CaptUSA
Member

It’s one of my faves too. I rewatch it every now and then when I’m feeling nostalgic for the 70s.

Looking around this forum lately I’d say we don’t need governments for that. We’re doing a pretty damn good job of it ourselves.

I can't think of any genocide Joe's involved in that Trump didn't start, wouldn't continue, and/or wouldn't keep financing for some "ally" or another.

Yeah, I know where you're stuck at. Theye're counting on that. Good luck with that in this day and age.

I maintain my insistence on https://freedomisobvious.blogspot.com/2021/07/amendment-xxix.html

I gave up there.

Man, you just don’t get it. We’re going to TAX our way to prosperity and security. Oh wait, we’ve got to do one more thing. Maintain a rigidly enforced hegemony. You know, looking at that again, it kinda reminds me of something.

I get your point. What Sonny Tufts seems to be missing is the fact that you don't pick your plaintiffs. Well....sometimes people do. Rosa Parks wasn't the first black women not to give up her seat on a Montgomery bus, but the woman before her was a single mom and back then the left cared about appearances. Fast forward to the 21st century and a druggie who robbed a pregnant woman at gunpoint, but nonetheless was murdered by a cop (no excuse for Chauvin to have his knee on Floyd's neck 2 minutes after Floyd no longer had a pulse), became an international hero for....dying. And it's not like there haven't been more sympathetic black people killed by police. Elijah McClain was just walking home listening to music, wearing a ski mask because of his allergies and he was attacked by police and then overdosed by EMTs with ketamine. That was just a year before George Floyd. But how many people know his name? (I had to look it up). I think Floyd was a matter of timing. It was close enough to affect the 2020 election and far enough away from the First Step Act for all of the goodwill Trump had generated in the black community to have evaporated.

Possible perjury for him having said he didn't have such messages on his phone. Needlessly delaying and driving up the litigation costs by not cooperating with discovery. Disobeying a lawful court order. Yes. The attorney screwed up multiple ways. But it also sounds like Alex didn't tell the truth about whether or not he did any texts about Sandy Hook. There are two possibilities. 1) Alex just "forgot" and his lawyer didn't refresh his memory by helping him search through his own cell phone. 2) AJ didn't want the records out and told his attorney not to turn them over. It's still his attorney's screw up. He should have convinced Alex to turn the records over and explained to him how they would mitigate the situation. The Paul Joseph Watson comment about the COVID dummies and his statement "This is like Sandy Hook" wasn't necessarily fatal to their case. They could have argued that both were examples of unintentional mistakes that were cleared up as soon as possible. Sometimes the best answer is "I don't recall" as opposed to an emphatic "No." But also in this case there was a specific question that Alex could easily check and verify. Further, 99% of the time before you have someone under oath you do written discovery AKA interrogatories and requests for production of documents. Normally you have 30 days to comply though the time often gets extended. So there was probably an interrogatory question on paper that said "Do you send or receive any text messages about Sandy Hook" followed by "produce any text messages you sent or received about Sandy Hook." The lawyer should have found that, told Alex the answer to the interrogatory was "yes" and then created a file with a copy of all of those messages to turn over. Why that didn't happen? That's between Alex and his lawyer.

Rand and Trump? Trump didn't veto it, dude. He signed it. Amash and Paul were the two working toward the same end. They might have stood a chance if Trump hadn't been involved. Or is that a truth you can't handle?

Oakland? Last I checked, it's an awfully long way from Oakland to the orange bridge. One wonders why they didn't spare the earth that excess carbon and just block the Bay Bridge.

An asymmetric look is cultural appropriation! Are they going to start parting their hair too?

Of all the lies NPR and other leftists peddled, this is the one I find the most shocking. Politics also intruded into NPR’s Covid coverage, most notably in reporting on the origin of the pandemic. One of the most dismal aspects of Covid journalism is how quickly it defaulted to ideological story lines. For example, there was Team Natural Origin—supporting the hypothesis that the virus came from a wild animal market in Wuhan, China. And on the other side, Team Lab Leak, leaning into the idea that the virus escaped from a Wuhan lab. The lab leak theory came in for rough treatment almost immediately, dismissed as racist or a right-wing conspiracy theory. Anthony Fauci and former NIH head Francis Collins, representing the public health establishment, were its most notable critics. And that was enough for NPR. We became fervent members of Team Natural Origin, even declaring that the lab leak had been debunked by scientists. But that wasn’t the case. When word first broke of a mysterious virus in Wuhan, a number of leading virologists immediately suspected it could have leaked from a lab there conducting experiments on bat coronaviruses. This was in January 2020, during calmer moments before a global pandemic had been declared, and before fear spread and politics intruded.

It isn't so much a different take, I think, as a different definition of what is is. Or rather, a different definition of who "they" is. Is he a monkey wrench in the plans of the radical left, the people who are getting so much glowing press from the MSM that they look downright official? Sure. He was designed to be. I wasn't talking about the useful idiots currently "in favor". I'm talking about the particular " them" to whom he is indeed useful. And I think he's useful to them mainly because people believe he will eventually line the useful idiot leftists up against the wall and shoot them. That's harder to believe about a libertarian. They're building up one group of useful idiots, and encouraging their most idiotic behavior, and enacting their pet policies so everyone can see how short - sighted and untenable they are, giving them sanction and pointing their cameras at the most arrogant and obnoxious of them. The left is being set up for a fall. The key is making everyone else so mad at and paranoid of the left that those leftists who know it has gone too far too fast and are sick of the hypocrisy have no refuge. They can either convert or know that people are lusting for their blood. Because if everyone else ignored the useful idiots of both sides but the most idiotic of those same useful idiots, everyone else could agree to say, "A pox on both your houses! I don't need the existing two parties!" the way they did in 1860. The time is ripe for that to happen. The destabilization has made that more than possible.

Well, you and I have a slightly different take on Trump. I do think Trump is a monkey wrench to their plans. I just think he's useful to them. He's shown very little inclination to reduce government power - only a strong inclination to use it. But he can't be relied upon to use it in the way they want. So, instead of ignoring him, they use him to help grow their power for the next round. It's risky, but not as risky as having a true liberty candidate start attracting people.

Nearly everyone flatters themselves that they pick their news outlets because they provide hard facts. But most people seem to pick them the way they'd pick out a sim. As in, a simulated reality.

Exactly. I don't think they expected American Royalty to enter the picture. They're trying to make him He Who Must Not Be Named, something they never once tried with Trump. But he's obviously still a monkey wrench in their plans. And that's something Trump does not appear to me to be. They need all the randomly applied monkey wrenches we can give them.

LOL But will dannno learn to stop listening to the site where he got all that malinformation, and listen to you instead?

For me, the appeal of RFK has nothing to do with his prospects of winning. We're screwed no matter who the figurehead is. For me, it's about causing the DNC heartache. I see anything that causes the machine some grief as a good thing. Their plans for us didn't include Kennedy. I'll take as many curveballs to their plans as possible.