Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold...

[Anti Federalist]

And it's what T jefferson suggested be done in the 2nd paragraph in the D of I

That was from a rep comment...it prompted me to post, yet again, the relevant words.

Well, that comment and the fact the babbling idjit communist in the White House got the Declaration and the Constitution mixed up again.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

[acptulsa]

..

'About the Declaration there is a finality that is exceedingly restful. It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning can not be applied to this great charter. If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final.

'No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction can not lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient, than those of the Revolutionary fathers.'--Calvin Coolidge

[A Son of Liberty]

This movement will forever be crippled by making the perfect the enemy of the good.

I was there, once. Until I learned that Ron never did that. He made allies where there were strategic alliances to be had, left and right. He partnered with Bernie Sanders when Bernie was right. He partnered with Lindsey Graham when Lindsey was right.

Look, I'm all for intellectual purity. I KNOW we're right. But this thing we tend to do of siting on the sidelines because we won't work with people who aren't right about EVERYTHING is SUICIDE. I never questioned Ron because he worked with Bernie. I knew exactly where he stood, and never doubted his sincerity.

We're running out of time.

[Invisible Man]

We're running out of time.

We ran out of time decades ago.

A Rand Paul/Bernie Sanders team up on writing a bill that won't get voted on, wouldn't be passed by Congress if it did get voted on, and wouldn't get signed by the president even if Congress passed it, and would be universally reviled by the voters to the point that they would demand that everyone who supported it be replaced even if the president did sign it, isn't going to change that.

[A Son of Liberty]

We ran out of time decades ago.

A Rand Paul/Bernie Sanders team up on writing a bill that won't get voted on, wouldn't be passed by Congress if it did get voted on, and wouldn't get signed by the president even if Congress passed it, and would be universally reviled by the voters to the point that they would demand that everyone who supported it be replaced even if the president did sign it, isn't going to change that.

Sure. My "running out of time" comment was unrelated to the urgency of cooperating with people who don't agree with us on *everything*. It was a broader statement on the state of things. I don't expect that cooperation is all of a sudden going to create "more time", or increase the amount of time we have. I'll grant that it was an ill-placed statement. The larger point was that we shouldn't be, as a movement, making enemies of people with whom we can find common ground, regardless of our more broad disagreements. That leads to stagnation, and immobility.

[acptulsa]

That leads to stagnation, and immobility.

Yes. The flip side is, we have a tough time investing in "solutions" that clearly haven't worked before and won't work now. You know. Like electing Trump.

Allies that shoot themselves in the foot shoot you in the foot too. Which is a pain I can bear, if all I want is to be able to say, "Look at all these allies I have!" For any other purpose, however, they're useless.

This is why politics always goes terribly wrong. The people who take an active interest in it are the very sort of people who think it's good for something. It's awfully hard to get people who are honest and aren't gullible idiots to take an interest until the shooting starts.

[TheTexan]

This movement will forever be crippled by making the perfect the enemy of the good.

I was there, once. Until I learned that Ron never did that. He made allies where there were strategic alliances to be had, left and right. He partnered with Bernie Sanders when Bernie was right. He partnered with Lindsey Graham when Lindsey was right.

Look, I'm all for intellectual purity. I KNOW we're right. But this thing we tend to do of siting on the sidelines because we won't work with people who aren't right about EVERYTHING is SUICIDE. I never questioned Ron because he worked with Bernie. I knew exactly where he stood, and never doubted his sincerity.

We're running out of time.

My purity test is simple:

Do you want to secede? Yes / No
Do you mind if I do? Yes / No

First question determines whether you are an ally.

Second question determines whether you are an enemy.

[Invisible Man]

Sure. My "running out of time" comment was unrelated to the urgency of cooperating with people who don't agree with us on *everything*. It was a broader statement on the state of things. I don't expect that cooperation is all of a sudden going to create "more time", or increase the amount of time we have. I'll grant that it was an ill-placed statement. The larger point was that we shouldn't be, as a movement, making enemies of people with whom we can find common ground, regardless of our more broad disagreements. That leads to stagnation, and immobility.

What I see is that student loan forgiveness was a fringe far left idea up until 2020, and now it's pretty much centrist.

Bernie Sanders is the most popular potential presidential candidate of any party.

These are not quirky strange factoids. They are two recent examples that are representative of what any of us can see as the current normal without exaggerating.

The continued movement of the Overton window in that same direction is baked into our political system. It will never have any sustained major movements in the other direction. At best we will occasionally see some micro-victories as the inevitable releases of pressure in the ongoing ratchet effect.

I don't know what the result of this will be. I know that if something can't go on forever, then it won't. But I also don't have any hope that the end of this unsustainable path to come by way of a national awakening to libertarianism that results in America voting its way out of it. And this includes by way of settling for the good instead of the perfect. Neither the good nor the perfect are on the menu.

I know I'm being a downer. But I see no feasible political solution. We are best off owning up to the inevitable and then looking for the best ways to adjust to it, educate the next generation, and live as free as possible in an unfree world.

[TheTexan]

I know I'm being a downer. But I see no feasible political solution.

Secession.

Will it solve everything immediately? No. But it will set us on the right course. (The lack of secession is why things are as $#@!ty as they are now.)

You talk about "education", but from my perspective, the only lesson anyone needs to be a good libertarian, is "secession = good".

[Invisible Man]

Secession.

Will it solve everything immediately? No. But it will set us on the right course. (The lack of secession is why things are as $#@!ty as they are now.)

You talk about "education", but from my perspective, the only lesson anyone needs to be a good libertarian, is "secession = good".

That's a great lesson.

We have a long way to go to get enough people to buy into it.

[Todd]

Well, Tucker, how is it that you, and/or Fux Newz, NEVER hold your "party" accountable?

When do YOU ever report House/Senate Bills, what's in them, and what the aftermath will be? You know, things like "Government Has No Business In Healthcare", Operation Warp Speed, funding Big-Pharm, meetings behind closed-doors with the likes of Gates, et al, spending like a GD Drunken Sailor?

Another f&cking useful idiot.

Ouch... Truth..

[Cleaner44]

It's really that simple.

And "we" doesn't have to be but about 5 or ten percent of the total population.

"We" have the tools, we have natural law on our side, we have the numbers, we have the moral high ground.

All we lack is the will.

The lack of will is because people still have too much to lose.

When you have nothing, you have nothing to lose.

As long as people have food and some comfort in life, they will continue to lack the will.

This may change for many this winter in Europe.

[TheTexan]

Well, Tucker, how is it that you, and/or Fux Newz, NEVER hold your "party" accountable?

When do YOU ever report House/Senate Bills, what's in them, and what the aftermath will be? You know, things like "Government Has No Business In Healthcare", Operation Warp Speed, funding Big-Pharm, meetings behind closed-doors with the likes of Gates, et al, spending like a GD Drunken Sailor?

Another f&cking useful idiot.

Ouch... Truth..

(Clip stops below at 1:30, rest is ads/worthless)

[TheTexan]

Tucker has been known to hold the GOP accountable for what he considers the major flaw of being too libertarian, too beholden to Austrian economics, and not open enough to the economic policies of Elizabeth Warren.

I agree with Tucker on this. As do many here, which I am sure brings you much dismay lol

[Invisible Man]

I agree with Tucker on this. As do many here, which I am sure brings you much dismay lol

Not dismay. But it is revealing.

I knew many here did, especially of the deplorables. I wasn't aware that you were one of them.

You could always just, you know, support Elizabeth Warren herself. These are not tangential issues he's talking about.

[TheTexan]

Not dismay. But it is revealing.

I knew many here did, especially of the deplorables. I wasn't aware that you were one of them.

You could always just, you know, support Elizabeth Warren herself. These are not tangential issues he's talking about.

People mistakenly believe that trade restrictions violate people's rights. They don't.

What violates people's rights, is forcing them to remain under the jurisdiction of an authority that enforces those restrictions.

It's a subtle difference but it's important to understand.

[ClaytonB]

(Clip stops below at 1:30, rest is ads/worthless)

...

[PAF]

(Clip stops below at 1:30, rest is ads/worthless)

Also @ClaytonB


You show me something dated August 27, 2022 - less than one week ago? Is that a joke?

Where was he when Trump first announced OWS, and when he hired Gates' stooge Moncef Slaoui, and when he upped the ante over and above what CONgress initially authorized to fund this crap? Where was he in 2019-2020, when he should have been telling all of Fux Newz blowhards Government Has No Business in Healthcare period?

You show me something years after the fact, after the majority of people have already been Vax'd and Boosted?

[TheTexan]

Also @ClaytonB


You show me something dated August 27, 2022 - less than one week ago? Is that a joke?

Where was he when Trump first announced OWS, and when he hired Gates' stooge Moncef Slaoui, and when he upped the ante over and above what CONgress initially authorized to fund this crap? Where was he in 2019-2020, when he should have been telling all of Fux Newz blowhards Government Has No Business in Healthcare period?

You show me something years after the fact, after the majority of people have already been Vax'd and Boosted?

I'd be happy to give you clips that prove you wrong on those accounts as well but it sure as $#@! ain't worth my time.

[Anti Federalist]

The lack of will is because people still have too much to lose.

When you have nothing, you have nothing to lose.

As long as people have food and some comfort in life, they will continue to lack the will.

This may change for many this winter in Europe.

Stupid, hungry, freezing, starving mobs will fight for Marxism not freedom.

Those of us who are well off need to find the will before it comes to that and risk everything, while we still have some skin left to throw in the game.

[CCTelander]

Stupid, hungry, freezing, starving mobs will fight for Marxism not freedom.

Those of us who are well off need to find the will before it comes to that and risk everything, while we still have some skin left to throw in the game.

Wasn't there something a long time ago that I heard about where a bunch of malcontents pledged their Lives, their Fortunes and their Sacred Honor to some cause or other? Maybe we need to try something like that?

[Anti Federalist]

Wasn't there something a long time ago that I heard about where a bunch of malcontents pledged their Lives, their Fortunes and their Sacred Honor to some cause or other? Maybe we need to try something like that?

Exactly right.

No starving mob looking for handouts, those men were hard assed farmers, sailors, merchants, pastors, lawyers, doctors...men of means and substance, well read, well informed, who knew they were fighting for their natural rights above all else, with a great deal to lose, not one in ten were a professional soldier, who opened fire on armed government enforcers who were part of the most powerful military/occupy force on planet earth.

They did this while in the middle of a smallpox epidemic that killed one out of four who contracted it.

They fought without doubt, without reservation , they fought like warrior poets...and won their freedom and the right to build a nation the likes of which the world had never seen before.

We, men, today are so far removed from that history and blood, as to be a different species.

[Swordsmyth]

And by doing what you are doing how much has changed? By doing nothing, they continue the corruption because they are hoping people like you sit idly-by to watch the world set afire.

It's almost like he and others work for them.

[acptulsa]

It's almost like he and others work for them.

Isn't it interesting how partisans on both sides spend so much time accusing anyone and everyone of being what they themselves are--intentionally or through useful idiocy?

[Todd]

(Clip stops below at 1:30, rest is ads/worthless)

I don't doubt that Tucker says some bomb diggity things, but I am too old to believe anyone with a six figure salary who gets to a place of influence on the major news networks is anything but an entertainer who will say the controversial opinions of the day. I was a Limbaugh fan for years in the 90's until I realized he was only invested in the conservative message as long as it made his investments skyrocket. When it came down to actually supporting anyone that might make his place in the world a little less important then he balked.

I mean what are you going to do if you actually get people in office that fix the problems you've been frightening people about for years? Can't have that.

I watched everyone genuflect and slobber over Glen Beck and then he screwed a liberty candidate royally when it became evident she might actually win.

I hope you are all right, but I will do what I have always done and that's listen to them but I'm not getting invested.

[Invisible Man]

I don't doubt that Tucker says some bomb diggity things, but I am too old to believe anyone with a six figure salary who gets to a place of influence on the major news networks is anything but an entertainer who will say the controversial opinions of the day.

If it were only 6 figures, your dictum may be questionable. But Tucker's salary is 8 figures: $35 million per year. The reduction in entertainment value and ratings that dispassionate objectivity would result in would cost him easily tens of millions of dollars per year.

[Todd]

If it were only 6 figures, your dictum may be questionable. But Tucker's salary is 8 figures: $35 million per year. The reduction in entertainment value and ratings that dispassionate objectivity would result in would cost him easily tens of millions of dollars per year.

That's what I meant. These days, If you can garner that much money for a major network as a political commentator, the ratio that the person presenting information informs and effects the power structure approaches zero pretty fast.

He's there to hold an audience. Whatever it takes baby!

The medium is the message.

[TheTexan]

If it were only 6 figures, your dictum may be questionable. But Tucker's salary is 8 figures: $35 million per year. The reduction in entertainment value and ratings that dispassionate objectivity would result in would cost him easily tens of millions of dollars per year.

Dispassionate objectivity lol. Is that what you're looking for? Doesn't exist. And anyone who claims or pretend such is even more the liar.

[acptulsa]

Dispassionate objectivity lol. Is that what you're looking for? Doesn't exist. And anyone who claims or pretend such is even more the liar.

I know you are, but what am I?

[Invisible Man]

Dispassionate objectivity lol. Is that what you're looking for? Doesn't exist. And anyone who claims or pretend such is even more the liar.

Fair enough. I actually agree with you here. But it's more than that. Tucker doesn't actually think that the things he says on TV are true. He just plays a character on TV who thinks that.

He used to be a Ron Paul supporter. Now he plays a character on TV who (at least sometimes, depending on the whims of the day) stands for the 180-degree opposite of everything Ron Paul supports, and lodges the ridiculous complaint that the GOP is beholden to Ron Paul types, which to him is a terrible thing. But he doesn't actually believe any of that, or any of much of what he says on TV.

And he successfully argued this very thing in court and won a case on the grounds that his audience should know better than to believe him.

I just find it interesting that it's on precisely those points where he is diametrically opposed to the mission of this website that the fans he has here most stridently agree with him.