Trump is no dummy.
Because he did not pick Newtie.
Had he done so, he might as well have put Romney at the head of the ticket and retired to Mira Lago. The selection of Pence shows that while Trump is no Libertarian, he’s not another “bipartisan” – and so Born to Lose – Republican.
With Pence, Trump makes his victory in November more rather than less likely – as would not have been the case with someone like Newtie as his Better Half.
This is smart politics, regardless of our (as Libertarians) approval of his politics.
Trump needs the snake handlers and tongue-talkers – just as Hillary must have the Millennial Redistributionists and Social Justice Warriors.
Like it or not, that is brass knuckle electoral reality.
Pence appeals to the snake handlers and tongue talkers because he is one himself. A “born again” guzzler of the theocratic Kool Aid. Newtie panders to the drinkers of the Kool Aid – and while they may be addled, they intuit his fraudulence just like the pod people in Invasion of the Body Snatchers. They know he doesn’t read The Good Book (except perhaps for its entertainment value) and doesn’t care which body parts get put into what other body parts, either. He is a smart, cynical, utterly corrupt DC insider.
Just like Romney.
And just as unelectable at this critical mass moment in American politics.
And so, Trump picked Pence.
Yes, he’s a warmonger in addition to a Bible-thumper. He not only supported the unprovoked attack on Iraq (a la Germany and Soviet Russia into Poland in 1939, a war crime according to the Nuremburg Tribunal, for which the Nazi neo-con leaders were hanged while our neo-con leaders get book deals) he supports further unilateral attacks on (among others) Iran. He opposes closing the American gulag at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. He supported the American version of Germany’s Enabling Act, which like its historical antecedent suspended civil liberties in this formerly sort-of free country.
All of this is understandably appalling to Libertarians but necessary for Trump to secure the support of the people who will decide the election in his favor. Without whom he cannot win.
And if he loses, so do we.
We get Hillary.
And probably Mr. Justice Obama.
The certainty of Obamacare forever.
That the Second Amendment will become like the Fourth and Fifth and Tenth Amendments – a nullity. We can look forward to yet more “diversity” at gunpoint. The likely criminalization of dissenting views. Carbon taxes. Et cetera.
Pence is no prize, either. Among other things, he is afflicted by the priapic urge to rain bombs on people in faraway lands with preferences for alternative religious fantasies and forms of political tyranny that differ in structure from the democratic ideal. But he will be vice president – not president.
He will help elect the president.
After which, he becomes a superfluity.
Trump, after all, is no Chimp. He will not be a front man for the real president (as Cheney was on behalf of The Chimp). Trump is many things, many of them not admirable. But a tool, he isn’t. Trump is no one’s second banana. Certainly not Pence’s. While Trump’s commitment to liberty is hugely debatable, his need to be Number One isn’t. Therefore, Pence’s most egregious and dangerous impulses – such as his lust for global war, which Trump doesn’t appear to share – would be blunted.
This is no small thing.
Keep in mind (like a mantra, because the stakes are that high) that if Hillary wins, we will get more war and very possibly a global one. Hillary loves war (so long as she’s not actually in the line of fire). Whether her VP shares this sickness is irrelevant. Because Hillary is also no one’s second banana. She is worse. She is this close – after a lifetime of scheming and waiting for her moment – to being in a position to pull the proverbial trigger herself.
And her finger is very itchy.
Trump could have asked Ron Paul to come out of retirement and accept the largely ceremonial office of VP. This would have swelled the hearts of Libertarians (including me) who cringe at the prospect of Hillary laying her murderous fingers on the levers of political power – but who are also rightly leery about Trump’s also-authoritarian tendencies.
But then Trump would have assured Hillary’s laying her murderous fingers on the levers of political power – and probably (among other things) Justice Obama a year or so from now.
By picking Pence, Trump has made this less likely.
As Sarah Palin used to say, you betcha.
EPautos.com depends on you to keep the wheels turning! The control freaks (Clovers) hate us. Goo-guhl blackballed us.
Will you help us?
EPautos stickers – new design, larger and magnetic! – are free to those who send in $10 or more to support the site.
Our donate button is here.
If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:
EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079
The bible is a lot of words. So is the Harry Potter and Star Wars series, both of which I’ve read almost as much as the bible.
I’ll attempt to mock, ridicule, and red pill both of them, for those who can’t stomach the “holy writ” being grilled under a prosecutorial light and being made to tell us the troof and nothing but the troof about itself.
The Harry Potter series is about mental illness. Hogwarts is a mental institution. The entire Harry Potter series is an extended metaphor – a coded transcription, really – about a boy with severe mental illness suffering from delusions. Everything depicted in the movie can be interpreted as a recitation, from his delusional perspective, of his attempts to cope with the harsh realities of his confinement in a mental institution.
Every major event in the book is a fantasy/delusional version of the experience that a child would encounter in the course of being institutionalized and forcibly treated for mental illness. Most, if not all, of the most popular books and movies of all time are constructed as a kind of double fantasy.
The reader and author understand and implicitly agree that the subject matter of the book or movie is not real. But on another level, the events in these stories are also constructed as a fantasy or delusion of the protagonist himself.
Typically this kind of story takes place in the real world. Then something happens that sends the hero into a new world, where the usual rules of the hero’s former life do not apply.
In supernatural-based storylines this is where the first non-empirical “magical” event occurs. In the real world portion of these stories, the protagonist typically experiences some form of psychological trauma, notably in the form of humiliation, rejection, or social isolation.
The hero finds themselves to be anonymous, abandoned, dumped, or socially subordinated in some extreme way. Luke Skywalker is told he can’t leave the farm. Dorothy is told to stay out of the way of the grown-ups while her dog is about to be killed. Nick Carraway of The Great Gatsby finds that he is incapable of intimacy and feels like a fraud among the New York elite. The narrator in Fight Club is literally anonymous and lives in corporate hell. Peter Parker and Clark Kent are bullied relentlessly.
Then some outside agency comes along and empowers the hero to respond to these traumas. The resulting heroism is always the exact opposite of the earlier powerlessness, rejection, or humiliation. Freud called this type of story a family romance, in which a young hero imagines his primary caretakers to be mere substitutes for his real parents, who are dead or otherwise out of the picture, but are of higher social class than his foster parents.
In the Harry Potter series, his real parents are famous wizards who were famous in all the world for their unparalleled love for the boy Harry, which set the whole series in motion, killing them and leaving the boy a scarred orphan.
This is fantasy, crafted as the direct opposite of the way in which children usually end up scarred – through abuse and neglect. If we interpret the story as Harry’s fantasy, then the Dursleys are his real parents, and the Potters are imaginary.
The Dursleys either can’t cope with the increasingly delusional boy living with them, or perhaps they are merely abusive, and it’s the abuse that is making him delusional. In any event, the parental figures constantly mistreat them, favor the brother, and inflict endless cruelty and humiliation on Harry.
One day, Harry snaps, and Dudley (who is really Harry’s brother) is severely injured in a way requiring repeated hospital treatments. In the delusion, Harry imagines that a pig’s tail is magically grown from Dudley’s buttocks. as a result of this incident, Harry is taken away to a “special school”.
This storyline is a coded explication of the delusional boy who is starting to engage in violent outbursts and is sent to a mental institution as a result. Everything that happens after that becomes increasingly detached from reality, and what we see as the audience is his delusion, which is a recasting of his institutionalization experience as a kind of adventure.
Mental illness is featured just about everywhere in the series, and the theme of insanity is very prominent. Classic features of mental illness such as delusions, paranoia, and multiple personality disorders become increasingly more important to the storyline. Here are a few examples.
The first book features Harry at his new “school” becoming obsessed with a mirror where he spends most days imagining his perfect parents. Of course, they’re dead, which is a metaphor for saying they’re wholly imaginary.
Dumbledore, the paragon of surrogate love, warns Harry that the mirror has driven people insane, because spending all your time in fantasy causes you to become un-moored to the real world. This is exactly what happens to Harry for the rest of the series.
The school is locked. It is also filled with random insane dangers that everyone accepts as perfectly normal: moving stairs, talking paintings, deadly monsters roaming around outside. Mental prisons are dangerous places where crazy situations are in fact totally ordinary.
Sirius Black is Harry’s godfather and is overtly insane. In the fourth book, Black is closely affiliated with and introduced by and treated as a kind of surrogate for a werewolf, who is obsessed with the moon. The moon is a symbol for insanity, i.e. lunacy.
The Goblet of Fire contest pits students against each other put in contests that are openly life-threatening, which is what students at a school for violent, mentally disturbed children experience on a regular basis.
The clean-cut [Cedric] Diggory, a fantasy image of the popular successful boy Harry could have been, were it not for his mental problems, it is murdered by “Voldemort”, who is Harry’s alter ego and the projection of his rage and fear.
Harry is the only one who sees this event, and no one believes it was “Voldemort”. This event is a metaphor for Harry murdering a boy who is too perfect, despised for having a life of love and ease that Harry wanted but never got.
So he imagines that “Voldemort” did it when no one believes him, it’s an unspoken metaphor for the fact that everyone knows Harry is the murderer. If the murder of [Cedric] Diggory is not meant to be a real event, but entirely imaginary and Harry’s mind, then the murder of the normal boy is a metaphor for Harry losing his final chance at a normal life.
This “murder” takes place in a maze, where the main danger is being psychologically possessed and going insane. Harry is helped in this unwanted fight to the death by Mad-Eye Moody, who is also openly insane. To compound the insanity of this parent surrogate, Moody is not actually the real Moody, but an impostor who is even more openly insane.
Book Five opens with Harry again attacking his brother/cousin Dudley, leaving him traumatized. Periodically, Harry returns to civilian life, but finds that he can’t go five minutes without a seriously violent delusional episode. This incident was interpreted by Harry as an attack by Dementors, who cannot be seen by normal people.
This incident causes Harry to appear before a board of inquiry to determine if he is too violent for Hogwarts. The alternative being Azkaban, i.e. a more harsh mental prison.
Azkaban is heavily associated with insanity. In the story, it is said that inmates go crazy within days of arriving, which is a metaphor for saying that it is a high-security prison for violent mental patients.
It is where Black and Lestrange and others went off the rails. It is also in the fifth book and movie that we meet Black’s cousin Beatrix Lestrange, who is also openly insane. She murders the insane Sirius Black just as he is becoming more stable and normal. This is a metaphor for the violently delusional side of Harry’s mind defeating and suppressing the side of his true self that might have healed.
Harry’s newest friend in school is Luna Lovegood, whose name is another reference to lunacy and is openly known to be crazy, and is the only other student who can see Harry’s delusions, even within the context of an otherwise crazy place like Hogwarts.
Another classmate, Neville Longbottom, the forlorn loser, is revealed to have a family history of mental illness. Parents were mental patients, having been driven insane by Beatrix.
Repeated references are made to Voldemort being so evil that he drives his victims crazy with torture, rather than merely killing them. It is repeatedly indicated that the boy, Tom Riddle, Voldemort, is actually Harry Potter with constant parallels and similarities being heavily stressed: same books, same wand, both orphaned, etc.
Harry has increasing visions of Voldemort and they even share thoughts, which is an obvious symbol for saying that Voldemort is just a component of Harry’s diseased mind, at first only whisper, and becoming increasingly dominant and thus dominantly real to him.
In the sixth and seventh book, it is revealed what Rowling was really writing about. There is a flashback scene where Dumbledore first meets Voldemort as a boy. Dumbledore comes to rescue the boy, who is really Riddle/Harry, from abuse and poverty.
When Dumbledore says he has come to take him to a special school for kids with his kinds of needs, Riddles first response is that he knows Hogwarts is an insane asylum, and he doesn’t want to go.
Maybe Rowling had some family or personal experience with childhood mental issues or institutionalization and that her Harry Potter series is a way for her to talk about them in a safe way. She donates heavily to two causes: multiple sclerosis, which was her mother’s cause of death, and has gone to great lengths to fund an organization called Lumos, described as follows:
“We want to end the systematic institutionalization of children across Europe. We want to see children living in safe, caring environments. We believe this should be the case for all children whether they are disabled, from an ethnic minority, or from an impoverished background.
Our minority vision is ambitious, we understand that removing children from institutions isn’t in itself enough. We must work with governments, policymakers, and practitioners to enable children to grow up in a family-type setting.”
Here’s a quote from the author on the subject.
“Twenty years ago, as Communist regimes across Europe toppled, harrowing images of Europe’s hidden children began to emerge,” said Rowling. “ Thousands upon thousands of children were living in vast depressing institutions, malnourished and often maltreated with little access to the outside world.
Slowly governments have begun to transform healthcare or care systems. Real and lasting change takes time, but today we are putting down a marker and calling for significantly more progress in the next 20 years to ensure that eventually no children are living in or at risk of entering such institutions.”
Just like Catcher in the Rye was Salinger’s way of talking about the sexual exploitation of children, the Harry Potter series was written about the kind of experiences that institutionalized children encounter, the kind that the Lumos charity is working to eradicate. But most people simply see the novels as an adventure story about magic. It’s not about magic. It’s about mental trauma and the delusions that results from it.
I was under the impression that this was a libertarian gearhead site. Apparently it is a libertarian atheist gearhead site. I don’t think it serves the libertarian cause to alienate a whole segment of the population, many of whom are being convinced of libertarian ideas. Apparently Ron Paul is able to reconcile the differences.
It would be good to remember the source of all liberty:
2 Cor 3:17 “and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.”
Not everyone here is an atheist (or agnostic). It’s just not the focus of this site.
Hi Robbie,
It’s not an “atheist” site – it’s an “I don’t know” (and no one else does, either) site. 🙂 I’m cool with whatever you want to believe – so long as you don’t insist others also believe!
The above with regard to matters of faith.
So long as everyone agrees that everyone is entitled to their faith – in whatever – there is no problem. In this way, it’s an example of the NAP in action. Everyone is free to believe in whatever they like – monotheism, polytheism, animism, atheism – provided those beliefs impose no harm on others.
Religious Clovers are just as bad as the secular ones. Both have shown they are willing – even eager – to kill others who disagree with them.
“So long as everyone agrees that everyone is entitled to their faith – in whatever – there is no problem. In this way, it’s an example of the NAP in action. Everyone is free to believe in whatever they like – monotheism, polytheism, animism, atheism – provided those beliefs impose no harm on others.”
That sounds good but not evidenced in this post. So all other beliefs are mocked and ridiculed (as Christianity was here) equally then?
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;
Hi Robbie,
I personally find religious certainty silly. Regardless of the “brand.” But I defend your right to believe in the “truth” of Christianity (however you happen to define it; there are endless permutations and parsings) to the same extent I defend someone else’s right to believe he is Napoleon, or in Mum Ra, the Ever Living.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuWLThMuf7k
Religion is about belief – belief based on that which cannot be proved; that which is merely asserted.
Hence, it cannot be a yes/no or right/wrong thing.
Which is why I am creeped out by religious certainty. It strikes me as a form of mental illness.
None of us knows whether there is a god outside of nature, omnipotent, who controls the show. Much less who this god is, what he wants of us, etc. We only know what men who wrote (and parse) books say …
So, I am open to what might be; I don’t dismiss possibilities. But I openly confess that I do not know – and am appalled by anyone who claims that he does.
Natural Law states (and the Founders codified it in the Declaration) that our rights and liberties come from our Creator. If we lose that, we have to look to the State for them and have lost the plot.
Hi Robbie,
Ok, but which “creator”? How so, exactly? Lots of premises unexamined, assumptions made.
Also, in re natural rights “coming from our Creator”:
If so, then they are just fatwas or befehls or whatever else you’d like to call them. That is, arbitrary orders issued from a Supreme Clover who must be Obeyed. And they don’t “come from our Creator.” They come from books written by men. That’s a fact. Yes, yes.. I know all about the books being “inspired” by the “word” (and so on). Well, fine. But until it can be proved that God wrote the books or actually did transmute his “word” through men – as opposed to men claiming they were merely vessels or conduits or whatever it is… then it’s just men making wild claims and no more binding on anyone than my claiming Napoleon “speaks” to me…
I’d rather something we can understand and justify based on logic and facts.
The NAP, for example, doesn’t rely on “because God” or other inscrutable/arbitrary edicts.
It is reasonable for men to work together cooperatively; preferable to coercion since no matter how strong one may be, there is always (or will be) someone stronger. Living according to violence is precarious, insecure and unpleasant.
Put in plainer language, no one likes getting punched in the nose. If I don’t like it being done to me, I ought not to do it to others – and if I do punch someone else in the nose, I’ve lost any basis for complaining about being punched in the nose.
No Yahweh or Bog or Allah or Ahura Mazda or Huxitlopochtli or Mum Ra necessary!
You’re not speaking of a segment, you’re talking about JudeoChristianityIslam, which is about 56% of the world population counting only devout official members. And then there’s countless more (including Eric probablly) who believe in many aspects of this “religious” system, but don’t qualify for the official count.
We are not here to alienate anyone, but rather to red pill.
Is your faith healthy enough and does it actually serve you well enough, that you dare remain here and swallow the red pill.
Or do you instead retreat back to your books of answers and find an apropos scripture reference and again try to sell us your brand of blue pill?
So now the Shrub and the Mitten are both saying they ‘may’ vote for Gary Johnson. More evidence (if it was needed) that while Gary is a Libertarian, he is NOT a libertarian.
Hi Phillip,
That is very interesting. I have my issues with Trump but I distrust Johnson at a gut level. I think he is a catspaw/shill… take your pick.
I’m enjoying Trump peeing in everyone’s punchbowl on the left and right. Hopefully after this election, we will hear no more from the Bush crime family and the rest of conservative Inc.
I’m for some serious immigration controls at this point. But neither party really gets it long term; limited government and low taxes. Team R has certainly failed to deliver over the decades.
Me too, sth!
Like Khan, I stab at them (the Bushes, Romney, the entire GOP “establishment”) for hates’ sake…
If Trump wins they can JFK him any time and they get one of their own instead of someone they hate more than Trump.
Lowell, this comment didn’t age well. So far, they have tried repeatedly to remove him, and all attempts have failed. Given, that he is the face of one of the Oligarch faction, going the other route is a non starter.
Well, so Trump picked Mike Pence?
I and a number of mostly long term Democrats of my acquaintance were all set to be “cross over voters” and vote for Trump because we think Hillary is a phony and a “DINO” while we thought Trump might be a “RINO”.
We were going to vote for Trump, but the Pence pick changed all that…
Probably the only difference is Paul Ryan is an enemy of Trump. Ryan is trying to get legislation passed that will, over time, effectively stop the sale of guns in this country.
Trump most likely won’t nuke all those mid-east countries Hitlery would take delight in destroying….of course, except for Saudi Arabia who gave her and Bill 100’s of millions of dollars as well as GWB. Scum, the entire Bush and Clinton clan.
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blacklistednews/hKxa/~3/NCdVkIrvEQk/M.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email
Hi Erik,
I hear you. Our choices – regardless – are awful. I do think Trump is less so in one critical area, though: He seems to grok that the Bush/Clinton Endless Wars have been a disaster. He does not appear to be the glib, sociopathic warmonger that Hillary is without question.
That’s why I’ll hold my nose and vote for him.
It might actually save lives.
Perhaps millions of them.
Yep, we’re past July 4, 2016 but I had a thought last night about our bi-centennial, where I was, who I was partying with, where we went, what we did and it could have been from another dimension compared to what we have now.
Too much to go into, too many things done and said that were legal then that would be difficult to not be jailed for now…..makes no sense except to become the banksters bitch.
And we were warned by none other than Grand Funk Railroad. But the song got no play since it wasn’t the “right” message. Later Bocephus put many of the same laments in song and it was taken bitterly by TPTB.
Grand Funk Railroad – Don’t Let ’em Take Your Gun
Ohhh, people why don’t you come in here and let me talk to you a while.
That’s right, step right up and listen to a concerned citizen speak his piece.
I’ll tell you a little something that my daddy told to me.
My basic fundamentals if you want to be free.
’cause son, there’s somthing wrong internally.
So, if you want your freedom son.
Don’t want your country to be overrun.
You got to keep america number one.
(chorus)
My daddy told me “son, don’t let ’em take your gun.
That’s what they tryin’ to do.
Son, don’t let ’em take your gun.
They’re takin’ your bill of rights away from you.”
My daddy said “son, don’t let ’em take your gun.
That’s what they tryin’ to do.
Son, don’t let ’em take your gun.
Don’t let ’em take your gun away from you.”
Ohhh, this year is our anniversary.
Two hundred years, people we’ve been free.
Won’t be nobody takin’ over our land.
If everybody’s brother’s got a gun in his hand.
I’m tellin’ you we learned to fight for justice.
We’re willing to die for freedom.
Hand in hand.
You got to understand.
We are american men.
Said they want your gun.
Said they want your gun.
Send ’em on the run.
Send ’em on the run.
Hip-hurray for fun.
Hip-hurray for fun.
If they do we’re done.
If they do we’re done.
if Fred Reed had tits, and a law degree, and no sense of humor, nor much sense at all. He’d be Ann Coulter. He and her could both get their gentlemen and lady boner rocks off just dreaming of all those mudpuppies they could bomb.
http://www.nndb.com/people/474/000022408/
Coulter’s admiration society grows
http://www.adl.org/combating-hate/domestic-extremism-terrorism/c/ann-coulter-white-supremacists.html#.V4l36PkrKM8
Unfortunately, the broken is in. Your mind is broken. My mind is broken. All our minds are almost completely useless. Maybe we can start to make some repairs. Maybe we can raise a new generation that doesn’t need so much fixing.
The broken is your belief in the sky daddy of government. Your belief in the “narrative.” To some degree or other, you accept the story that you were told about the moral history or the nature of your country, a customized narrative of good versus bad, us versus them.
The Americans are the greatest accomplishment of the British. The British are great, the Germans are evil, that we have nothing in common except right after the war, then we’re going to give money to the Germans. And have a plan for Europe. I mean people just make this stuff up and everyone thinks this has something to do with reality.
But when you start bringing facts to bear about this narrative to these people, they start getting hostile in one form or another, either passive-aggressive or otherwise aggressive – and that’s because once they had to swallow this indoctrinating madness, what relationship to facts could their ethical reasoning ever have in the future?
It simply can’t exist.
Once you believe that something like the American Presidency, something that is invisible, can be the center of morality, and the center of truth and right and all that is good in the world, what possible reference could you have to facts about ethics in the future?
Or about anything, for that matter? About the existence of things? You’re going to be drawn toward emotionally compelling stories, you’re going to be drawn toward emotional bullying, and you’re going to be drawn towards just making other people feel guilty for not believing you, or being aggressive and basically saying, “Well if you believe this or that you’re a bad person.” But you’re not going have any reference to a single fact, or a single statistic, other than those that are made up by people with a like-minded view.
You’re not going to have any reference to any facts. You’re going to have instantaneous answers that you make up on the spot based on prior prejudices. How could it be otherwise? You’ve already accepted as the core of your reality processing that invisible things like the United States exist and have supreme value and ultimate moral authority.
How on earth are you going to process anything from even a remotely reality-based or empirically-based or fact-based standpoint ever again? Well, you can’t!
And that’s fantastic for the people in power, because if you can’t track anything to do with material reality, if you can’t track anything to do with facts, if you can’t apply logic and empiricism to something like morality, you’re completely helpless. You are a lamb in a slaughterhouse when it comes to being abused by power, by those in power, by those willing to use violence to achieve their ends.
You’re absolutely without defenses in this realm. You can groan, and you can grumble you can roll your eyes, and you can write in your blog that you’re mad at things and so on. But it really doesn’t matter: you’re fundamentally, absolutely, and completely helpless, because how are you going to question the morality of those in power with reference to logic and facts and our common humanity, when at the very beginning of things, you swallowed these indoctrinating beliefs and called it tasty?
Your reality processing and your logical processing and your central processing is completely wrecked. You might as well drive a car off a cliff and then try and win a race with it. It’s just wrecked, it’s smoking, it’s wheels have fallen off! I mean, it can be repaired, of course, but it takes a lot of work, and the first thing you have to do is recognize that it’s broken.
You’ve got to recognize that your mind is kind of broken, your mind is kind of damaged. What they call “the norm” is an asylum, what they call the norm is mentally ill. What they call the norm is people who believe in things like a government.
Government doesn’t exist! There is no such thing as the state! There’s people with guns, and there’s people who obey them. That’s it. There’s no such thing as the state, no such thing as countries, no such thing as gods, or demons. It’s all just a complete nonsense. Even gender exists in reality. You have biological differences that you can categorize. But nations don’t exist in reality. Culture doesn’t exist in reality.
Culture is just the scar tissue of the child abuse and forced indoctrination. I mean, why do Americans believe different things than French children? Why does everyone love their own country and love their own culture? Because of child abuse! Because that’s what they’re told, they’re told all these false things!
The Greeks are told, “Oh, the Greeks are the best, we gave the world this and that and the other,” and the Italian kids, “Oh, Italians are best,” the British: “Oh, the British are the best.” It’s all just nonsense.
You’re filling your children up with complete idiocy and falsehoods and telling them that it’s all “morality” and self esteem based. It’s complete child abuse. All culture that is not based on this simple observable facts of reality is just scar tissue that grows over being lied to as children.
I think it’s very important to understand the number of things that you’re told as a child that don’t have any kind of reality, that you are told to be loyal to, that you are told to believe in, that you are told to infuse with some sort of moral energy – they’re all complete falsehoods.
The wonderful thing about it is that concepts have no voice. This is the sort of nail in the coffin as far as obeying things like this state and politicians and priests and the military.
If “the country” is virtue – my country right or wrong – if the country is virtue, if the country doesn’t exist, then the country obviously can’t tell you what to do. If God is goodness, but God doesn’t exist, then God cannot tell you what to do. So who gets to tell you what to do? Well, the person who claims to represent this fantasy abstract. So it’s how one human being bypasses another human being’s legitimate anger of being bullied and told what to do.
The priest doesn’t say, “Give me your money because my name is Bob and I want your money.” The priest says, “Give God your money, because God wants you to give him your money, because God says ‘help the poor.’” It’s not, “Obey me,” its, “Obey this abstract entity that I made up – because only I know what it wants!”
I mean it is ridiculous! It is absolutely insane! These things don’t exist – and because they don’t exist, they can’t voice anything, and so the people who make them up and get you to believe in them say that you have to obey:
“Oh not me. It’s not me. It’s for the good of the country. The country. Your country needs you!” No! Roosevelt needs you! People who profit from the war need you to go and get killed. Your country does not need you because countries don’t exist!
God is not telling you to do anything, the priest is telling you to do things! Crazy lunatic monks 5,000 years dead are telling you to do things! There’s no such thing as God, or country, or state.
They can’t tell you to do anything because they don’t exist! It’s like trying to get paid with the idea of money – it doesn’t exist! It’s a mere conceptual tag that is imperfectly derived from physical instances – and in the case of country, it’s not even derived from anything. It’s a line in a map in somebody’s head. Your country doesn’t need you – countries don’t have needs because countries don’t exist!
At one time in Texas. there was only one thing to be loyal to, the Brand. All others including govt., the law, etc. got nothing but lies if necessary and for the main part, got nothing anyway. The land, the people and the group you were a part of were your only loyalty. You might have some loyalty to another group but in the end, there was one brand and one brand that was paramount to everything else. Even if one of the brand screwed up, everyone else still had their back. Good fences make good neighbors in more than one way.
Where you are was called Comancheria until the civil war and reconstruction, right. The brand came after and might still be the case if not for all the police state interventions. With oil, cattle, the profitable pharmeceutical opium and coca that could be grown and traded for.
Y’all could be real boys and stop being broke ass ho wooden puppets for uncle’s crazy green back games.
The invisible cold dead hand of the Power Elite hets to be a bit much after a century or 2.
The area was vaguely defined and shifted over time, but generally was described as bordered to the south by the Balcones Fault, just north of San Antonio, Texas, continuing north along the Cross Timbers to encompass a northern area that included the Cimarron River and the upper Arkansas River east of the high Rockies.
Comancheria was bordered along the west by the Mescalero Escarpment and the Pecos River, continuing north along the edge of the Spanish settlements in Santa Fe de Nuevo México.
Today, this region makes up West Texas, the Llano Estacado, the Texas Panhandle, the Edwards Plateau (including the Texas Hill Country), Eastern New Mexico, western Oklahoma including the Oklahoma Panhandle and the Wichita Mountains, southeastern Colorado and southwestern Kansas.
Apachería
Before the Comanche expanded out of present-day Wyoming in the early eighteenth century, the lands now known as Comancheria was home to a multitude of tribes—most notably the Apaches. Much of the region had previously been known as Apachería.
Comancheria as empire
Some argue that from the 1750s to the 1850s, the Comanches were the dominant group in the Southwest, and the domain they ruled was known as Comancheria.
Many call it an empire. Confronted with Spanish, Mexican, and American outposts on their periphery in New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana, and Mexico, they worked to increase their own safety, prosperity and power.
The Comanches used their military power to obtain supplies and labor from the Americans, Mexicans, and Indians through thievery, tribute, and kidnappings.
Although powered by violence, the Comanche empire was primarily an economic construction, rooted in an extensive commercial network that facilitated long-distance trade. Dealing with subordinate Indians, the Comanche spread their language and culture across the region. Their empire collapsed when their villages were repeatedly decimated by epidemics of smallpox and cholera in the late 1840s; the population plunged from 20,000 to just a few thousand by the 1870s.
Neighboring peoples
To the west, southwest and southeast of the Comancheria stretched the vast territories of the various hostile Apache groups, partially overlapping and forming a kind of no man’s land, which was heavily contested between the two peoples. Moreover, the Comanche had to pass through the dangerous
Apachería on their way down to Mexico for raiding and recross it with plunder. The Oklahoma and Texas panhandles were inhabited by their allies, the Kiowa and Kiowa-Apache, along with the Comanche. In the northwest of the Comancheria lived the opposing Ute and Shoshone, to the northeast settled the enemy and powerful Osage and in the north the also antagonistic Pawnee.
In addition, in and adjacent to the Comancheria settled the allied Wichita, Tawakoni, Waco (Spanish: Hueco, were a subtribe of the Wichita) and Hasinai. In the East lived the Caddo and later the Cherokee. In the southeast settled the erstwhile allies, but after the expulsion of the Apaches of the Plains, now rival Tonkawa.
In the north, the Southern Cheyenne and Southern Arapaho, forced the Comanche to acknowledge the Arkansas River as their northern border. Moreover, the Comanche undertook extensive commercial enterprises to the Pueblo in New Mexico and to the Spanish settlements around San Antonio, Texas.
In this trade of guns, horses, captives and other goods the Comancheros (Pueblo and New Mexico traders) acted as intermediaries. The Ciboleros also competed against the Comanche in the context of bison hunting. The Comanche language became the Lingua franca of the Southern Plains.
The Comanche Empire
https://www.amazon.com/Comanche-Empire-Lamar-Western-History/dp/0300151179
The Brand, the cattle brand and the ranch brand where everybody lived and shared and looked out for one another. Law and the like didn’t mess too much with the brand since it was more powerful than a few with badges. Same for bankers and those looking to move into your ranch for any reason. People were taken at face value. You weren’t judged by some legal record in your past, only how you conducted yourself. Even the federal govt. after the uncivil war didn’t mess with various brands.
I can see how learning a man’s nature is as good as a way of determine his suitability and candidacy for receiving a welcoming into your neighborhood.
I think I have a simple life philosophy distilled into 3 broad areas. In much the same way everything is animal, mineral, or vegetable.
Every one and every action can be sorted into 3 broad categories.
1 Nature
2 Power
3 Physics
1 So nature is how we all came into this world. Helpless babies who were fed, usually by our mother, otherwise some other caregiver.
Nature is a man choosing a woman. Then the choice being made to deliver the baby, or maybe to use one of the methods of physics to abort the baby. Scarce resources force stark choices, the thriftiness of nature.
Then we matured enough to be influenced by older kids and adults. And the way the our little corner of the world worked.
This is when we learned about power. Our nature was to be hungry. We found our nature was to cry out. The other adults and older children had a complex power arrangement that helped them determine who would feed us. And when. And with what.
Also there is the physics of the thing. The bounty of the free market. Manufactured baby food. Diapers made from manufactured materials. Cribs. Toys. All the things that someone had to invent. Some other guy had to manufacture and deliver to wherever the baby was at.
What I have come to demand, and to desire. Is to avoid all power being used against me. And to be forced to join any power structures by fiat. And I want to live and let live and not have any unnatural power over anyone else.
I should have dominion over those I rightfully provide for or am in relationships with, according to nature. I should be able to trade for things I want by offering the things of the value I have made or acquired. Things that came to be because of my mastery of physics. My improving and harnessing nature via knowledge and ability of physics.
So in the shit sandwich of life. I don’t want any power shit in my lunch. No free lunch eaten nor provided. Just the slice of nature and the physics of bread made from wheat and honed and formed into bread via physics.
Thus Trump, the privileges of being a Texan. Of being in a neighborhood first. I embrace all the natural aspects of these. And all the physics that are brought to bear to profit from cattle.
But I abjure and object to any kind of power from this. There is no good power. Nor bad power. Power is just something that doesn’t exist for me.
4,700 year old history of brands
http://www.cowboyshowcase.com/brands.html
History of American West Cattle Branding
http://buckarooleather.blogspot.com/2011/01/history-of-american-west-cattle.html
West Texas Oilmen N Malone Mitchell
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/1108/focus-malone-mitchell-oil-gas-tom-ward-trading-texas-for-istanbul.html
I think I have to agree with Ann Coulter on Trump’s picking Pence as his VP. Trump just painted a huge target on his back. Pence is part of the NWO gang and is hugely acceptable to that cabal thus making a Trump assassination more not less likely. Ann listed several individuals that would make more sense as Trump’s running mate vs Snake In The Grass Pence. After all, Pence supports every item on the Globalist’s agenda. More immigration, TPP, etc. Trump might be crazy like a fox but if I were him I’d fire the Secret Service and hire private protection so Pence could not off me as easily as Johnson did Kennedy.
Anything Coulter says – believe the opposite! She is a well-paid shill for the GOP.
But….that she has teamed up with Milo Yiannopoulos…you gotta grin at that one.
http://www.breitbart.com/milo/2016/07/13/milo-ann-coulter-hold-joint-book-signing-event-gop-convention-cleveland/
@Eric,
Hey, I am not a fan of Coulter but I do agree with her statement that Pence makes Trump a target. Am I a Trump fan? Nooooooooo. I am just watching the game show play out and looking at how things develop. With Pence as VP it is my belief, Trump will be dead within the first year. Then it will be Armageddon all over again. While I really don’t like Trump at all, he probably doesn’t deserve to die at the hands of the NEO-Crapcons.
Hi David,
That is certainly possible. That said, I do my best to avoid that aging shill – who has had her face so far up the elephant’s ass for so long it now looks like an elephant’s ass!
It would appear that I am not the only one that thinks Trump is a Dead Man Walking….
So says Charles Burris:
Dead Man Walking
“With his choice of Pence as his VP nominee I believe Trump just destroyed his maverick campaign and its credibility by selecting a banal party hack undeniably connected to the corrupt GOP “free trade” corporatist, militarist and war mongering establishment. Even “Little Marco” Rubio loves this guy. His Trumpian base of anti-establishment insurgents thoroughly disgusted with politics-as-usual (not the GOP establishment’s staid rank-and-file base of zombies who never cared much for him) will never trust him again, and will stay away from the polls by the millions in November. This was done, no doubt, in a futile attempt to consolidate that #NeverTrump GOP base. This also destroyed any chance of cross-party outreach to Bernie Sanders’ economic populists disgusted with Hillary because of Pence’s “social conservative” views on gay marriage and Planned Parenthood. Trump may as well paint a bulls eye target on his forehead for the deep state who will no doubt try to pull a “John Hinckley” after January 20, 2017 if it didn’t already hand over and assure Hillary’s election. There are still months to go in this bizarre election cycle and the conventions and their ensuing violent riots and civil insurrections have not even been held yet. Let’s all see how this freak show plays out.”
This is a pretty fair assessment of the, now, Trump campaign. I venture to say that Trump has gone full bore, let’s appease the Neo-Crapcon wing, and that voters will stay home in droves. Nothing to see here move along…..
I do wonder if perhaps Trump isn’t thinking the same thing.
Make himself out to be stoopid, be a target, and… Come the swearing-in, his VP catches a fatal case of (something). Lead, TNT, nerve gas, fugu fish…
Then replace said individual with the preferred office holder. (Not going to look up that succession right now, work to do.)
But I’m concerned it’s a fantasy on my part. 🙁
Trump and Pence are authoritarians, but they also believe in the 1st and 2nd amendments very strongly (for politicians). I’m told Pence supported failed legislation to legalize concealed and open carry without a permit in Indiana.
This is so much better than Hitlery I can’t help but want him to win. The very real prospect of having national reciprocity and the “hearing protection act” (takes suppressors off the NFA) signed into law almost makes me want to vote for them.
Then again, a Hitlery win accelerates the nation’s demise, which could be a good thing.
Another possible upside to Hitlery – she might decide to outright do away w/the 2nd Amendment, rather than just nibble away at it. That could be the straw that broke the camel’s back.
Did I just call her a camel?
9 out of 10 men that tried Camels preferred women.
You need to stop polling arabs, my friend… 😉
They think G-O-A-T spells woman, first off… (Camels are ornery beasts, and therefore much like non-Stockholm syndrome women.) 😉
All Pence believes in is power.
Can’t say I know much about Pence. But he does seem to be at least a wee bit of an outsider.
If Trump had picked a ‘mainstream conservative establishment Republican’ like the Newt (or Christie, etc., etc., ad nauseum) 1 of 2 things would have happened.
1: He would have lost the votes of enough people who support him only because he is an outsider so that Hitlery won the election.
2: He would have painted a huge target on his back.
Pence is not an outsider. 12 years in Congress nullifies that concept.
Yes, but he’s vastly less repellent than Newtie… and bottom line, Trump needs someone like Pence to win the general.
But now Paul Ryan is saying Pence is a great choice, and Rubio is agreeing.
http://www.westernjournalism.com/paul-ryan-speaks-out-on-trumps-choice-of-pence-for-vp/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=ConservativeTribune&utm_content=2016-07-15&utm_campaign=manualpost
Mike Pence
http://www.nndb.com/people/097/000039977/
Wants to make abortion almost universally unavailable. This would bring back the classic Baptist and Bootlegger scenario, where trillions could be made running a morning after pill abortion cartel and everybody makes a fortune, and we all get to make decisions about each others bodies which is what all of us holy rolling invisible apple eaters want to do anyway.
Conservative Republican; anti-abortion rights, anti-gay rights, pro-gun rights, anti-net neutrality.
Supported 2001 USA PATRIOT Act, 2002 Iraq War resolution, 2004 restriction to bankruptcy rules, 2005 Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), 2006 Secure Fence Act;
opposed 2008 GM/Chrysler bailout, 2008 Wall Street bailout, 2009 economic stimulus, 2010 health care reform.
The first thing that you need to do in order to begin the
process of destroying your child’s mind is you let your wife set up categories, empty
categories, which are moral absolutes.
I know, it’s not exactly in the kindergarten book, but trust me — well don’t trust me, let me reason it out and see if you believe me. This is how it works: You, with great
reverence — as the corrupting teacher, or parent, or person with authority — with great reverence, you vividly describe and are enormously passionate about things which the child cannot see.
Of course the first example of this that leaps to mind for most people is God, but that’s just one aspect of these crazy kaleidoscopes of fantasy that your children’s brains are squeezed into and cut up on.
So, of course, God – people all say: “Let’s have grace, let’s pray, let’s worship.”
Of course, Santa Claus is just one thin edge of the wedge in all of this.
So first you speak with enormous reverence and passion about
things which the child cannot see. And the child, of course, is baffled.
You are playing enormously on the power that you hold over the child
— I mean, you hold the power of life and death over this child, there’s
simply no way to get around that.
That is just the nature of biology: children will cleave to the wishes of their parents above all else, because without the parents there’s no survival, and so, biologically, those children who fought the moral absolutes or commandments of their
parents just tended to die off.
Parents have absolutely no problem sacrificing children to abstract moral ideals, as we see throughout the history of the world in terms of wars and religious torture and even beatings.
That child is going to inevitably cleave to the will of the parent — and so what you do, if you use are this evil, corrupting parent, is that you will — wild-eyed, or calmly, or passionately, but with some kind of reverence — talk about things that aren’t there, as if it’s perfectly natural, that you would talk about these things that don’t exist.
You basically say that there’s an invisible apple on the table — and
this would be your basic approach to wrecking a child’s mind very early
on in life.
The child knows apples, and he knows oranges, and he’s getting
the hang of that stuff. So he’s maybe two years old, two-and-a-half
years old — maybe if he’s bright eighteen months — so he’s getting the
hang of material reality, and how to describe things, and categorize
things, and understand them.
So what you do, to start to undermine the child’s sense of competency
in the physical realm, in the realm of the senses, is you all sit
down to dinner — and there is nothing on the table.
Then you, with great solemnity, reach over and pick up an “invisible
apple.” You pick up this invisible apple, along with the whole
family, and with great solemnity you all take a bite out of this invisible
apple, and you say, “That is the best apple I have ever tasted in my life.
It tastes like all the sugar and chocolate and glucose and fructose and
caramel you can dream of all piled together. It’s a mouth orgasm that I
just can’t even speak about!”
And everybody agrees. This is “The Emperor’s New Clothes syndrome.”
Everybody agrees, and then everybody mimes, and so on.
The child, of course, is completely bewildered — let’s say she’s your youngest child. The youngest child is just completely baffled — he can’t for the life of him understand what on earth is going on.
Everything has kind of made sense so far. Every sort of concept or abstraction
that he are building on based on the evidence of his senses kind of
makes sense.
In the beginning, when you’re playing with your little baby, you roll a
ball that they can see. You roll it under a blanket and they just lose interest,
because they think it’s ceased to exist. At some point — a couple
of months, six months, seven months, eight months — they begin
to develop object constancy, where they go, “Aha! The ball that has rolled
under the blanket has not ceased to exist, it is simply under the blanket!”
And then they pull the blanket off the ball and continue to play
with it, if that’s what they want.
Every abstraction that the child has built up on — that letters
mean things on the page that mean objects that are transmitted
through the senses, and there’s a correlation between concepts and instances
— all of the amazing and fantastic developments of neuron complexity and brain complexity that is going on in a child’s mind for the first couple of years — it all sort of comes to complete shuddering halt during this imaginary fruit eating dinner table conversation, because everything that he’s eaten before has substance, and tastes, andn he can see it, and everybody else can see it, and now the whole family,
everybody around the table is “eating” something and he can’t see it.
So then you think, as a child, “Well, maybe everyone else can see
it!” So you reach out to where everybody seems to be taking the fruit
from, and you can’t feel anything! Well what you gonna do? I mean, it’s
a bizarre and deranged situation!
The behavior at the dinner table is just so astoundingly
corrupting and destructive of the child’s mind. The child’s first reaction is horror and fear, because one of two things is occurring. Either he’s lost the ability to process essential sensual information — which, to living organism, is a death sentence —
and a murderously horrible death sentence, because it’s going to be a
slow, horrible death.
You either can’t figure out what to eat, or you try to eat a pine cone or you can’t hear the lion coming, or you try to drink water and it turns out to be blood or urine, and it just becomes a horrible death sentence if you lose the ability to process essential sensual information – that’s just a terrible thing to happen! There’s almost no worse fate to an organism other than simply a quick death.
So, either the child has lost the ability to process sensual information,
or the child has the ability to process essential information and
his entire family is lying to him about a very essential fact.
Those are two absolutely, unbelievably terrible options for a
child, a young child, to face. “Either I’ve lost the ability for my brain to
work effectively with reality, and therefore I’m going to face a life of
incredible struggle, danger, and death, and it’s going to be very short
life at that, too. Either that has happened, or my family is lying to me
in such a fundamentally destructive way that I would actually prefer it
if they just beat me across the head with a stick!”
Hi Tor,
No question, Pence is a “good Republican.” But Trump needs one to get the support of the flag humpers and Bible beaters, without whom he cannot win the election. What would be the point of putting even Ron Paul on the ticket knowing that it would cost the election? Why bother? Why not just appoint Hillary Dear Leader … for the duration?
I take comfort in believing that Trump doesn’t believe in “the word” – that he is not a religious nutter and is only doing The Pence for practical political reasons. I do not think it is his goal to outlaw abortion or erect a theocratic warfare state.
But – per the Horseface – if Trump is eliminated, his stellvertreter would likely seek to do exactly those things…
I guess one question would be, will “the flag humpers and Bible beaters” support Hitlery?
My concern is, yes, they would (and still might be made out to, “it matters only who counts the votes…”)
Trump is 13 years older than Mike. The attorney Pence can be an excellent subordinate counsel for Trump, and Pence opens the door of a lot of future opportunities for himself. A mutual bargain, not some weird MI6 psyop setup like Reagan picking the head of the CIA as VP or the Chimp picking a intellectual superior 5 years senior to him who wasn’t handed everything on a silver platter like some Orwellian Boy From Brazil.
The spin in Britain and elsewhere, is Trump is some kind of clown. And that a serious Republican or Third Party candidate is going to emerge soon as a “serious” alternative to Hitlery.
Pence is meant to be reassuring about that, showing that while Trump may be an egomaniac huckster, he is being as serious as one can be about the whole bread and circuses charade. He’s going to wear the Emperor’s new clothes with as much dignity as one can wear them.
[1] Mike Pence
Michael Richard “Mike” Pence (born June 7, 1959) is an American politician and attorney who has been serving as the 50th Governor of Indiana since 2013.
A member of the Republican Party, he previously represented Indiana’s 6th congressional district in the United States House of Representatives from 2001 to 2013 and served as Chairman of the House Republican Conference from 2009 to 2011.
Pence is a conservative and a longtime supporter of the Tea Party movement.
Pence’s family are Irish Catholic Democrats. He is named after his grandfather, Richard Michael Cawley, a Chicago bus driver who came to the United States from Ireland through Ellis Island.
Pence worked 2 years as an admissions counselor at Hanover college from 1981 to 1983. After graduating from Indiana University law school in 1986, Pence worked as an attorney in private practice.
In 1991, he became the president of the Indiana Policy Review Foundation, a self-described free-market think tank.In 1994, he began a career in talk radio hosting The Mike Pence Show” calling himself “Rush Limbaugh on decaf” since he considered himself politically conservative while not as outspoken.
The show was syndicated by Network Indiana and aired weekdays 9 a.m. to noon on 18 stations throughout the state, including WIBC in Indianapolis. From 1995 to 1999, Pence also hosted a weekend political talk show out of Indianapolis.
Pence met his wife Karen while she was playing guitar at Mass at St. Thomas Aquinas Church. Mike proposed marriage on Aug. 6, 1984, as the two walked along the canal in the Meridian-Kessler neighborhood of Indianapolis, stopping to feed the ducks. They married in June 1985.
After the birth of their first child, his wife Karen decided to take a class in watercolor painting. This led to a career painting portraits of houses. The couple have three children, Michael, Charlotte, and Audrey.
The more I ponder Trump, the more I think he is “crazy like a fox.”
Yes, he got a huge leg up from his old man. But he didn’t get to be a billionaire by being a fool.
And I believe that while his election will not be a victory for Libertarians it would be a crushing defeat for statist Democrats and Republicans.
That’s no small potatoes.
Consider – if you still have trouble embracing Trump – the obvious hate/fury directed at him by the likes of The Chimp and his entire inbred family. The Kristols and Krauthammers.
That’s no small potatoes, either.
Don’t forget the Kochs!
Crazy like a fox or crazy like a wolf who rules and takes all of everything he wants before any other wolf gets his while they eat everything that isn’t a wolf.
When it comes to abortion, nobody has anything morally to say about what anyone else does and especially men to have any say of what women do. When I can become pregnant than maybe I have an opinion someone else might consider. Up to that point, it’s none of my bidness.
I’m torn in voting for Trump, staying at home or voting for libertarians just to join in and make a point. If hitlery wins, we can almost be assured of a world wide famine and catastrophe., destruction. It might be the very thing that brings peace and freedom back to the world but the problem is, there will be a small fraction of people left, maybe a small fraction of everything left including knowledge and ability to live above a basic live off the earth ilfestyle with virtually nothing left that makes us technological. We have reached the time I have warned my friends about for 15 years, a time of destruction. I’m not hot to reach that neither under Hitlery nor Trump.
Hi Eight,
I think the abortion issue will be the least of our worries if Hillary wins.
This is about triage for me.
Hillary and what will slouch into DC along with her would be nothing less than catastrophic for whatever remains of what America once was. Just try to imagine a Supreme Court with Justice Obama and two others like him. Yes, abortion will remain legal. But everything else will soon be illegal.
Trump might stop this, hence I support him in order to defeat her.
Yeah, I know. I just wanna leave….but that’s been in my “want” basket for a couple decades.
Triage indeed. I honestly believe that the Communist cadre has gotten so much of the insane shopping list that they wanted under Obastard, that when it all starts coming completely apart that there will be death camps. If Hitlery/Polly Pot gets in there will be firing squads- these people are quite mad and they have no sense of humor.
I don’t like Trump…..but I’m willing to take a chance on him rather than put what we know would be the final nail in office. I hope enough people look at it this way and suck it up. SCOTUS is in play and will shape the course of the country for decades to come…..we cant let hitlery be the one picking justices.
Hi Shemp,
Yes – exactly.
Think of it this way: If you were presented with the choice to vote for more or less (but not no) property taxes. which would you choose?
Yes, I’d like to vote for a principled Libertarian; I’d really like to get rid of voting altogether (i.e., end the practice of putting other people’s lives and property up for auction).
But that’s not on the table.
Less is not as good what you’d prefer – but it’s much better than nothing.
That’s the biggest problem with politics, elections and voting. If you have principles, you will never get elected.