TMPHBITEU
And the media has finally turned on Cuomo: My story of working with Governor Cuomo | by Lindsey Boylan | Feb, 2021 | Medium
Not for killing thousands of old people imprisoned in nursing homes, but for playing grab-ass with the staff girls. Loss for words.
And the Biden Administration plows ahead with stupid people as nominees for important positions because of their identity, qualifications be damned:
5 Times Deb Haaland Refused to Answer Basic Questions – PJ Media
Tyler is quite wrong about this. This is a genuinely stupid person, not playing at all.Rep. Deb Haaland (D-N.M.), President Joe Biden’s nominee for secretary of the interior, refused to answer basic questions about energy and fossil fuels on public lands. Haaland had previously campaigned on eliminating oil and gas production in New Mexico and Biden has pledged to eliminate drilling on public lands, yet the nominee played dumb when faced with elementary questions on these issues.
Member
Historically a nation of unconquerable collective fortitude, peerless individual elegance and unsurpassed kick-ass Empirical power has turned into a nation of cowering canines. Still not beyond saving but the prospects do not look good at this rate.Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe
Member
Let's not lose sight of what counts as "offensive" these days. It's not considered offensive, as it was in 1940's Germany, to engage in or promote "degenerate" behaviour, or to ridicule or even question authority. In today's society, that won't get you sent to a concentration camp - it will probably get you a promotion at work. Or at least get laid.
It's not offensive to take your 3 or 4 year-old child and psychologically and physically abuse them by convincing them they have been born into the "wrong" body and can become anything they want to be, in that particular moment. This is the logical end-point of tabula rasa and liberal thought.
It's certainly not offensive or "hateful" to single out white people, as a racial group, and chastise them for their perceived group-behaviour, or just accuse them of various heinous things, on the basis of their skin colour.
It is only offensive when ethnic minorities, homosexuals or transgendered people are involved and you don't even have to call them a bad name to fall foul of the law. You just need to question the ideas surrounding their identities.
I'm not sure how the 2nd Amendment protects a society against this kind of liberal tyranny. Our civilisation is half-dead, and both of our societies are being feasted on by maggots while we gasp our last breaths - you just happen to be bristling with guns while this happens.
Two things to think about today:
China apologizes for forcing Biden's staff to submit to anal Covid exams. Around 50 members of Biden's team were subjected to anal penetration on one or more occasions from Chinese Communist Party doctors. China promises to stop.
China Gave US Diplomats Anal COVID Tests ‘In Error,’ American Officials Say
Mr. Potato Head is no longer a mister. Hasbro, the company that makes the potato-shaped plastic toy, is giving the spud a gender neutral new name: Potato Head. The change will appear on boxes this year.
A mister no more: Mr. Potato Head goes gender neutral
Member
Mrs Potato Head is said to be distraught and not available for comment. These woke imbeciles are destroying the world.
Member
The 2nd Amendment only works in combination with collective, unified action.
90% (probably higher) of the US population are too scared right now to go outside without a mask on, not because they fear dying from COVID19 (they know it is bullshit too), but because they fear the repercussions for disobeying. If people are not willing to take off a mask in public, what on earth makes anyone think they will be willing to take up arms? Acknowledged that it only took a tiny percentage to initiate the Civil War in 1861, a catalytic event no doubt, but the question is can that percentage be found now?
I don't think so. But I very much want to be wrong.
TMPHBITEU
Look at it like this: There are about 400 million guns in the hands of about 100 million Americans. There are a combined total of about 1.5 million law enforcement/military personnel. Who is going to take the guns? Under what circumstances will armed Americans willingly turn their weapons over to the government? How does the government know what percentage of those 100 million will roll over? I know that most people are pussies, but most people have not been presented with a no-shit deal-breaker yet, and gun confiscation represents not only the end of the 2nd Amendment, but the end of the US as it has been known. Neither the government nor you or I know what would happen under those extreme circumstances. But we have the numbers, and they know that.
Why is there a severe ammo shortage right now? Why are guns more expensive than ever before? These questions are very important, to us and to those who would be tasked with enforcing the end of the 2nd Amendment. I know that far from a majority of the military and a minority of the cops would participate in the confiscation of the weapons of otherwise law-abiding Americans, because 1.) they are not suicidal, and 2.) they won't follow such an order.
Member
When you put it like that, I understand.
I guess then we have a situation where gun laws are passed that simply cannot or won't be enforced.
What exactly would be a no-shit deal-breaker be though?
In 2019 if you had told me that the nation would be placed under house arrest, be forced to wear muzzles, business's shut down, effective treatments banned, elective surgeries cancelled, the election stolen, and then half the nation asked to accept a new government order who's idea of SCIENCE is essentially 2+Watermelon=Poodle, I would have said not a chance. Yet here we are.
Maybe it's not a process of turning up at people's houses with vans of armed police. I know John Lovell has some good content on his site regarding much sneakier ways the government may attempt to phase out the 2A, such as massive increases in import duties/tax/insurance etc.
✓ Member
This is a topic I feel I need to learn a lot more about.
My impression is that gun/ammo prices spike up fairly often. Of course we know why.
From my point of view, this indicates a more or less linear erosion of rights through legislation, not amending the constitution and outright prohibition. Perhaps an impartial projection would say there will be no private ownership of firearms in 100yrs? And, isn’t that scenario far more likely than picking a side and shooting it out?
I am not making a political statement, nor am I being defeatist. I’m just pointing out this is a 100yr problem, not a 1 yr problem.
Member
Leaked Emails Confirm UN Gave Names of Dissidents to CCP
Leaked Emails Confirm UN Gave Names of Dissidents to CCP
The UN is almost as hopelessly corrupt as the US government
TMPHBITEU
I've been wrong so many times this year that I'm out of the prediction business. All I can say is that you'll know it when you see it.
There are already 400 million guns in the hands of 100 million people. We are the most heavily armed society in the history of the earth. And we make most of our own guns here, so import duties are silly. And we will not pay taxes on guns we already possess, nor will we buy insurance if ordered to do so. If they want criminalize 30% of the population, let them do so. Criminals don't obey laws, and that is a dangerous thing to teach to an otherwise law-abiding population.Maybe it's not a process of turning up at people's houses with vans of armed police. I know John Lovell has some good content on his site regarding much sneakier ways the government may attempt to phase out the 2A, such as massive increases in import duties/tax/insurance etc.
You will enjoy tomorrow's podcast.
My god, you're right.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote