Reply With QuoteWhere in the last few years of this thread have I ever said that?Originally Posted by Subby
Member
I think it's naive to act as if things will snap back to normal, when previous history has shown a 3 steps forward 1 step back cycle.
Member
Where in the last few years of this thread have I ever said that?
Member
You said the states are the last thing remaining to push back the federal government. I think it's naive to think that the final outcome of that will be a positive one.
Member
https://freebeacon.com/campus/a-fail...isted-at-ucla/
Witness the power of ideology, this is already illegal, both state and federally and this lucero retard is still doing it. And when she's fired she will fail upward and find a better position courtesy of her ideological allies in other organisations. At best she might face charges of some kind, which she'll be able to afford great legal representation to get her off anything serious A) because of her highly paid position for the past few years and B) ideologically allied lawyers who will represent her pro bono or at lower cost.
And the worst part is bolded below:
On "our side" there is just nothing similar and it's naïve to expect "the process" to return UCLA to normal.For certain applicants, they say, hardship and community service seem to be the only things that matter to the majority of the committee's 20-30 members, many of whom were handpicked by Lucero,
Member
And where did I say that? Subby, I don't think you're following what I'm putting down, here. Go back and read it with a bias that leans less naive and more with one for a healthy appreciation for rural to small city culture in the Continental U.S. with a need to maintain enough order that commerce, industry and agriculture can continue in a sufficient capacity to ensure, at least regionally, there's not a total collapse.
What else are you expecting to dislodge the federal government? Civil unrest and peaceful disobedience? Where did that lead the last time? Every civil rights bill passed into law protected who? Or did it gut the Black community at the family level?
Why would corporations large enough to push back against the government spend time and treasure resisting what they can buy through lobbyists with big returns on a long term investment?
Civil war, maybe? Big battles? Key points and resources seized? Guerilla hit and run tactics? Territory won and held? Enemy armies destroyed? What was the end state the last time that happened? Did it lead to the reduction of federal power?
No, the federal government's powers must be shattered, but it won't be from violence or some large hammer blow, and enough of them should know that full civil war would be them committing suicide by immediately destroying the foundations of their power base. Why do you think the federal government and intelligence agencies haven't used the military, and instead opted for fifth generation warfare? Bad optics? The goodness of their hearts?
The States exist as the last meaningful entities to do it by each taking back the powers lost to the federal government handful by handful. Sure, violence and unrest are likely (probably unavoidable), but that is a problem the States have both strategic and tactical advantages in. Smart local and state leaders will be working on the bigger problems of making sure the gears keep turning rather than exclusively preparing for something as relatively trivial as mere armed conflict.
But, hey... I guess total collapse with death rates in the tens to hundreds of millions would technically work. It certainly did for Communism every time it's been tried. It's just not an option I want to go with.
TMPHBITEU
David is right, subby. The fall-back mechanism here has always been the state governments, and enough people know that to make it a serious consideration for the Feds.
Member
The only way the large land area (western) states with relatively small populations will be able to do what's being discussed will be to sell the roads, and that is if the state governments can find a buyer. The states have been conditioned, intentionally so, to be reliant on the federal highway money to maintain the roads, which forces the acquiescence of the states to the federal government juggernaut in all areas. What does a person want to bet that there hasn't been a single person in the state government class that has even thought of selling the 'public' roads to private interests?
TMPHBITEU
Good point.
__________________________________________________
This is how Caneedia maintains the narrative: https://x.com/CitizenFreePres/status...20670286717169
__________________________________________________
The boys in New Jersey finally win: NJ gym owner who defied Covid lockdowns WINS legal battle | Blaze Media
When New Jersey gym owners Ian Smith and Frank Trumbetti defied the Garden State’s COVID-19 regulations by keeping their gym open, the pair were ordered to pay around $165,000 in fines for violating public health emergency rules.
After an almost four-year legal battle, Smith has been cleared of more than 80 charges.
These charges were “thrown at us really to scare us into shutting down,” Smith tells Sara Gonzales. “When that didn’t work, Governor Murphy took those municipal charges as well as a health department shutdown order and went before a judge in New Jersey.”
Murphy asked for a court order to close Smith’s business, which Smith explains is “where a lot of the really tangible, very scary punishments came in."
Member
Just think of what state and local governments could do with a modest increase in taxes if the federal tax rates on individuals and corporations was reduced by 95%...
Member
You guys really do live in a wonderful place. In my country, the state governments hate us too.
Posting Permissions