a draconian order.
I saw where Kamala Harris just got sworn in to her senate seat again in California, yesterday, on Sunday. Now, if I'm correct, isn't she breaking some kind of rule here, by doing that? Also, perhaps she knows that her and Biden did not legitimately win the Presidency?
Amazona January 4, 2021 / 10:55 am
Some believe that the Constitution has been changed in such a way that it has been weaponized against the American citizenry, Actually, I don't think anyone believes the Constitution has been changed, unless you are thinking of a specific amendment you feel is harmful. It's that the Constitution has simply been ignored, trampled in the stampede to impose as much Leftism on the American public as possible.
They get away with it because we have let them. They have used their brilliant propaganda machines, the school system (we can't really call it "education" any more) and the Agenda Media, to redefine terms so that a large number of Americans think it is not necessary to follow the Constitution because it is outdated, archaic, not relevant any more and really just a living document that can and should be ignored when it gets in the way of a Leftist agenda. Just like the Left has sanitized the word "socialist" by claiming it is really just a benign way to make things "equal" the Left has recast the Constitution, the very concept of HAVING a Constitution, as a silly old relic of bygone days that has no place in a Progressive society.
And the "educated", with their degrees proudly mounted on their walls and their preening over their credentials, flaunt their ignorance and lack of knowledge as their masters then feel free to do what they want, unhindered by the actual rule of law of the nation.
But they haven't really changed the Constitution. They have merely dismissed it as irrelevant. To the extent they acknowledge that it is important, they have convinced the "educated" ignorant mobs that it depends on how a few politically appointed unelected Supreme Court justices rule, parroting the insanity so popular among the "educated" degree-holders of the Left that the Court should be "balanced" between people who see the role of the Court as simply strictly applying the Constitution to what we do in this country and those who see it as having the power to give a patina of authority to its violations.
They would change it if they could, but they know they can't, because there are too many truly educated people out there who would not allow it. So they do end runs around it, until it is hemmed in by activist judges and activist legislators and, if they get their way, activist justices, all of whom just have the goal of changing the way the country is run without having to actually change the Constitution itself.
Retired Spook January 4, 2021 / 11:02 am
Just spitballing here, but what do you think happens in a society where the rule of law, like gender fluidity, is whatever anyone wants it to be on any given day, and where law enforcement has largely been marginalized and replaced by social workers? As a mutual friend of ours is fond of saying, a big bucket of not good.
Spook, I think it's obvious what happens—anarchy and mob rule, followed by the fist of Leftist Central Authority.
The Left has never succeeded in taking power in a strong, stable society. It either preys on the chaos of societies that have fallen into disarray or it creates the kind of chaos it needs to get a toe hold.
When people are scared, fearing for their lives and their property, they are attracted to authority that promises to protect them, that promises safety and security—-and in terms of government, you can't get more authoritative than the Left. "Authoritative"—that's a ten-dollar word for tyranny.
It's one thing when a society falls apart on its own, and people are scared, hungry and feel threatened by the events spinning around them. But we are talking about the most stable, successful and productive society the world has ever seen, in the process of being brought to its knees by a sinister but skillful Leftist effort to destabilize it.
These efforts have been conceived and coordinated by the leaders of the Left, but they have been enabled and even implemented by average Americans who have been blindly acting as agents and foot soldiers of their masters, who have callously manipulated personality disorders and psychological weaknesses to create and then widen cracks in the social infrastructure of our country. Some poor sad tormented soul wracked with self-hatred over his or her gender did not become part of a divisive movement with the intent of fracturing our societal cohesion but was just looking for validation. But the end result was another fissure in our society, another demographic created and manipulated and used to create divisiveness.
Multiply this many times, as we look at how racism has been weaponized to generate resentment, hatred and violence. As we look at how the supposedly "educated" have come to depend on propagandists like Maddow and even Colbert to tell them not just what to think but how to feel about it. As we see the essentially feral part of humanity coaxed to the surface and then fed, encouraged and set upon our communities to destroy them. Even as we see efforts by the level-headed and concerned, who gather online in blogs like this to discuss what is happening, infiltrated by mental termites who come here not to participate but to corrode.
The same pattern has been repeated over and over, with the approval and participation of the so-called "educated" class which has been indoctrinated not into the actual political philosophy of the Left but into its smug self-righteousness for participating in its efforts to divide the nation.
We are trying to stop, or at least slow down, the death spiral of Leftism as we see it devour our nation and excrete its damaged but controllable society in unsightly piles behind it. Those of us educated enough to know and understand history, politics and human nature won't be able to do much but stand back and watch the plunge into chaos followed by tyranny as history repeats itself, once again.
Retired Spook January 4, 2021 / 12:14 pm
Other than the people at the top of the political food chain, who wants to live in a society like that?
Amazona January 4, 2021 / 12:24 pm
But they think they will be at the top of that food chain. Because they are special. Because they are "better educated" and therefore smarter and therefore better and therefore will be part of the elites and not part of the rest of the nation.
Retired Spook January 4, 2021 / 1:06 pm
But they think they will be at the top of that food chain.
Some will, but I find it hard to believe that the vast majority of those who identify as Progressive believe they will be involved in the decision-making process in a "utopian" society. My oldest daughter is of that mindset. It would be interesting to ask her how she believes she would fit into a society dominated by people who share her views. At the risk of attracting more troll droppings, I'd be interested in hearing an answer to that question from Crewman, Tryvasty, or Simonee.
Amazona January 4, 2021 / 3:27 pm
At the risk of attracting more troll droppings, I'd be interested in hearing an answer to that question from Crewman, Tryvasty, or Simonee.
Hmmm. Asking for an explanation of an emotional twitch? Good luck. I haven't even seen any of them explain why they support a political system based on the consolidation of power in the hands of a few. All I get is a version of "hahahahahahahahaha there she goes again talking about political systems, what an idiot".
While not every Leftist necessarily believes he or she will be in the decision-making class, I think there is a conviction that by just being "better people", just being on the "right side" of the moral equation by being FOR things like not letting children go hungry and saying black lives matter they will always be guaranteed a seat at the Good People table. I think for people like this it is much more an ego issue than a political or even social one—it's that short cut to the Higher Moral Ground thing. It's a way to think "I am a better person than those people because I feel this way about these things". I don't think we can overestimate the allure of having one's self-identification based on a conviction of moral superiority without having to actually do anything, or the resistance to having that conviction challenged. This is the bait the Left has always used—this, or the "only the smartest people believe this" challenge, to which stupid people respond because they are so desperate to be thought of as smart.
People like your sister will abandon their duty to be good parents and lead their children through emotional storms and crises because the Left's definitions of "good parent" and "good person" demand acquiescence to the political doctrine of gender transition. So instead of having adult parents who lead, guide and counsel disturbed children, these children are encouraged to live out destructive fantasies that will interfere with if not destroy the chances of them eventually leading happy and productive lives. But this sacrifice is OK because it feeds the ego-based concept of "this means I am a very enlightened and good human being".
These delusions are fed by having people they admire, like the talking heads of Agenda Media, constantly adding lies to the Trump side of the scale, so there are incessant comparisons of their inherent specialness to the essential wrongness and badness of this Invented Other bogeyman, to provide constant comparisons to feed the egos of the sheeple.
crewman4238 January 4, 2021 / 5:39 pm
So the question is, how does your daughter believe she would fit into a society dominated by people who share her views? I don't mean to be pedantic, but I'm not quite sure I know what you're asking. And I hesitate to respond to your definition of progressives or "the left" or whatever you want to call it. For instance, I would never claim that my aim is to achieve a "utopian" society or that it would even be possible.
But I do think we should constantly strive to better the United States–"to form a more perfect union," as the founders put it in the constitution.
And I think the phrase "All men are created equal" in the Declaration of Independence means something. While we have never fully achieved that ideal, that doesn't mean that we should continue to try. Or do you think Thomas Jefferson was a utopian expressing and impossible, if noble, goal?
Not sure if this addresses your question, so feel free to ask a more direct one.
So what IS your aim? Why do you support and enable the political system based on consolidation of power in the hands of a few, and the imposition of its belief systems on the public through violence, intimidation and the force implied by a massively powerful Central Authority? Do you believe in and support the underlying political philosophy of the Left, or do you attack its opposition because Trump?
If you want to "constantly strive to better the United States" how do you propose to do that? And please don't misquote the Founders by cherry-picking phrases. The phrase "to form a more perfect union" was specific to the need to unify the states into a cohesive federal identity, and the resulting Constitution was the result of that effort. It was, by the way, a result designed to make it as close as they could achieve to being impossible to distort into a massively powerful Central Authority imposing a unified will on the public, instead of the essentially libertarian nature of the Constitution, which creates a framework of protections for citizens and then establishes processes by which they can decide how to run their lives without the interference of the federal government.
As for Jefferson, if you are going to cite something he said you should put it in the context of what he then said and did. This habit of yours of plucking out a few words here and there and then assigning distorted meanings to them is quite annoying. When you look at the governing document Jefferson helped frame, it is obvious that it not only did not contain any reference no matter how indirect to desire to create the kind of Utopia envisioned by the Left and its artificial imposition of its own concept of equality on others.
I'm pretty confident that if Jefferson and Milton Friedman were contemporaries Jefferson would have agreed with Friedman that The use of force to achieve equality will destroy freedom
Why do you support and enable the political system based on consolidation of power in the hands of a few, and the imposition of its belief systems on the public through violence, intimidation and the force implied by a massively powerful Central Authority?
I don't, and never said that I did.
Why do you support a president who intimidates election officials to overturn elections?
Anyway, Spook, I'm happy to carry on the conservation with you. You were the one who asked the question, and who I was addressing, after all.
This is an open forum. If you want to sit in a cozy corner and chat alone with Spook he and you will have to set that up. In the meantime what is posted here is open to anyone who wants to respond.
Of course you never said you "…support and enable the political system based on consolidation of power in the hands of a few, and the imposition of its belief systems on the public through violence, intimidation and the force implied by a massively powerful Central Authority." You never come right out and take a position on anything. You just dart in, drop a little snot-nugget and take off.
But it is possible to discern the political position of someone based on what he attacks as much as on what he has the courage to openly admit. So, given your incessant sniping at and about anyone and anything on the Right and your obsession with anti-Trump snarls, many of which have been proved to be lies, it is obvious that you support and enable the movement that echoes those sentiments. Lacking the integrity to declare and then defend a position is not the same as not agreeing with it. It's just cowardice.
Why do you support a president who intimidates election officials to overturn elections? Oh, was that part of the discussion Spook asked you to join? Or are you playing another crewman game and skittering around from one topic to another to try to disguise your usual evasiveness when it comes to answering a direct question?
But I'll play. Why do you claim this election is over? Why do you claim that going through the Constitutional processes set up to provide avenues of addressing various election problems is an effort to "overturn" an election that isn't even over yet? That's kind of like whining that a football team setting up a last-minute field goal when they are behind by 2 points with seconds left on the clock is really trying to overturn the results of the game. Your shallowness and silliness are really amazing sometimes.
Oh, you are cherry-picking again, focusing on a few words in a very long phone call where the president, after repeating several times that the proofs of fraud showed many more votes taken from him than represent the margin of alleged victory then pointed out that all that is needed to resolve this quickly enough to withdraw certification right now would be to find stolen votes that total that difference. I don't believe that he was intimidating the governor, and if you object to a president trying to ensure that an election is honest then just come right out and say so. You can quibble and bicker all you like about the way he phrased this, but it all comes down to being part of the panicked mob trying like hell to stop investigating election fraud
No one knows for sure why the governor of Georgia is so adamant about covering up such fraud, interfering with such an investigation, clinging to the claim that the entire election process in Georgia was fair and free and honest, but it is clear that this is what he is doing. He's acting like a governor who is getting hourly photos sent to him of his child tied to a chair with a gun pointed at his head and the reminder that if he fails to block election investigations in Georgia the kid gets it. I can't blame the president for getting frustrated with this kind of intransigence. A governor ought to be happy to do whatever it takes to ensure that the elections in his state are trustworthy and instead this guy is just repeating that the recount was perfect and all that was needed, and he is sticking to his certification in spite of the proof that it is impossible to certify the vote tally because there has been no real investigation into the other aspects of suspicious activity.
One definition of "certification" is a process indicating that an individual or institution has met predetermined standards and it is clear that the election in Georgia failed, dramatically, to meet predetermined standards. Another is a certified statement especially as to the truth of something and we know this cannot be possible in Georgia until all the irregularities have been investigated. So let's go back to the root word ,"certify":
intransitive verb	To confirm formally as true, accurate, or genuine.
intransitive verb	To guarantee as meeting a standard.
Well, there is no way to confirm formally that the election results in Georgia are true, accurate or genuine. As for meeting a standard, the standards have certainly not been met. So the secretary of state and the governor have falsely signed off on a result that cannot be confirmed as accurate.
You never spoke up about a former president trying to overturn a legitimate election by illegally and unethically using federal agencies to create false information about the winner and then using that false information to try to unseat him after he had been elected by the Electoral College and legally inaugurated.
Now—will you , can you, address the question Spook asked you? Since you are coyly pretending that you think you did answer, let me refresh your memory: At the risk of attracting more troll droppings, I'd be interested in hearing an answer to that question from Crewman, Tryvasty, or Simonee. Are you really trying to get away with pretending that he was asking you what his daughter, whom you have never met, who has never participated in any discussion on this forum, would think?
The question to YOU was not how you think Spook's daughter believes she would fit into a society dominated by people who share her views. No, you are not being "pedantic" you are being silly. The question was how do you think YOU would "… fit into a society dominated by people who share her views." If you were truly bewildered by this, and truly thought he was asking your opinion about how a complete stranger would react to a hypothetical that has not even been presented to her, well, that would explain a lot about the incoherence of your other posts as well.
Which takes me back to my observation about your lack of personal dignity, as you are quite happy to play stupid, act stupid and post stupid comments, without any concern for the fact that these all make you look, well, stupid. Which leads me to think that you are fine with having your alter ego, tryvasty, come across as a mindless dunce making an utter fool of himself because he is just an avatar and not really you, whoever you are. The shallow, superficial, incoherent babbler of anti-whatever is an invention, and who cares if his babbling only generates scorn and contempt? It's all just a game.
This is an open forum.
Cool. Then I can choose to address Spook instead of you.
The question was how do you think YOU would "… fit into a society dominated by people who share her views."
Spook can clarify for himself what he was asking us to address. I really can't address the question as you framed it, as I don't know what Spook's daughter's views are.
You can "address" anyone you want.
Your non-answer is bizarre. I point out that the question was about what YOU think, not what you think his daughter might think, and you come back with "I don't know what Spook's daughter's views are." The question as I framed it had nothing to do with what Spook's daughter might or might not think. But you just keep tap dancing. It's really kind of funny to watch.
Or are you playing another crewman game and skittering around from one topic to another to try to disguise your usual evasiveness when it comes to answering a direct question?
Did you hear the tape recorded phone call that President Trump made to the Georgia Secretary of State? You know, the one where he urged the SOS to "find 11,780 votes" so that Trump could declare victory, using threats and intimidation like mob boss? You want voter fraud? There it is.
Skitter skitter skitter. Get asked a direct question requiring a direct answer and it is just skitter skitter skitter off to some other topic you think might distract from your evasion, along with another of your inane questions designed to do nothing but enable more of your bicker bicker bicker.
Jeremiah January 4, 2021 / 9:54 pm
But they haven't really changed the Constitution
Would you agree that the second amendment was put into the Constitution for what is happening right now, but we can't use it save for self defense and hunting? Wouldn't that be suppressing the Constitution? Also, they weaponize the Constitution against life and pursuit of happiness by adding their interpretation to it, such as the 14th amendment, or the 4th amendment? Just a couple examples…
No, I don't agree that we can use our guns only for "self defense and hunting". I don't hunt and I haven't had to use a gun to defend myself but I own and shoot guns.
I said the Constitution has been ignored, dismissed and misinterpreted. I did not agree it had been "changed". It stands as it was written and amended. An ethical Supreme Court, doing the job the justices swear under oath to do, can go back to the written words, which are still there.
Jeremiah January 4, 2021 / 10:31 pm
Thank you! Yes, I understood what you said, and I appreciate your help! 👍🏻
Just trying to learn from you!
crewman4238 January 4, 2021 / 10:49 pm
And we're back to deleting posts. Since Spook told us the other day that he is a moderator, I can only conclude that he has chosen to use those powers.
Retired Spook did not say he was the only moderator. You were invited back to answer a question. You did not answer the question. Instead you started your old patterns that always get you uninvited.
//Moderator
"One of the most cowardly things ordinary people do is to shut their eyes to facts."
― C.S. Lewis
I see the lure of Leftism as the lure of fantasy, of Magical Thinking. The Left says, essentially, "If you believe that man has the ability to make the world into a safe and happy place of equality and acceptance then join us and that's what we will do. And by joining us you will set yourself apart as more kind, more noble, more moral and more intelligent than those who do not."
And once joined, the faithful simply shut their eyes to the facts. To the fact that this warm fuzzy promise of love and equality is using violence, hatred, divisiveness and fear to dominate others. To the fact that every single time this political system has been put in control it has led to economic misery, loss of liberty and often the slaughter of millions. To the fact that there is something inherently wrong in forcing a belief system on others, through intimidation or violence or "reeducation camps" and that this very concept is antithetical to the promises of fairness and diversity. To the fact that imposing their will on others means they are bullies who would, if given the chance, by tyrants.
They have let their personal identities become so merged with their political affiliation that to challenge the precepts of that political identity is terrifying because it would mean challenging their concept of who and what they are as human beings. And it is just easier, and safer—and more cowardly—-to shut their eyes even tighter, to deny the facts that if acknowledged would threaten the identity of being a certain kind of very special person.
Nothing has destroyed civility like the mask debate.
I'm reminded of the day President Trump was diagnosed with COVID-19. I ripped my mask off as I existed the local Kroger store and headed to my car. An unpleasantly plump (I'm told I can't say fat) woman heading into the store screamed at me, "put your mask back on; don't you know the President has COVID?" I said, "it's OK, I haven't been around the President in over a month." I though she was going to bust an aneurism.
A man after my own heart. Great comeback.
I've talked about my concerns about the mask fad's affect on the social structure of our society. I see it more than many might, as I go from Normalville (Wyoming) to the prison camp mentality of Colorado under the iron fist of Commandant Polis. I see a few people in Wyoming wearing masks, though I think a lot of it is just because some stores ask us to. But I still don't see the antagonism and hostility that I do in Colorado.
One aspect of the mask phenomenon is paranoia: I wonder that some people even leave their homes. I see them wearing masks on walking paths or pumping gas. I even saw a couple of people riding motorcycles while wearing masks. There is no rhyme nor reason to any of this. A side effect of this paranoia is anger—people are furious at other people because they think the others are putting them at risk. If you are convinced that your mask will filter out whatever it is that terrifies you—virus particles, "droplets" or whatever—- then you are protected whether I am wearing a mask or not, or so it seems to me. So there is a large element of authoritarianism at work here, the inner tyrant finally set loose in a socially acceptable setting so some people can order other people to do what they want them to do.
My concern is that this anger is not going to go away once masking has run its course. When people have chosen to judge others on the basis of who wears a mask and who doesn't, and have chosen to make moral judgments about them as inherently bad or selfish people compared to the assumed moral superiority of mask wearing that is not going to go away. I'm seeing this as just another, but far more expansive and corrosive, example of Leftist social meddling creating even more fracturing of our social fabric.
The standard for moral judgment keeps getting lower. From "Have you murdered someone?" as a basis for judging the morality of someone we have gone all the way into the silliness of "Have you ever told a joke based on ethnicity?" and the moral equivalency is the same. Murder, rape, theft, arson, drunk driving, fraud, using the "wrong" pronoun, not thinking men should be in locker rooms with naked women and girls, believing that gender is based on science and not on emotion, liking The Dukes of Hazzard, thinking the Constitution is the law of the land, saying "Merry Christmas", believing in God, not wearing face diapers because science has proved they don't do any good, thinking proximity to a giant furnace in the sky has more effect on planet temperatures than driving a car, being white, voting for Trump—they are all equally sinful and offensive and subject to punishment, according to the Left.
As the Left destroys traditional boundaries of behavior and governance, it adds its own new, rigid and oppressive boundaries beyond which no one can stray without severe disciplinary action being taken. And pudgy mask Nazis in parking lots are the foot soldiers of the movement, enabling it through their smug sense of moral and intellectual superiority.
Just as "global warming" has morphed into the vague term "climate change", "mask" has evolved into "face covering". So a real mask covering nose and mouth and fitting tightly around them onto the face is no longer the standard. Merely having some piece of something loosely draped across the lower face is fine. Porous pleated paper? It's still a mask, right? Big gaps at the top and bottom, where those deadly and feared "droplets" can escape at will? No problem. It's a face covering. I saw someone in a store the other day wearing a single layer of a fast food paper napkin held onto his face by a piece of string. No problem—his face was covered.
I see a lot of bandannas tied across the lower face, Western bank robber style now approved for wear even in banks. I am tempted to dig out one of my old fishing hats—-a camo boonie hat with mosquito netting hanging from the brim. I think it would not only meet the rigid standards of the Mask Police, covering my entire face and even my neck, it would be a fashion statement, a daytime shopping version of the old funeral veils worn by widows.
I've joked that I should set up a booth in shopping mall parking lot, renting these hats. "Symbolic masks for rent, 50 cents an hour with a five dollar deposit. Make a statement about the stupidity of face coverings."
I finally decided if I was going to be forced to wear a mask in certain areas (ie., from the front door of a restaurant to the table, from the front door of the YMCA to the workout area, or from the front door of our church to the pew), that I'd get a couple masks that tweak the moral do-gooders. I've got one that says "It's not about safety, it's about compliance," and another one that says, "Take this mask and shove it." So far I've gotten nothing but positive comments, which in rural Indiana is not a surprise. So far, no one has been able to explain to me how you can get COVID walking to and from a restaurant table but not sitting at the table, but that's another argument for another day.
Where did you get those masks? I could use a couple in The Peoples' Republic Of Colorado
LATEST NEWS The Face Mask: A Powerful Symbol of COVID Oppression
A few weeks ago face masks were said to be useless and even dangerous against COVID-19. Now, people are urged to wear them and some cities are making them mandatory. Was this complete 180 made for health reasons? Or to create a specific social climate?
After two months of COVID-19 panic and terror, the world is now being ushered into a "new normal". However, there is nothing "new" nor "normal" about an oppressive police state that haphazardly revokes rights and freedoms while citizens snitch on each other. Nope, such regimes have existed in the past. And, in societies that dare call themselves "free" and "democratic", the "new normal" is an aberration – a slippery slope towards a global totalitarian regime.
Despite the fact that all viruses inevitably peak and phase-out from human circulation, profound and permanent changes are being made to society. And, to the elite, COVID-19 is the perfect opportunity to create a society that is rooted in fear, dehumanization, and widespread distrust of the "other".
Since symbols rule the world, one symbol perfectly embodies this "new normal": The face mask.
Although face masks were deemed useless and even dangerous only weeks ago, they are now being enforced in several cities around the world. What happened?
Did science make a last-minute, game-changing discovery about masks? No. However, those who are profiting from this crisis saw an opportunity: It can be instrumentalized to create a specific social climate. It is about keeping fear, anxiety, and paranoia going. It is about being constantly reminded that things are NOT going back to normal. In short, it is about social engineering.
Here's how the usage of the face mask made an inorganic, unnatural about-face in cities worldwide.
In the early onset of the pandemic, nearly all organizations and specialists advised against wearing a mask. Here's an infographic made by the World Health Organization (WHO) in late 2019.
"For healthy people wear a mask only if you are taking care of a person with suspected 2019-nCoV infection".
In March 2020, the WHO was still advising against wearing masks.
Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of the WHO health emergencies program said at a media briefing:
"There is no specific evidence to suggest that the wearing of masks by the mass population has any potential benefit. In fact, there's some evidence to suggest the opposite in the misuse of wearing a mask properly or fitting it properly."
Meanwhile, the US Surgeon General was also urging people to not wear masks.
In April, Dr. Brosseau, a national expert on respiratory protection and infectious diseases at the University of Illinois at Chicago published an article titled "Masks-for-all for COVID-19 not based on sound data". She wrote:
"Sweeping mask recommendations—as many have proposed—will not reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission, as evidenced by the widespread practice of wearing such masks in Hubei province, China, before and during its mass COVID-19 transmission experience earlier this year. Our review of relevant studies indicates that cloth masks will be ineffective at preventing SARS-CoV-2 transmission, whether worn as source control or as PPE.
Surgical masks likely have some utility as source control (meaning the wearer limits virus dispersal to another person) from a symptomatic patient in a healthcare setting to stop the spread of large cough particles and limit the lateral dispersion of cough particles. They may also have very limited utility as source control or PPE in households.
On the official website of the Canadian government, a page lists lots of reasons why homemade masks are practically useless while also hindering oxygen intake.
Homemade masks are not medical devices and are not regulated like medical masks and respirators. Their use poses a number of limitations:
they have not been tested to recognized standards
the fabrics are not the same as used in surgical masks or respirators
the edges are not designed to form a seal around the nose and mouth
they may not provide complete protection against virus-sized particles
they can be difficult to breathe through and can prevent you from getting the required amount of oxygen needed by your body
These types of masks may not be effective in blocking virus particles that may be transmitted by coughing, sneezing or certain medical procedures. They do not provide complete protection from virus particles because of a potential loose fit and the materials used.
Fast forward a few weeks. Here's a headline from the CBC (which is funded by the Canadian government).
Everyone should wear face masks in public, CDC now recommends
This decision was not the result of new science. The world elite realized that the widespread usage of the mask creates the perfect fear-based social climate to advance its agenda. It can be used to justify longer lockdowns, intrusive contact tracing and all kinds of oppressive measures.
What happened? The answer can be summed up in one word: Agenda.
Complete 180 and Media Mask-arade
After advising against the mask for weeks, the CDC made a complete 180 in early April.
The one about compliance I got from Etsy, and the one that says "Take this mask and shove it," I actually custom ordered from a company that lets you compose your own message, Maskedstatement.com. Both are 3-layer, soft and nicely fitting.
I found a similar one on Etsy and will keep looking, or check the web site you link. Thanks
I wish I had room for my own message:
Won't block big smoke particles
Will block tiny virus particles
Because science
I might see if your site can fit that on a mask.
I didn't see a place to order my own message but just ordered two others—the "compliance" one and "This mask is as useless as my governor". They have one that says "my governor is an idiot" which is a very popular bumper sticker in Colorado.
I didn't see a place to order my own message
Click on the tab that says "Custom Orders."
I just ordered it from another site.
I am tempted to order one that says:
PURELY SYMBOLIC MASK
At a time when small businesses are going under by the thousands, it's nice to see small companies profiting by selling masks that make fun of Liberals — a twofer.
dbschmidt January 4, 2021 / 9:47 pm
Depending on how I feel that day–I always have my shemagh with me from the good of days of desert warfare. Freaks people out when I go all Lawrence of Arabia on them.
simoneee9 January 4, 2021 / 7:03 pm
Anyone else watching Lin Wood's decline into full blown psychosis on Twitter and Parler? He's now claiming Pence will be executed by firing squad and the Justice Roberts is a murdering pedophile.
Well, Spook, you did invite the little rodent in, and here are your troll droppings to show you how that worked out.
Yeah, my bad. After Crewman completely (and I suspect purposely) misconstrued my earlier question, I think I'll just let sleeping dogs lie. It's pretty clear that none of them has the ability or desire to discuss what attracts them to a system in which a central authority governs every aspect of their lives, or how they see their role in such a society.
Not purposeful intent to misconstrue you. And nothing's stopping you from just asking your question plainly and simply now. I have indicated that I would respond to it. But maybe you didn't actually want an answer.
By the way, I am not "attracted" nor do I advocate "a system in which a central authority governs every aspect of their lives," so I don't spend time pondering my role in such a society. Is that what your daughter believes?
You do attack, smear, lie about and generally work very hard to discredit the political model that is the antithesis of the one in which a a central authority governs every aspect of our lives. That leads to the logical conclusion that you support such a system, as every post of yours tends to try to undermine its critics.
Forget Spook's daughter. What do YOU believe?
Not purposeful intent to misconstrue you. And nothing's stopping you from just asking your question plainly and simply now. I have indicated that I would respond to it.
OK, you apparently don't like the immensely successful, lightly regulated free-market capitalism we've seen for the last 4 years, and you don't support top-down government control. I'll bite — what type of a governmental system would you prefer, and why, and what do you see as your role in it? And by role, I mean, private citizen who just wants to be left alone to his/her own devices, public servant, entrepreneur, working stiff, ward of the state, etc.
OK, you apparently don't like the immensely successful, lightly regulated free-market capitalism we've seen for the last 4 years, and you don't support top-down government control
I don't like a corrupt presidential administration. You and I disagree on that, but that's the way I see it. It doesn't matter to me whether that administration supports my views or not. A thoroughly corrupt administration like this one is thoroughly corrupt and doesn't deserve another term.
what type of a governmental system would you prefer
A representative democracy, of which the United States is an example.
what do you see as your role in it?
As a citizen, to be education about the issues, to vote, to advocate for reasonable and responsible government, to support candidates of my choosing.
private citizen who just wants to be left alone to his/her own devices
We all like to be left alone, but we also live in a society with other people, with laws that regulate our interaction. I have no problem with that because without them it would be anarchy.
Never been one.
working stiff
ward of the state
Forget Captain Obvious, we have a new character in the house—Corporal Platitude. The closest thing to a definitive statement is that they current president is not only "corrupt" but "thoroughly corrupt"—another allegation just tossed out without backing it up, along with a series of vague platitudes worthy of a Miss America interview.
But even Corporal Platitude blurts out an admission, try as he does to avoid giving any straightforward answers. That is that Identity Politics is all he cares about. "It doesn't matter to me whether that administration supports my views or not…" if I just don't like him as a person. that is basically a definition of the superficiality of Identity Politics, and sums up the shallowness of whatever try pretends is his actual political philosophy.
I could have written your answer ahead of time almost verbatim. Sorry I asked.
Okay, your turn–what type of a governmental system would you prefer, and why, and what do you see as your role in it? And by role, I mean, private citizen who just wants to be left alone to his/her own devices, public servant, entrepreneur, working stiff, ward of the state, etc.
I've articulated my position on the role of government and on my role within the society associated with that governmental model dozens if not hundreds of times on this blog over the last 17 years. I've practically written a thesis on it. If you had given me a meaningful answer, I might consider continuing to play your little game, but you didn't so I won't. Thanks anyway.
The reason I brought up my daughter is that she sounds exactly like our three trolls when she talks about politics — EXACTLY! IE., THEY APPEAR TO HOLD THE SAME VIEWS.
It isn't really a difficult question. The United States of America is, without question, the greatest experiment in self government in modern history, maybe in all of history. You are either for the limited central government, with the majority of power to the states and the people as laid out in the Constitution, or you're for something else.
And the "something else" is a central authority with little power left to the states or the people
I don't really expect a coherent answer beyond the platitudes of his previous answer, do you?
The reason I brought up my daughter is that she sounds exactly like our three trolls when she talks about politics.
And I'm supposed to know this how?
You asked "what type of a governmental system would you prefer"? I said a representative democracy. Do you agree with that? Do you understand that that is in fact with the U.S. system of government is? You didn't actually ask me what the role of government should be. You asked 'what do you see as your role in it," which I answered.
Sorry, I forgot your reading comprehension skills are less than great..
" My oldest daughter is of that mindset. It would be interesting to ask her how she believes she would fit into a society dominated by people who share her views. At the risk of attracting more troll droppings, I'd be interested in hearing an answer to that question from Crewman, Tryvasty, or Simonee." (emphasis – mine)
So………you know what your views are (you've never articulated them other than in generalized platitudes, so we really don't know what your views are, other than you're against government corruption. I realize you can't tell us what a society governed by people who share your views would look like without getting into some detail about your own views, but, what the hell — give it a shot.
You left off the first part of what you wrote. You previously wrote, Some will, but I find it hard to believe that the vast majority of those who identify as Progressive believe they will be involved in the decision-making process in a "utopian" society. My oldest daughter is of that mindset.
I already told you that I would never claim that my aim is to achieve a "utopian" society or that it would even be possible. If your daughter believes she can bring about Utopia, good luck to her. Maybe we don't all think alike after all.
Now you are afraid to even address whether the United States system of government is a representative democracy. It's almost like you can't bring yourself to find ANY point of common ground. That's on you. And with the recent antics of the president and many Republican senators and congressmen, apparently Republicans don't believe the U.S. should be a representative democracy anymore. Perhaps that includes you. If so, then all your talk about limited federal government is moot. If you're going to throw away the democratic part of the republic, then you haven't got much, do you.
You say, You are either for the limited central government, with the majority of power to the states and the people as laid out in the Constitution, or you're for something else.
Hogwash. That's a false dichotomy, like saying you are either for socialism or fascism, that there's no other alternative. The extent of the federal government has been debated since the ink was dry on the Constitution. To be on one side or the other of the debate, or somewhere in between, doesn't make one un-American. The Constitution provides for a robust federal government, as has been confirmed by the Supreme Court through the decades.
I believe that government has a role in advancing the general welfare of the people it governs. And this includes government at all levels, including federal. One of the beauties of our system of government, and the Constitution (including its amendments), is that it has adaptable to a country that is vastly different from the one for which is was originally written.
I particularly liked this nugget: apparently Republicans don't believe the U.S. should be a representative democracy anymore
I liked it because it was so blatantly dishonest, yet framed in what was supposed to be a serious concern.
Actually, Republicans, or at least conservatives as there are a lot of "Republicans" who don't seem to have much of a political compass at all, are DEMANDING representative government. That is demanding that the vote represent the actual will of the people and not just the skill of the Left in cheating. It is the lack of true representation as seen in this election that is motivating resistance to certifying it as legitimate.
Now you are afraid to even address whether the United States system of government is a representative democracy. It's almost like you can't bring yourself to find ANY point of common ground.
That's because the United States is not a representative democracy, it's a representative, constitutional republic. The founders abhorred democracy.
Hogwash. That's a false dichotomy, like saying you are either for socialism or fascism, that there's no other alternative.
Talk about hogwash. "something else" covers a lot more ground than socialism or fascism. Sorry I can't have a meaningful discussion with someone who has such abysmal reading comprehension and reasoning skills.
Spook, as I said, try is not interested in a real discussion. He just wants to drag out any conversation as long as he possibly can, which he does by evasiveness, meaningless platitudes and inane questions designed to get us, any of us, to respond so he can start off trolling a new subject. This is the pattern of paid trolls who are supposed to keep posters on the line as long as possible, getting as many clicks (responses) as possible. There is not a scintilla of honesty in anything he writes. He will simply write anything he thinks he can bicker about, to pad the conversation as much as possible.
And because he is using a throw-away persona he doesn't care how demeaning he makes it appear by having it be stupid, dense, or any other negative. Insults don't matter because we ae insulting a make-believe character. It's all just a game.
This is why I encourage the blog administration to block him or at least refuse to let him continue to be a blog vandal.
Spook, the "false dichotomy" whine reminds me of a similar objection when I once said that the political choice is simple–between the descriptions you and I have posted about the nature of Constitutional governance or the alternative, which is of course that of a massively powerful Central Authority. The whine at the time was that this was utterly ridiculous as it was overlooking the myriad ISSUES that people care about, which influence their vote.
I suppose it is theoretically possible that someone with basic writing skills, which I think indicate basic thinking skills, is at the same time incapable of understanding that the real vote is about the form, or blueprint, of how to govern the nation, and that our decisions on ISSUES and how to address them is dependent on which kind of government we vote for. Most basically, that is whether they are addressed at the state level (Constitutional model) or at the federal level (Leftist model).
So yes, the core decision we are asked to make in our national elections IS a binary decision—–do we want a Constitutional government which keeps most authority at the state or personal level with the federal government allowed to do very little other than provide a national identity, national defense and an umbrella of protections of our rights, or do we want a central authority which attempts to legislate every problem and issue and then impose its decisions on all of us, making the federal government unconstitutionally powerful and reducing state sovereignty. There really is no middle ground. It really is an either/or decision.
Leftists fight this concept, argue it, ridicule it and demean it, because it would force people to stop making crucial decisions based on Identity Politics and really analyze the two political models and choices they have. This is a threat to the Left, because when they think about it most people prefer to keep authority at the state or local level as much as possible, unless they have an agenda they want to impose on the whole nation, like abortion. The last thing the Left wants is for people to analyze its structure and compare it to its alternative, which is about personal liberty and keeping governmental authority close to home.
That's because the United States is not a representative democracy, it's a representative, constitutional republic.
It's both.
The founders abhorred democracy.
Then why did they stipulate in the Constitution that Congressmen be chosen by the people?
The Constitution also stipulates that United States senators be determined by a vote of the people.
And since early in the republic, the president has been determined by popular vote in each state. Seems like a whole lot of democracy going on in the good old U.S. of A.
So very wrong on so many counts:
Because the people are not voting, democratically, for laws but just for the representatives who will then form the legislative body that does vote on laws. Duh.
since early in the republic, the president has been determined by popular vote in each state.
Except no, they have not. The presidency is decided by Electors chosen by state legislatures. You really ought to stop making stuff up (what we call "lying").
Only recently has there been a move to make states choose their Electors based on the certified popular vote in each state. Read the Constitution. The legislature of each state chooses its Electors. They may choose to be governed by the certified popular vote in that state, or they may not. In any case, lacking confidence in the legitimacy of the certification allows any state legislature to make its own decisions about which Electors to choose.
And it is the legitimacy of the certification process in some states that is at issue here, as it is impossible to guarantee the accuracy of a vote tally in the face of proven irregularities regarding how many votes were cast, how many were legally cast and how accurately they were counted.
By passage and ratification of the 17th Amendment in 1913, one of the first casualties of the Progressive movement. The founders believed in checks and balances, and one of those was that even the Congress should be divided into one house answerable to the people and one house answerable to the states. Accordingly, senators were originally appointed by the state legislatures, and could actually be recalled if they did not look out for the interests of their respective states. Today, not only is there orders of magnitude more money involved in senate races, but many, if not most senators put national interests before the interests of their states. I'd love to see the 17th Amendment repealed.
Getting lectured on the Constitution by tryvasty is kind of like getting lectured on civility by Joy Behar
Right. So what part of this–the people voting for their representatives and senators–is not embodied by calling the United States a democratic republic?
<iThe presidency is decided by Electors chosen by state legislatures..
Right. And what mechanism does every state in the union use to determine its presidential electors? A popular vote. Most states appoint all of their electors to the candidate who wins the majority of votes in that state. Some states do it slightly differently–e.g., Nebraska–but still rely upon a popular vote. And it's been that way since something like the 1820s–that is, since early in the republic.
That's a mighty generous interpretation of what Republicans are doing. So how do you think this plays out? If states cannot certify their own votes, then who does?
In July of 2020 the Supreme Court ruled that states may compel electors, the individuals who make up the Electoral College, to vote for the winner of the statewide presidential race by either removing or fining "faithless electors."
This unanimous decision still leaves it up to the states to decide how they will respond to electors making their own decisions about how to cast their votes.
The Constitution gives each state legislature authority to appoint in the manner it chooses. In the early days, most state legislatures just picked electors. But states quickly shifted toward "translating popular preferences" into "Electoral College ballots," appointing electors who would support the winner of the statewide vote. That practice prevails today: 32 states and the District of Columbia obligate their electors to follow the people's will.
Therefore, not only are there many states which do not force their Electors to vote according to the popular vote, such a demand is not part of the Constitution but is left up to each state. Yes, 32 out of 50 does qualify as "most" but there is a big difference between "all" and "most" and more important, this demand is fluid, depending on the changing opinions of each state legislature.
And at stake now is the question of whether or not Electors are required to pretend that a clearly false certification means they have to vote accordingly.
If states cannot certify their own votes, then who does?
While it may not fall to any other entity to certify a state's votes, it is possible and appropriate to simply set aside that questionable vote tally as uncertifiable and therefore not valid.
If this means a lot of people will have their votes ignored, well, so be it. If electing corrupt and/or incompetent government officials, such as governors or secretaries of state, and/or tolerating corrupt and/or incompetent appointees means having ones' votes discarded, perhaps people will pay a little more attention to who they put in charge. It's about time we get back to the concept that voting is a lot more than just playing Identity Politics or popularity games, but is a serious responsibility with consequences for bad decisions.
By passage and ratification of the 17th Amendment in 1913, one of the first casualties of the Progressive movement.
Right. As I said, the Constitution stipulates that senators are elected by the people. More of that democratic republic stuff.
I'd love to see the 17th Amendment repealed.
Ah, so in your opinion some parts of the Constitution are good and some are not.
Yup. I view the 17th Amendment the same way virtually the entire country did the 18th Amendment, which was repealed by the 21st Amendment. That's the beauty of our Constitution — it has a built in mechanism for changing it. You stick around here long enough, you might actually learn something.
So who decides which votes are "questionable" and "uncertifiable"? You? The states themselves already certified that the votes are legitimate and certifiable.
The states themselves already certified that the votes are legitimate and certifiable.
Then you should have no problem with a commission to look into the raw data upon which these certifications have allegedly been based. This should pose no threat or concern and should actually be welcomed as a chance to finally lay to rest the convictions of so many millions of people that the numbers cannot be verified. You should be fine with a commission interviewing the secretaries of state and the governors who did these certifications to find out what they did to establish, in their own minds, the validity of the numbers they essentially swore were true and accurate
Certification of votes is a big moral and legal responsibility, with legal ramifications for falsely stating, essentially under oath, that they have adequately investigated the source of their numbers and find them valid and trustworthy.
After all, words do have definitions. Definitions for "certify" include:
To confirm formally as true, accurate, or genuine.
To guarantee as meeting a standard.
to attest authoritatively
to guarantee authenticity
Perhaps you, yourself, can explain how votes cast by people not legally allowed to vote can be certified as legitimate. Perhaps you can explain why the Constitutional right of equal protection should not have been an applied standard when some voters had to follow some laws and others did not, in the same state, in the same election. Perhaps you, yourself, can explain why the legal concept of refusing to allow the fruit of the poison tree does not apply when it comes to counting votes cast in defiance of a state's own constitution. Because these are the kinds of questions that should be asked of officials who "certified" votes under the shadow of such irregularities.
So who decides which votes are "questionable" and "uncertifiable"?
Well, after investigation and testimony from those doing the "certification" if these officials still want to stand by their guarantees that there is nothing questionable or improper about those votes, it would then come down to the state legislatures to see if they agree. I think any objective standard of "questionable" would apply to votes cast by dead people, votes cast by non-residents and votes cast by people who voted more than once, as well as votes cast under election rules forbidden by a state's own constitution. I suggest that there is reasonable doubt regarding the validity of votes gained by bribery, votes garnered through ballot harvesting,
Or maybe you can just cut to the chase and tell us why you think no one should ask these questions or even care.
In Washington State, under RCW 29A.84.711
Documents regarding nomination, election, candidacy—Frauds and falsehoods
Every person who:
(1) Knowingly and falsely issues a certificate of nomination or election; or
(2) Knowingly provides false information on a minor party or independent candidate certificate of nomination is guilty of a class C felony punishable under RCW 9A.20.021.
I imagine other states have similar laws regarding the duty of officials to certify election data accurately and with conviction that it is true. Not having that conviction is the same thing as falsely certifying
The questions have been asked over and over. There have been recounts and recounts. Audit after audit. Court case after court case after court case.
Now you want to hold up the inauguration of the next president so that a commission can look into it. And if the commission doesn't come up with the answer that you want, then you will demand another commission or whatever, because you know, questions have been raised. It will never end. Just admit that you think Donald Trump should serve a second term regardless of what the American people decided.
Court case after court case after court case.
False. No court has held a formal hearing and heard presentation of evidence or testimony from witnesses. Courts have merely dodged the issue on procedural grounds. We've been over this.
Audit after audit.
"Auditing" votes that have already been approved does not address issues like how many were cast by dead people, how many were cast by non-residents, etc. And no "audit" has addressed the issue of the underlying legal defect of allowing them to be cast at all because the elections rules were changed and were in violation of the state's constitution.
The willfully gullible or the apologist can fall back on the "audit" claim that this was all that was necessary but there are significant issues that have never been addressed in a formal court setting, with witnesses, sworn testimony and certified evidence. So stop pretending that there have been.
Now you want to hold up the inauguration of the next president so that a commission can look into it.
Not our fault that the game plan has been to run out the clock and now we are this close to January 20. What hubris, to create a situation and then say oh well, the situation we created robs you of your options.
…if the commission doesn't come up with the answer that you want, then you will demand another commission or whatever,
And there you go again, playing that stupid game of predicting how people will supposedly act, to justify whatever it is you are evading. It is juvenile and tiresome.
Just admit that you think Donald Trump should serve a second term regardless of what the American people decided.
And then you, predictably, segue into another of your lies. The lie is that putting Biden in the White House would reflect "what the American people decided". Of course I would prefer to have Trump continue as president. He's done a great job and I approve of his policies and his handling of his office. I think Joe Biden is a thoroughly corrupt wholly political animal who has sold his country out, over and over in many ways, just to enrich his family. I am also disgusted by his sexual predation on young girls and his condoning of the sexual activities of his son with his own granddaughter. Worse, I think he is now a senile meat puppet for a Left so radical that it is emboldened to brag about its agenda of fundamentally transforming this nation into a permanently one-party country enacting radical Leftist policies.
But if I had any reason at all to believe that the people of this country chose Biden, I would accept that. I just don't happen to think that is what happened. I will never, even for a moment, agree that Biden was elected to the presidency. I will accept the fact that the Left figured out a way to hand it to him, and work tirelessly in any way I can to stop his agenda from moving forward and to save the nation from the disaster he has planned for it.
Every word in every post you dump here illustrates your basic, inherent, dishonesty, or at least that of the phony avatar you use for your official trolling. Fine. Just don't think it goes unnoticed.
Anyone else watching Lin Wood's decline into full blown psychosis
I'm not defending Lin Wood; he sounds like he's gone off the deep end, but we watched virtually every talking head on CNN, MSDNC, ABC, CBS, NBC and even a few on Fox use similar rhetoric about Trump for the last 4 + years. I don't recall you questioning that.
I know it's a parallel that's already been reiterated to death but it was literally one year ago that America was asked to believe that the motivation for Trump's request that Ukraine investigate Biden was his deep concern about the rule of law.
And now we are asked to believe that Trump's motivation is his deep concern about the destruction of the integrity of our election process.
Which is wholly justified and shared by about half of the country. Trolls, though, don't care.
I got this from a mutual friend of mine and Amazona's. A humorous look at what defund the police might look like:
I'm The Rapid Response Social Worker Who Replaced The Police
It's not an easy job. In fact, it's impossible, but it's for social justice!
I'm not gonna lie, this isn't exactly what I expected — lying here in the hospital. I mean, it's only a few broken bones, a punctured lung, and some stitches to the head, but I almost feel betrayed. Three weeks ago when I took the five-hour online course to become an unarmed rapid response social worker, I thought I was helping mankind. After all, with the police abolished, somebody had to be there to mitigate when people had inevitable disagreements.
My first mitigation didn't go great. I was called to the scene of a bank robbery — which, there weren't supposed to be any bank robberies once the capitalist-driven oppression of the police no longer created crime, but this guy apparently didn't get the memo, I guess. He was a Latino male-presenting person about 5'6" holding a shotgun.
Thinking back on my extensive training, I tried to calm things down with a breathing exercise. But he just kept yelling and pointing the gun at me, which again, not supposed to happen. I told him that as a white man, I could never know the trauma the Spanish-speaking people suffered under white genocidal maniacs like Cortez, and while his desire to rob the bank was understandable, even laudable, we have collectively decided not to support such actions, and resources were available to him.
That's when he hit me in the head with the butt of his gun; I think it was the butt of his gun, anyway. When I woke up, I realized this job was not going to be as easy as I thought it would be. That was just one person, though — one person who is really rich now. But to assume he represented the entire criminal class would have been the height of privilege, right? And after all, it's only money and a slight concussion.
The next day went remarkably better. I was called to a gang fight that was about to get very heated. No guns this time, just knives and brass knuckles. I suggested we all sit in a circle and use a feelings chart to determine what had brought us all to that place. I did not, of course, suggest that why I was there was for some inherently better or more virtuous purpose, and I think they really got it! They stopped fighting each other and stole my wallet, instead. Progress.
It was yesterday, my third day on the job, when things really got dicey. There were reports of revolutionary redistribution of corporate assets, which used to go by the patently racist name "looting." I consulted my Rapid Response Social Worker app, and it advised me to start gently chanting, "Hope is the thing with feathers." Dickinson. It's a technique that was developed in Denmark to deescalate harmful situations with poetry.
The rest is a blur. There were a few baseball bats to the legs. A large glass bottle of something sticky, organic maple syrup maybe, was smashed on my head. People were kicking me in the ribs, and I saw a few people fighting over a Ralph Lauren down comforter they were steali… I mean redistributing. The comforter ripped, there was chaos everywhere, and when I woke up in the ambulance, well, I was the thing with feathers.
This morning when I woke up, my supervisor was right there next to my bed. I thought maybe she had brought flowers or one of those shiny balloons from the hospital gift shop. But actually she had a long complaint form, detailing the ways in which I had failed in my job and failed the collective community. I was still kind of groggy. I didn't catch it all, but something about a failure to recognize and ameliorate systems of oppression. Which, I mean, yeah probably.
I'm not giving up though. Nobody said this would be easy. They also didn't say it would put me in the ICU, but that's beside the point. We are creating a better world — one where police, the real criminals, no longer exist, and more equitable forms of community support for need-based compelled law suggestion can thrive. Are we there yet? No, but once I'm out of the hospital and off suspension, I'll be right back to work making America a better place.
I haven't spoken about the coronavirus since it began back in March of 2020. It's been almost a year now since it started in the United States. But it was the most unreal thing I had ever seen in my life how people were panicking. After about the first week, the store shelves were emptied of toilet paper, paper towels, bottled water, cleaning supplies, you name it. Well, about a month had passed, and things were starting to calm down a bit, spring was coming on, people were getting outside doing their yard work, and going to work, at least here in West Virginia…I know a lot of other states weren't so fortunate, in that their governors kept them locked down. Governor Whitmer comes to mind, who went so far as to prevent people from going to home and garden supply stores to buy seeds for their gardens, and of course, Antifa and BLM were loving the lockdowns in states where there are Democrat controlled state governments, they burned entire cities to the ground, like Minneapolis, they destroyed peoples businesses who spent their entire lives building, and making a life for themselves. They wanted to try to say it was all because of "George Floyd" who at the time of arrest had a fatal dose of fentanyl in his bloodstream, and was going to die anyway even without being arrested. No, Antifa and BLM used George Floyd as an excuse to destroy peoples lives that had nothing to do with George Floyd's death. They continue to taunt and physically injure conservatives and people who support President Trump. Unfortunately, conservatives and MAGA have been too kind to Antifa and BLM. They went to Josh Hawley's house the other night in Missouri, beating and banging on the door, and threatening him and his family with a megaphone in their hand. Law enforcement won't do anything to them, you might as well call the dog catcher as much good as it would do to rely on people that are supposed to defend and protect, but if you defend yourself, law enforcement will be there so fast it'll make your head spin. But Antifa can beat you in the head with a tire iron all day long and the attackers are long gone before the police can get to you. What a backwards world we live in.
But anyways, I noticed something strange that I had never seen before, I noticed all these arrows and X's on the floors in the stores, and in the banks sets of footprints painted on the floor. I found it very strange, but also very, very sad. I said to myself, this is how it is, this is how they do. This is how they herd you like cattle. You're no longer human beings to them.
Up in Canada they are arresting families inside their homes who have get togethers. In New York they are threatening people with covid detention camps, or should I say concentration camps?
What will be next, cattle cars?
OF COURSE NOT! screech the Leftists. No one has used those exact words, so it is irrational to suggest it.
No, all they have said they want is to "reeducate" us, with some openly advocating for actual gulags to accomplish this. Most just make the ability to work for a living, for example, dependent on being forcibly reeducated to fall in line with Leftist tyranny.
It's 2021 America. Of course they wouldn't use cattle cars. There are all those school buses sitting idle, with children shut out of schools.
Right next to Stacey Abrams brags about Lack of Signature Verification in Georgia.
I Now Better Understand the 'Good German'
https://pjmedia.com/columns/dennis-prager/2021/01/05/i-now-better-understand-the-good-german-n1305198
It is a very sobering reminder, DB, how many were led like lambs to the slaughter under Hitler's tyranny, and how we here in America are on the precipice of such an outcome. Which is why I paraphrased earlier in the thread…that the second amendment was put into place for times such as these, yet we are not permitted to use it save for hunting and self defense. In many cases, however, we are not permitted to even use the second amendment for self defense, we must, yet again, rely on Big Brother to send his posse to the rescue, and many times they arrive to discover that the victim has done departed this life into the next.
The second amendment was put into place as a barrier between individual freedom and tyranny, if we are to remain a free people, we must put it into action.
From this excellent and very important article: READ IT
Prior to the lockdowns, I flew almost every week of the year, so I was approached by people who recognized me on a regular basis. Increasingly, I noticed that people would look around to see if anyone was within earshot and then tell me in almost a whisper: "I support Trump" or, "I'm a conservative." The last time people looked around and whispered things to me was when I used to visit the Soviet Union.
All this is taking place without concentration camps, without a Gestapo, without a KGB and without Maoist reeducation camps.
To the latter comment, all I can say is "….so far….." I've talked about my visit to a Stasi prison in Berlin, built to hold and torture people whose ideas were not considered acceptable by the Leftist government. Yes, imprisoned and tortured and sometimes killed for what they thought.
When we tolerate Thought Police in our own nation after that it becomes only a matter of degree—-to what extent will the tyrants go to impose their own acceptable belief system?
Pennsylvania senate erupts chaos after Democrats throw temper tantrum https://t.co/IxGzgyjn6y
— The Election Wizard (@Wizard_Predicts) January 5, 2021
I do not want to travel down the road Spook opened up but I just want to know. You know, like all of the crap shown over MSM which every Democrats calls "There is no evidence" because courts have refused to hear it. It is evidence just not heard evidence.
Nevertheless, I have seen several persons claim with no evidence that President Trump has committed everything from corruption to crimes against humanity without defending arguments. If President Trump is the most egregious President ever–could someone present the evidence without going into a Rep. Shiff show.
If President Trump, including an impeachment without merit, is the most corrupt President ever–you will not only show how ignorant you are but baffoon us into this new year.
Please state Time/Date: Offense: Charge: Belief
If you need any help I would recommend Mark / Matt excellent book; The Worst President in History: The Legacy of Barack Obama.just to help you along.
Throughout his career Donald Trump has been investigated by the FBI and the IRS for various allegations of wrongdoing—-and cleared every time.
He is a man who has never flown under the radar, has always been flamboyant and a lightning rod for resentment of his success. As a result he is probably the most investigated president we have ever had—and not a single accusation against him has held water.
He excelled in a rough and tumble world, where competition was not just tough it could be dangerous and where some of the companies he had to work with were run by the Mob. He had to deal with union bosses, known to be thugs. Your average paycheck guy has no idea what is involved in this kind of business life and seems to be on the verge of swooning over what are and were common dealings in this world. Again, opponents complained, he was investigated, and he was cleared.
He went through a period of pretty disgusting personal behavior, no doubt about it. But that was more than a decade ago and nothing indicates that it continued past that period.
I hear the same vague accusations and comments, and other than adultery (which is always breathlessly embroidered with invented details like "while his wife was home nursing their son") it's never been specific to anything.
"Crimes against humanity" is just plain hysterical nonsense and an indictment of the intelligence and integrity of anyone who makes that claim.
He is the first president who stood up to the cartels at the border and tried to stop their human trafficking. Barack Obama sold them guns. and encouraged the trafficking of children to be used as pawns to get across the border. Many were abandoned on the US side of the border, to become street children or sold into sex slavery. To this day the Dems are remarkably silent about the human trafficking and sex slavery based on the preying on illegal immigrants, instead complaining when children are separated from the adults who take them to the border to make sure they are actually with adults who are their parents or legal guardians. If there are "crimes against humanity" they include turning a blind eye to these egregious crimes.
Amazona January 6, 2021 / 1:08 am
Funny how we never hear criticism of Joe Biden's adultery with the wife of a friend. He was not only having an affair with the wife of a friend, he later made up a complicated story of their "first date".
Joe Biden had five military deferments and then suddenly developed "asthma" in his 20s, an affliction he seemed to quickly outgrow once he had a permanent deferment. Donald Trump, on the other hand, still has the bone spurs in his heels that kept him out of military service. (Barack Obama just never registered for the draft.)
I was thinking more along the lines of;
"I voted for the Man who gave up his wealth for my country. Not the 'man' who gave up his country for his wealth."
The Agenda Media have called the Georgia races. I don't know if an official count is in yet. I do know, from following it yesterday, that the same old crooks were playing by the same old handbook. A judge had to order visual blocking removed and reorganization of counting tables because poll watchers were not allowed to see ballots, and even after the reorganization they were required to stand ten feet away.
This was after, early in the day, machines already showed "programming errors" and law enforcement had to deliver whatever was needed to "fix" them.
Just voted in Newton County Georgia. Heavy republican district.. When I went to place my printed ballot into the dominion machine, the poll worked said the scanner was broken and someone was coming to fix it, I placed it in the machine slot but not in the scanner.
"Dominion machines in 3 of the largest Republican precincts are down.They are told they cant scan their ballots because the machines dont work.The pole workers are saying 'When it's fixed we'll scan it for you'. There's all kinds of red flags"
Really? Just leave that ballot here and we'll scan it for you later?
What I found most interesting was that Trafalger, the polling company, had to factor in more than 3% to cover fraud when they calculated their odds. One might think that under the intense scrutiny of the Georgia frauds and the spotlight then focused on how it was going to run this election the criminals might have backed off, but no…..it's the Same Old Same Old. Including stopping counting till the next day. Or whenever.
…after that announcement went out that Chatham County officials would be going home tonight and it went all over the internet, I kept looking at the count on the Decision Desk for the county. It had been at 84% after that announcement.
Lo and behold, sometime after they announced that they were going home, if it didn't jump up to 99% counted and it was in that jump that Ossoff took the lead. It's this kind of stuff that makes people crazy and makes them doubt what the heck is going on.
So can we ask were poll watchers sent home? Did they continue counting as they did before without poll watchers?
"Once is chance, twice is coincidence, three times is a pattern." So we see the same thing happening, time after time, four times in the national election and now a fifth in the Georgia runoff, where poll watchers were placed so they couldn't see ballots and then canvassers stopped counting, after which a large number of votes that just happened to shift the balance to the Dem appeared, in the time period when canvassers had supposedly stopped counting.
Another version of that saying is "Once is chance, twice is coincidence, more is enemy action."
Does this mean that 14% of the outstanding votes were somehow counted after they "stopped counting"? That's a pretty big vote dump for a few minutes, and if they were at 99% why stop to come back the next day for a measly one percent?
Apparently a lot of people in Georgia were upset that they only got $600 instead of $2,000 in COVID relief. I'm not sure how you beat a party that bribes voters with free stuff and then fills in any shortfall by cheating. I don't think we could out-bribe and out-cheat them even if we wanted to.
A caller to one of the daytime talk radio shows yesterday nailed it when he said we have one party that says they want to open the borders, make millions of illegal aliens citizens, provide a guaranteed income and free abortions, free college and forgive current student loan debt, and the other party that says they are the firewall to stop all that.
Let me rephrase that: Apparently a lot of people in Georgia were so bone-deep stupid they blamed the Republican Party because they only got $600 instead of $2,000 in COVID relief so they decided it made sense to sentence themselves to six years of incompetent representation in the Senate to teach the GOP a lesson,
There: fixed
From a lawsuit filed in California to fight against elections fraud:
Practices that promote the casting of illegal or unreliable ballots fail to contain basic minimum guarantees against such conduct are a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment by leading to the diminution in value of validly cast ballots.
This is true, period, no matter where it happens. Though this suit is in California, the same problems and the same principles apply wherever election rules have been changed to make fraud easier to accomplish and harder to prove.
Over the past three decades in California, the rights of California citizens to choose their representatives by means of a fair, honest and transparent electoral process have been intentionally eroded by an onslaught of unconstitutional statutes, regulations and executive orders that, taken together, are designed to create an environment in which elections could be manipulated and eligible voters disenfranchised.
I've been saying for years that instead of just hollering about ineligible votes being cast we ought to start suing the states and especially those handling elections for disenfranchisement. When an illegitimate vote is counted, it cancels out my legitimate vote, thereby disenfranchising me. Instead of broad-based actions against government entities, I have been saying we need to take the battle directly to the individuals who are responsible.
The Constitution of the United States guarantees the right of every eligible citizen to cast an equal vote to determine who will represent him or her in government through the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment and, in the case of Federal congressional elections, through the Elections Clause (Art. I, § 4, cl. 1). This makes depriving me of my legal vote to enable an illegal vote to be counted is a federal offense.
Here we go again. On @CNN
O 945,050
P 774,723
P 743,323 -31400
O 951,474 +6424
P 745,835 +2512
Reuters stream. Has it too.
O 945050
P 742323 -31400
If you watch the Reuters YouTube, it literally flips with Perdue numbers at 1:31:51 going backwards from 774,723 to 742,323, taking 32,000 from Perdue.
Why do they think they can get away with blatantly changing vote tallies? Easy—because they can. Because they have enough yapping hyenas out there flooding blogs like ours with claims that we are fools to trust our lying eyes, because they have been successful in just outlasting objections till they fade away, because complicit Agenda Media cover for them, and because an equally complicit "legal system" refuses to hold them accountable.
You wouldn't even call it "bank robbery" if the bank president left the doors to the bank and vault open, the police escorted the getaway car out of town and the newspaper denied that the depositors just lost their money. That's the way our elections are feeling these days.
A little ray of sunshine amidst the sea of darkness. The Dem majority in the House of Representatives, already the smallest in 80 years, just got narrower by one of their own switching sides.
While we might not see any more Congressmen switching official party affiliation, I think we might see some refusing to vote for policies that are clearly designed to undermine the core principles of the Constitution. This might be due to principles, or it might be due to political pressure and the knowledge that supporting such a radical erosion of our Constitution will result in a resounding defeat in two years, or possibly the realization that history will not be kind to those who collude in this kind of attack on the Constitution, but I have no problem in seeing a few defectors from the Pelosi lockstep total obedience template.
Particularly as she is losing support anyway. Given the radical Leftward lurch by the party, there may be some moderates who want to steer it back toward the middle. Hard as it is to believe, there might be some ethical, principled Democrats in Congress. I think it would a good idea for Republicans to identify such potential patriots, as well as Representatives whose victory margins were small, and focus on them as they are asked to vote to undermine the very structure of our government.
I'd like to comment on the violent protests at the U.S. Capitol this afternoon. As someone who took my Constitutional oath as sacred, I'm saddened by people who, I'm sure, largely share my views on politics have decided that it's a good idea to lay siege to the Capitol. I'm saddened but not surprised. I said a while back that everyone has his or her own line in the sand , that breaking point where they feel they have nothing left to lose, and it appears thousands have reached that point today. When you repeatedly poke someone in the eye with a sharp stick, you can't be surprised when they eventually fight back. I hope this is settled quickly and saner minds prevail.
Spook, I am surprised that you suspect Trump supporters. Back in 2016 James O'Keefe had recordings of Leftist activists admitting they had been paid to incite violence at Trump rallies. You yourself saw Leftists infiltrate TEA Party gatherings when media showed up, to wave their racist signs for the cameras and then leave. The guest host on Rush's show this morning said he had seen intelligence reports of Antifa chatter about infiltrating the Trump supporters, wearing MAGA hats and red clothes and Trump regalia, to start trouble. Louie Gomert said on Hannity just a while ago that last night Capital police told him they had all been called in to be ready for today because they had been told to expect violence from radicals posing as Trump supporters.
So I have a very hard time imagining why any true Trump supporter would, in this last chance to salvage a stolen election, act to sabotage that by acting like a Leftist. With an unbroken history of peaceful demonstrations now we are supposed to think Trump supporters have decided to go all Antifa on us and riot? Not just after losing, but on the verge of a possible victory?
A sign of the times, though—–on the radio, as I was coming home, I heard a Fox news reader, who had spent a year referring to "protesters" even as they burned, looted, pillaged and attacked, refer to the people in DC as "rioters".
I am very frustrated by the willingness of some conservatives to quickly adopt the Leftist narrative of bad old Trump supporters snapping and striking out. It just doesn't make sense.
Louie Gomert said on Hannity just a while ago that last night Capital police told him they had all been called in to be ready for today because they had been told to expect violence from radicals posing as Trump supporters.
I hope that turns out to be the case. I've been especially proud to identify with people who DON'T engage in this sort of conduct.
As someone who took my Constitutional oath as sacred I am still pondering what I really believe these days. Has nothing to do with the idiot droppings here who now want jack boots on everyone's neck but whether there will be a place for me to call home. ExPat? Not really my style.I do know from what little I have heard is Tillis and Pence will never secure another vote from me. Pence was in my top 3 in 2016 but no longer. If I even intend to vote any longer. Only missed one municipal since 1978 and that was for illness. Even worked on others city, state and national before I was able to vote.
My line in the sand, so to speak is to speak–I will publish or manage to disseminate everything possible about all those griffting whether they are here in NC or national. Do not know how much may be coming but I will create an accessible source of information for all of those interested. Not biased, just the facts and let the general population decide. Nevertheless, there is the problem-it is the uneducated, no matter how educated the deem themselves, that have lead us to this fork on a very dark path.
God Bless us All as we sort this out.
"Congress in undisclosed location, considering invoking 25th Amendment to have Trump removed from office effective immediately"
Yeah, well, if that is true all it does is support the idea that to be a member of Congress one has to pass a test on the Constitution. A vocabulary test would be helpful, too, to ensure a better understanding of words like "treason".
What this really means is that the Dems are afraid, very afraid, that an investigation which openly shines light on the various crimes and irregularities and frauds of this election might make officials rethink their casual and politically motivated "certifications" and leave Trump in office, so they are telegraphing their desperate panicked effort to get him removed before the election results can be truly investigated and those who casually certified them have to stand by their actions after seeing the evidence.
I do hope that those who are behind this violence are arrested and prosecuted as harshly as those who rioted, looted and burned for much of last year.
rsandilands January 6, 2021 / 8:25 pm
Half of right wing twitter right now is saying this is a false flag by antifa and the other half is posting pictures from the capitol saying this is me! i'm doing this!
And of course the "other half" is really "the other half of 'right-wing twitter'" and not more false flags.
sandilands (@sandilands) January 6, 2021 / 10:14 pm
https://www.kusi.com/kusi-news-confirms-identity-of-woman-shot-and-killed-inside-us-capitol/
Sure looks like antifa to me.
I should say, so it continues. This is not the first person murdered for being a Trump supporter.
I am not surprised that Mike Pence's reading of the 12th Amendment is that he must open and count each EC vote envelope. I have always respected his integrity even when I didn't agree with him.
I do support the challenges to the certifications because I think it is time we stop letting people get away with cheating by simply looking the other way. I see certification of a state's votes as a very important, even sacred, duty and to see it demeaned on the altar of either political agenda or fear of the mob is disgusting. At the very least a commission should be empaneled, and each of those officials who certified questionable and even blatantly fraudulent votes should at the very least face cross examination by Ted Cruz to explain how they arrived at their conclusions. False certification is a crime, and should be investigated as such.
I am tired of the Left's defaulting to Column A (that never happened) or Column B (who cares?)
and getting away with it. At the very least people like Kemp and Raffensperger should have to be sworn in and testify about why they seem to have based their crucial decisions on either Column A or Column B. They owe us answers. So do the legislature, governor and secretary of state of Pennsylvania and Michigan.
As far as that goes, I want an explanation of why the Supreme Court refused to hear the case that the Constitution assigned to them—that of a lawsuit among states.
62 court cases and you still want an explanation?
Oh, Petal, you're really not going to try to pick up that tired old theme and run with it, are you? At least you seem to have given up that breathless fluttery little "what evidence?" sham, now that you are parroting the same old same old.
But OK—name a single court case that was heard, actually heard in a court of law, with witnesses and evidence. Just one. Where and when? Who brought the case, who testified, and who ruled on the testimony?
Here's 4 decisions where the evidence was considered and rejected. You can take the knee pads off now, it's over.
pic.twitter.com/yA9Gitu7G2
— sandilands (@sandilands) January 7, 2021
Here they is, is they?
Knee pads? Got quite a mouth on you, don't you, Petal? Charming. Ever do any thinking or writing of your own, or just vomit up what someone else has fed you?
BTW, the rejections were procedural and not rejections of the evidence itself. Usually, the plaintiffs offer just enough to get the court to agree to hear the case, and do not present their entire case in the original pleading. This court chose to dodge its responsibility by carping that the pleading didn't present all the evidence. And you didn't answer my question, you just pasted some fragments of unidentified comments, supposedly from some court commentary somewhere.
I believe the highlighted portion of your "evidence" is from what is known as the Catch-22 Ruling. That is, the case was thrown out because the court said it should have been filed earlier, before the election, but the law says that a challenge couldn't be filed till after an election.
("Catch-22". A literary reference. Look it up.)
There was a lot of this procedural game playing going on as courts scrambled to avoid having to actually do their jobs.
If we nominate Trump, we will get destroyed…….and we will deserve it.
— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) May 3, 2016
Yeah, Lindsay was not a big Trump fan. Neither was I. As a matter of fact, I was strenuously anti-Trump. Not because I thought he would be a bad president, because I thought he would probably be pretty good, at least in some areas, and after all, after Obama the bar was set awfully low. I was just afraid he would be a bad candidate.
Once he got the nomination, I supported his election, because I am a political person and of the two options we had he was the marginally more likely to govern according to the Constitution. Again, the bar was pretty low, knowing what Hillary would do with the job—after she posted her fee schedule on line, that is.
At first I thought the obviously invented lies about Trump were sour grapes because he snatched the coronation of Queen Hillary out from under her nose, but I started to realize that it was more than that—it was an acknowledgment by the Left that he scared them spitless. And as he got rolling in his presidency I could see why. I became a Trump fan as I saw him skillfully dismantling the fabric of Leftist dominance based on its steady acquisition of power through political appointments of Leftist agents in positions of power in federal agencies, accompanied by the steady growth of size, scope and power of those agencies. I was very impressed with his deftness in understanding the issues and then addressing them, while keeping those efforts mostly under the radar.
Unlike you Identity Politics fan-club types, I didn't have to like his personality, which I sometimes found annoying, or his quirks like his Twitter obsession. But they didn't bother me because I am a problem solver and I loved watching him solve problems. As I said when your kind started whining about something he had said or done, I never wanted to date Trump, I wanted to hire him.
And he was a hell of a hire, outperforming amazingly well while shrugging off the nonstop vitriol and merciless attacks. BTW, I notice that you, in typically dishonest fashion, neglected to point out that Lindsey Graham underwent much the same kind of growing appreciation for Trump. But then, people like you find honesty so darned inconvenient, you just never let it get in your way.
If the "we" Graham meant was the old style GOP, then good riddance. That is the party of John McCain, Mitt Romney, other swamp creatures with hardly a hint of commitment to Constitutional governance. When I look at the Republicans who have come to the forefront under a Trump presidency I am thrilled. While the Left has fossils or lightweights like AOC, we have so much depth on the bench it is an embarrassment of riches.
So your snarky little effort to demean Trump just pointed out how inherently nasty you are, how inherently dishonest you are, and how well you fit into the trollerverse that is trying to infect this blog.
So piss off
We need to get past the idea that an orderly transition of power depends on validation of the illegal means of acquiring it. The Left did not win the election, but they did win the battle for the White House. The president should, and will. leave the office with dignity but he does not have to, nor should he, concede that the vote count leading to the Electoral College vote was legitimate.
The Left started working toward this end game on January 20th, 2016, if not earlier. When I see GOP swamp rats abandoning the Trump ship in order to not jeopardize their continued employment in the swamp, I question whether Conservatives have the wherewithal to continue to play the game. It's going to take some time to digest the events of the last 2 months and then another 3 months or so to determine just how much of a threat to our way of life this new administration is going to be. They're certainly not getting off on the right foot if their desire is to unite the country. And, of course, we all knew that was never the plan. If they're willing to do this to Trump with 13 days left in office, I can only imagine what they have planned for those of us who supported him.
They don't want to defeat Trump, they want to destroy him. They want to crush him, burn him, shatter his bones and scatter his ashes—and then go after his children, his wife, his grandchildren and of course those of us who have supported him.
Anyone who watches the savage insane obsession with utterly destroying this man who doesn't feel a chill of concern about how this regime will treat others it finds objectionable or simply not adequately submissive is just not paying attention.
Trump did the unforgivable—he showed the world the truth about the Left, he showed us how to dismantle their power structure and then he forced them strip away any pretense of honesty or decency to get him out of the White House. For these transgressions there is no punishment severe enough to sate their blood lust.
John Solomon is one of my favorite investigative reporters. His analysis of this election cycle is spot on.
All branches are the federal government are now under the control of socialists. Future elections do not look good for the foreseeable future. Families will struggle to put food on their tables. Energy will be regulated to the hilt, poverty will skyrocket. children will be force fed a steady diet of transgender studies in schools, abortion will be mandatory, guns will be confiscated and seized, Antifa the new Nazis will become the "police" and anyone who doesn't fit their definition of
"American" will be offed, there will be forced vaccinations. Everyone will be forced to bow to Big Brother. Welcome to the Third Reich
One thing that occurred to me when I first heard of the Antifa chatter about infiltrating the Trump supporters wearing Trump hats, shirts and so on, was that throughout history this kind of behavior has been considered worthy of the sternest punishment. I believe that under the Geneva Conventions wearing the uniform of the enemy could be punished by execution. This has always been considered a very serious violation even in war.
But the plans by Leftists to do this at this rally seem to be quite acceptable to the Left. But then, what disgusting, illegal or immoral thing isn't? The pearl clutching by the Usual Suspects over this Capital event is just insane. The overheated hyperbolic rhetoric would be funny if it were not so sinister.
jake goldblum (@Jakegoldblum) January 8, 2021 / 12:11 pm
jeremiah you are moron probably on food stamps with this logic. Give me a break. There is hardly any difference between the democrats and republicans at this point. I really wonder how you think the democrats are applauding antifa taking over the capital. Trump ignited a riot that stormed the capital building, hurt 5 people and injured 40 police officers and all i hear is how unacceptable it is. I do not think that is out of bounds. Your rhetoric is so ridiculous. Talk facts instead of rhetoric. I can't wait till they shut facebook down so these crazy places you get news get shut down. That is the real crime in all of this. Yes- if it is antifa or whoever it was wrong ot storm the capital but Trump ignited a riot and caused many problems. If you want me to list the reasons Trump is a fascist i can do that easily.
If you want me to prove to you PA voting was legit i can do that to you but you have to be open to ideas. Facts are facts and pa had paper trails. My parents voted by mail in pa and they litearlly had a piece of paper, with their signature and it was never thrown out and it was verified. What trump did to cast doubt on this election should be illegal.
@worstpresident
RT @jsolomonReports: LISTEN NOW: Bombshell revelations as Trump declassifies all FBI documents in Russia probe | Just The News https://t.co… 6 days ago
RT @ScottAdamsSays: In an effort to avoid being banned from all communication and banking platforms, I'd like to publicly affirm that our e… 1 week ago
RT @RealSaavedra: Democrat Nancy Pelosi held up coronavirus relief for 8 months but managed to get articles of impeachment on the House flo… 1 week ago
RT @TheRightMelissa: Thanksgiving in a blue state where tyrants like @LoriLightfoot are gonna get you arrested for the crime of celebratin… 1 month ago
@BillyBaldwin Biden won't have an inauguration 2 months ago
Follow @worstpresident
The Start of a New Error
Purge, or Liberation?
Archives Select Month January 2021 (9) December 2020 (12) November 2020 (15) October 2020 (9) September 2020 (8) August 2020 (8) July 2020 (8) June 2020 (9) May 2020 (10) April 2020 (11) March 2020 (14) February 2020 (8) January 2020 (8) December 2019 (11) November 2019 (8) October 2019 (10) September 2019 (9) August 2019 (10) July 2019 (12) June 2019 (9) May 2019 (13) April 2019 (16) March 2019 (14) February 2019 (16) January 2019 (16) December 2018 (10) November 2018 (9) October 2018 (11) September 2018 (11) August 2018 (13) July 2018 (11) June 2018 (8) May 2018 (5) April 2018 (12) March 2018 (12) February 2018 (8) January 2018 (9) December 2017 (7) November 2017 (8) October 2017 (9) September 2017 (6) August 2017 (10) July 2017 (10) June 2017 (7) May 2017 (8) April 2017 (10) March 2017 (10) February 2017 (10) January 2017 (14) December 2016 (18) November 2016 (13) October 2016 (10) September 2016 (15) August 2016 (13) July 2016 (14) June 2016 (13) May 2016 (18) April 2016 (13) March 2016 (17) February 2016 (15) January 2016 (11) December 2015 (12) November 2015 (11) October 2015 (10) September 2015 (13) August 2015 (17) July 2015 (15) June 2015 (13) May 2015 (9) April 2015 (9) March 2015 (13) February 2015 (11) January 2015 (14) December 2014 (11) November 2014 (14) October 2014 (16) September 2014 (8) August 2014 (10) July 2014 (14) June 2014 (10) May 2014 (16) April 2014 (14) March 2014 (12) February 2014 (6) January 2014 (9) December 2013 (13) November 2013 (14) October 2013 (12) September 2013 (21) August 2013 (18) July 2013 (12) June 2013 (13) May 2013 (17) April 2013 (16) March 2013 (26) February 2013 (22) January 2013 (26) December 2012 (30) November 2012 (35) October 2012 (39) September 2012 (42) August 2012 (35) July 2012 (23) June 2012 (33) May 2012 (20) April 2012 (22) March 2012 (25) February 2012 (21) January 2012 (28) December 2011 (27) November 2011 (23) October 2011 (41) September 2011 (136) August 2011 (156) July 2011 (136) June 2011 (138) May 2011 (155) April 2011 (151) March 2011 (156) February 2011 (136) January 2011 (126) December 2010 (140) November 2010 (143) October 2010 (163) September 2010 (144) August 2010 (140) July 2010 (130) June 2010 (135) May 2010 (134) April 2010 (120) March 2010 (141) February 2010 (136) January 2010 (136) December 2009 (145) November 2009 (172) October 2009 (187) September 2009 (175) August 2009 (198) July 2009 (213) June 2009 (194) May 2009 (172) April 2009 (144) March 2009 (153) February 2009 (115) January 2009 (138) December 2008 (103) November 2008 (135) October 2008 (192) September 2008 (182) August 2008 (139) July 2008 (129) June 2008 (142) May 2008 (75) April 2008 (46) March 2008 (54) February 2008 (60) January 2008 (52) December 2007 (67) November 2007 (40)
9/11 abortion Anti-Semitism AOC Bernie Sanders Biden Blue Wave Campaign 2020 Catholicism China Christianity Christmas climate change Coronavirus Coronovirus crony capitalism Deep State Distributism Donald Trump Egypt Gaza global warming hoax gun control Hillary immigration Impeachment Iran Iraq Islam Israel Jeffrey Epstein Joe Biden Kavanaugh liberal fascism liberal lies Lockdown make/mine/grow Mass Shooting media bias middle east Mirrors MSM Mueller Nancy Pelosi Never Trump Nikki Haley North Korea Obama Planned Parenthood Polls Pope Francis President Trump Rand Paul Red Wave Riots Ronald Reagan ruling class Russia Scott Walker secession Second American Revolution Secrets Sinai stock market Stop_The_Steal Supreme Court Syria tax and spend liberalism TDS TEA Party Ted Cruz The Wall Trump-Russia West Bank Worst President