Whoops!

Comments

  1. It is backfiring bigly!

  2. WASHINGTON, D.C.—Congressional Democrats recently noticed a problem in our nation: many of the people who voted for Donald Trump have yet to be beaten up.

    Our Democratic leaders in Washington decided it was time to solve this problem because they are really good at identifying problems we didn’t even know we had and then solving them.
    Presidential candidate Joaquin Castro, who spearheaded the program, explained, “The solution is simple and cost-effective: a national Trump Voter Registry, forcing anyone who voted for Trump to register so people around them will be able to be cautious and vigilant while living among such reckless hate.”
    Anyone who voted for Trump will have to sign up on the national registry’s website. Then, their name and address will automatically appear on a map of the country so that their neighbors can avoid them and hopefully beat them up.
    The bill also contains many other requirements for Trump voters:
    They cannot live within 1,000 feet of a school, park, or civilized Democrat.
    They must knock on all doors of other people in their neighborhood when they move in and identify themselves as a Trump voter.
    They are required to wear their MAGA hats at all times so they can easily be identified as a legitimate target of harassment.
    They must hire a crier to go before them and shout “SHAME! SHAME! SHAME!” whenever they go outside.
    They are not allowed to get a job or conduct commerce unless they agree to get the Mark of Obama on their hand and forehead.
    “With this new registry, we can finally have healing in our nation,” said Nancy Pelosi. “Especially Trump voters. They’ll have to have a lot of healing after they get punched in the face.”

  3. @Mathius

    To answer your question about what could Trump do in order for me to not vote for him….become a Democrat 😀

  4. Guns are a plague on mankind. They are the source of all violence in our modern world. Can you imagine how peaceful the world would be if guns didn’t exist? Well, you don’t have to imagine. There was such a time; it’s called our distant past.

    In the long, long ago, people lived in harmony. They had no choice but to, as they had nothing to shoot each other with. Theoretically, they had bows and arrows, but if you’ve ever actually tried to use one, they’re basically impossible to hit anything with. So if they had a problem, they just talked things out. If things got really heated, they’d settle things with a riddle competition. And men were respectful to women, as there were no guns to enhance toxic masculinity. Also, politicians only ever did the will of the people since there was no NRA to buy them off. And no one knew anything about war, because how would you have a war without guns? Throw rocks at each other? Who could haul that many rocks to a battlefield? It’s impractical.
    Life was basically as peaceful as a John Lennon song or a Communist country.
    This all changed, though, when the inventor of guns (Bob Gun, I believe) created guns in his racism laboratory while trying to find ways to enhance racism. Since then, gun deaths have increased infinity-fold, from zero to more than zero. And there have been violence, murder, and, admittedly, some very entertaining John Wick movies. Also, think of all the wars since then. World War I. World War II. World War: Vietnam. World War: Desert Heat. And the World War prequel, World War Stories: The Civil War.
    It’s no exaggeration to say things are now a million billion times more violent than before guns were invented. It’s past time to get rid of all the guns and go back to how peaceful and nice everyone was in ancient history. It won’t end all conflicts, but it will get pretty close. We’ll just have to think of some good riddles to stave off invasion.

    😀 😀

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      Oh those peaceful days before guns. Like the “peaceful” resolution between Rome and Carthage over Sicily in 256 BC in one sea battle off Cape Ecomenus between 40000 and 50000 sailors were killed. Up close and personal.

      • Dale A Albrecht says:

        The wars led in his name, Genghus Khan, killed some 40 million people (about 10% of the world’s population at the time)! While it’s impossible to know for sure how many people perished during the Mongol conquests, many historians put the number at somewhere around 40 million.

        Bows and arrows and swords

        Hitler was an amateur with his modern weapons

        • Genghis killed so many people that huge swaths of land returned to nature and re-forested. In fact, as a consequence, so much carbon was sequestered, that it (roughly) equates to about a year’s worth of gasoline usage today. We can see the traces in ice cores from the Antarctic.

          • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

            Does that explain the “little ice age”?

            • Doubtful – a year’s worth of gasoline sounds like a lot (and it is!), but it’s really just a blip when you consider it had to have been spread over the better part of a century.

              Fun Fact #2: To “decimate” a population means to literally reduce by 10%. As such he is the only person who has ever literally decimated the human race.

              Fun Fact #3: Despite his efforts at wholesale slaughter, he also had a lot of children. It is estimated that about 1-in-200 people alive today are his direct descendants. That number increases to 35% if you’re Mongolian.

          • Dale A Albrecht says:

            So you’ve just made a good case to NOT vaccinated. Or eliminate WHO and the CDC. Let the plagues, viruses and contagions run rampant. That’ll reduce man’s impact real fast and save the planet. Or espouse more communist takeovers like in China and murder 100M people to get their way. Besides war, plagues and disease kept man in a stable earth friendly population density. Once science started fixing those “problems” and it became an international contest to see whose population had the longest life expectancy. Science has caused the damn overpopulation problem in the 1st place😁

    • Just A Citizen says:

      BLAME THE CHINESE…………… gunpowder. And the Italian merchant who smuggled it home.

  5. Actress Rosanna Arquette took to Twitter to apologize to her followers for being “born white and privileged” just days after saying she’ll never again stand for the American flag.
    “I’m sorry I was born white and privileged. It disgusts me. And I feel so much shame,” the “Pulp Fiction” actress wrote on Twitter Wednesday.

    Another mentally ill Lefty comes out of the closet.

    • I can’t say if she was being sarcastic or trying to make a joke or if she’s just nuts. A quick check suggests a bunch of other tweets in the hard-left camp well over the line into nut-job territory, so the later seems most likely. That said, her twitter is blocked for non-followers (I don’t have twitter).

      That said, rather weirdly for someone so far on the loonie tunes side of hard-left, the picture at the top of her page has someone prominently wearing a MAGA hat.. make of that what you will..

      THAT SAID, Another mentally ill Lefty comes out of the closet.

      Would you like me to go out of my way to itemize every crazy person as if they were indicative of the whole?

      AnOtHeR mEnTaLlY IlL rIgHtY cOmEs OuT oF tHe ClOsEt!!1!1! O _ o

      • I think one being prejudiced against themself, is a clue she nuts.

        But let’s be honest she didn’t have to walk all that far left to come to the conclusion that white people are bad.

        • But let’s be honest she didn’t have to walk all that far left to come to the conclusion that white people are bad.

          Let’s be honest, then… I’m pretty left.

          My friends are pretty left.

          My family is pretty left.

          I went to a pretty liberal college.

          I work with pretty liberal people.

          I have never once met a person in real life who thinks that “white people are bad.”

          Not even a non-white person making that assertion.

          I have met a girl (sorry, vagina’d-American) who believes that men and the patriarchy are filth. She threatened to gouge out my eye for the unforgivable crime of holding the door for her.

          I have seen a black man raving on the street who said that all white people are so privileged that we have “no excuse” for not being millionaires. By implication, I assume, we’re oppressing the black man, I suppose. So, I guess, you could reasonably infer that he thinks “white people are bad.”

          But that’s as close as I’ve ever seen.

          My point, V, is that, while this person assuredly exists, they’re the bleeding edge of lunacy within “the left.” Basically, they are to “us” what your crazy-racist uncle is to “you.”

          These people are out there. They are. And, sure, they’re nominally on “my side,” but they are super rare and are just aren’t indicative in any way of what it means to be a liberal in America.

          They are – however – extremely useful props for someone like Gman to point to and say something sanctimoniously assholic like “another mentally ill Lefty comes out of the closet” so that he can pretend we’re all just a bunch of nut jobs unlike his side, which is lucid as the day is long.

          I suppose he just sleeps better at night when he is able to delude himself into believing that no one actually opposes his worldview unless they’re mentally ill.

          • I am not talking about everyday people on the left. I’m talking about the Democratic party and it’s power structure, the ones with the microphones. They promote that whites are bad everyday, constantly, it is unending. You can’t ignore that fact just because the vast majority of democrats aren’t bad people. These are still the ideas that the democrat party is promoting, even if these specific ideas isn’t everyone’s reason for supporting them.

            • I’m talking about the Democratic party and it’s power structure, the ones with the microphones

              What I’m saying is that “the ones with the megaphone” in modern times is “everyone.” And people like Gman are only listening in for the crazy people who have those megaphones.

              This woman is no one. She’s a minor has-been celebrity. I’ve already forgotten her name.
              Quick, without looking up, what was her name? What was she famous for? Why should we give a flying crap what she has to say? If you can answer any of those questions, you’re better than me.

              For every one of her, there are thousands of equally “nobody” minor has-been celebrities on the left who aren’t insane. Who aren’t spouting off absurd bulshit like this on twitter and who are being completely ignored by the right. Why? Because a sane comment is boring and doesn’t reinforce the narrative they want to hear – that the left is just a bunch of stupid lemmings following a crazy agenda.

              So he picks up on the crazy ones (in truth, whatever ultra-biased rag he reads picks up them and he just parrots them). And then he puts them here, one after the other, as though they were indicative of the whole.

              Neither the Democratic party nor it’s power structure, nor anyone significant figure within it is making any claim even remotely similar to this.

              They promote that whites are bad everyday, constantly, it is unending.

              I would like you to point me at someone with power or authority within the Democratic party who says this (within the last, say, decade). Not just some random off-hand comment by one back-bencher, or mayor of a town of 45 people, or a blogger. Give me a significant person who said something to this effect in clear terms. Who actually tried to make the case that “whites are bad.”

              If they’re doing it “everyday, constantly,” it should be easy to point to.

              Is Pelosi doing it? Obama? Warren? Bernie?

              Or is it possible that people like Gman have just been peppering you with these random nobodies so constantly for so long that it begins to blend into a narrative?

              These are still the ideas that the democrat party is promoting, even if these specific ideas isn’t everyone’s reason for supporting them.

              What I’m saying is that I don’t believe this IS what the Democratic party is promoting.

              Maybe it’s in the party platform somewhere?

              Point me at something concrete and I’ll admit my error. Hell, if you prove me wrong, I’ll make a donation right now to the Trump campaign.

              I’m not saying there aren’t those within “my” camp who think this way. What I’m saying is that they are a lunatic minority and have no real power, and certainly no power to set the agenda.

              What Gman is doing is pointing at stray lunatics and using them to paint the whole of the left (read: the Democratic party) as though the position were indicative of the greater whole. And if he and his ilk do this enough, the repetition makes it feel like this is the actual position.

              • Nothing stray about these lunatics. We have plenty on our side too, but we don’t apologize for being white, scream because our candidate lost, hit people because of their political beliefs, pretend we are anti-fascist then go out and do fascist things, call people racists without legit cause and I can go on and on. We are crazy, no doubt.

              • You know what? I had a big reply all typed out.. I was going to argue it…

                But, you know, I keep forgetting.

                You’re a hyper-partisan hack who thinks your side is good and noble and smart while mine is evil and violent and stupid.

                Nothing I could ever say would convince you otherwise because you have your head wedged so far up your tribal mentality that there’s no point in discussing it with you. You are incapable of seeing things from any perspective other than the biased view of the left where you have already adjudged us to be the irredeemable dregs of humanity.

                My team good.

                His team bad.

                Anything I could possibly say or show gets filtered through that lens. Everything I point out of your side is written off, obfuscated, or hand-waved away. Anything bad done by any member of “my side” is indicative of the whole.

                Why bother. There are better uses of my time.

                So I deleted my reply.

                Have a nice day.

              • I’ve gotta go, take my daughter to the dentist, so I can’t really respond right now. But one more question before I go. Do you, Mathius agree that democrats are purposely attacking and demonizing men?

              • That’s good Mathius, because if I have to explain one more time that I’m not speaking in terms of a broad brush and that most Democrat leaning people are good people, because of your poor memory, I’m gonna scream. I’m not going to lower myself to calling you names because you can’t seem to remember this, but you should check with your doctor about early onset of dementia.

                You have a nice day too!

  6. The ‘death camps for Trump supporters’ fliers that were seen in New York yesterday have now been posted on homes and cars belonging to the staff of Republican Congressman Lee Zeldin.
    As we highlighted yesterday, the disturbing fliers were previously posted on street posts and parking meters in Patchogue, New York.
    The fliers feature the threatening text in red and a stylized image of Trump’s face as a skeleton.

    No community is immune from this political hate. This is happening now in NY-1 (also being placed on my staffers’ homes & cars). Between this, trying to publicly shame GOP donors here & worse, those w hate consuming their hearts are only sowing division! https://t.co/Dpe5tkNotn
    — Lee Zeldin (@RepLeeZeldin) August 7, 2019

    Now leftists appear to be targeting Republican lawmakers with the same message.
    “No community is immune from this political hate,” tweeted Rep. Zeldin. “This is happening now in NY-1 (also being placed on my staffers’ homes & cars). Between this, trying to publicly shame GOP donors here & worse, those w hate consuming their hearts are only sowing division!”
    Following the mass shooting in El Paso on Saturday, which the media blamed on Trump despite the shooter himself saying he was not radicalized by Trump, leftist hysteria and violent threats towards conservatives appears to be on the increase.

  7. T minus 9 days (and 10 minutes)

  8. I watched Tucker and Dale last night. Mixed feelings. It kept my interest for the most part and I definitely laughed. Was both impressed by the twist on horror shows while being a little horrified and disappointed at the same time. Trying hard not to be a spoiler. 😊

    • Canine Weapon says:

      A) That thing with the wood chipper was pure genius.

      B) Tucker (the thinner one) was played by Alan Tudyk who, amongst other things, was classically trained and went to Julliard, as you can clearly see below:

  9. Canine Weapon says:

    “Foreign affairs is like sex. If you loudly proclaim that you’re going to come first, you’re going to have trouble finding willing partners.” – John Oliver

  10. Hi V.,

    Do you, Mathius agree that democrats are purposely attacking and demonizing men?

    No.

    I believe some people who happen to be Democrats on the left are attacking and demonizing men.

    As mentioned, I had a personal run-in with one of them in college.

    But the fact that, given the circles I run in, I have only ever met one such person tells me they are a small minority. They certainly feel more numerous because (A) they’re so friggin’ loud and (B) people like Gman constantly amplify them to support their partisan narrative.

    I would only caution you to carefully distinguish between between “attacking and demonizing men” and “attacking certain things that might be considered classically masculine.”

    But we shouldn’t think that because I’m against certain cultural anachronisms that I’m “attacking and demonizing men.” If I said “men shouldn’t pinch the waitress’ ass as she walks by,” that’s really not an attack on men – it’s an assertion that pinching the waitress’ ass is not appropriate. But, having said that, many on the right (like Gman) would deliberately miss my point and hear, instead, “Mathius thinks all men grope women. He thinks we need special laws to stop men from doing this because men are animals incapable of controlling themselves. Mathius thinks all men should be locked in cages for the good of society.” (ok, fine, excuse the hyperbole, but you see the point)

    If someone produced an ad directed at men, advising against rape, it wouldn’t be an attack on men. It’d be an effort to help eliminate a bad behavior. But some on the right would pick it up and find a way to take umbrage “the left thinks all men are rapists!”

    I’d direct you to that Gillette ad which got so much flack a while back… what was it really criticizing? Many people saw it as an attack on men. I didn’t. I saw it, perhaps a bit ham-handed, as an attack on certain aspects of our culture as they relate to men. Bullying. “don’t be a sissy.” Acceptance / tolerance of sexual harassment. “Boys will be boys.” Belittling women. Etc. These aren’t thing about “men.” They are things that our culture is permissive of men doing. It wasn’t an attack on me. It was a call to be our best selves. To be better people. What’s wrong with asking people to be better human beings?

    I think many people look at the left like this. They see us demonizing “male behaviors” and they have a hard time separating it from demonizing “males.” Only the tiniest of tiny factions within the left would ever make the case that “men are bad” or anything akin to that. But a whole lot of us would argue that there’s a lot to fix about American culture as it relates to men.

    • If someone produced an ad directed at men, advising against rape, it wouldn’t be an attack on men. It’d be an effort to help eliminate a bad behavior. But some on the right would pick it up and find a way to take umbrage “the left thinks all men are rapists!”

      Mathius….you are better than this, sir.

    • I’d direct you to that Gillette ad which got so much flack a while back… what was it really criticizing? Many people saw it as an attack on men. I didn’t. I saw it, perhaps a bit ham-handed, as an attack on certain aspects of our culture as they relate to men. Bullying. “don’t be a sissy.” Acceptance / tolerance of sexual harassment. “Boys will be boys.” Belittling women. Etc. These aren’t thing about “men.” They are things that our culture is permissive of men doing. It wasn’t an attack on me. It was a call to be our best selves. To be better people. What’s wrong with asking people to be better human beings?

      No sir…I think you are wrong. I WILL understand, and do, your version of this but I have a real problem with your version. I will not even think of calling you a name or even be disparaging, but AOC and her ilk are becoming the voice of the democratic party. I think that trying to change “cultural aspects” is the same thing as saying that we need to change everyone who does not think like us,,,,,and this is very dangerous. You want examples of of personal attacks against the conservatives and labeling all people on the right…..just watch the re-runs of the Kavanaugh hearings, just listen to being called “deplorables”…this name was against all people who voted for Trump.,,, and that is the way I took it. So quit trying to deflect the narrative…..I am a gun nut because I like guns and target shooting and hunting…I do not mind carrying that label but it is a label. I am a life member of the NRA and that makes me supportive of all mass murderers….and that is also a label. There are a great number of labels that have been put on all white people…..if we are white, we are racists by definition. If we are against ANTIFA…we are racists. If I say that all immigrants, who violated the law, should return home, I am racist….but what I see is that it is ok to violate the law and if I am against it, I am KKK or racist.

      I guess I am now a true independent…..and I abhor what both sides are doing. There is plenty of blame going around…..you listed what you and your liberal say and think. Well, my conservative friends think almost the complete opposite. We see ourselves being painted under one brush. We see AOC and the extreme left as running the Democratic party.

      As I have said many times, I do not like President Trump but he has my support and I listed my reasons why. I do not want any vestige of Europe and I do not want any vestige of a world order….You and I disagree on this and we do not call each other names. I do not want any vestige of the “greater good” and neither should you because it is discriminatory. IT does the very thing you are against, or say you are against…it discriminates against one group in favor of another…..AND…..you make money off it.

      And, if you are taking this as a personal affront, you would be wrong….because you and I can talk and you and I can reason…..we are just cut from different cloth…..

      • You and I disagree on this and we do not call each other names.

        What are you talking about? I call you all kinds of names!

        Maybe not to your face… you are a gun nut after all…. but still, all kinds of names!

        We see ourselves being painted under one brush

        That’s kind of my point!

        BUT it goes both ways… you feel like “your side” is being painted with a broad brush and… you might find this hard to believe, but…. I AGREE!

        THAT SAID, I also feel that “my side” is being painted with a broad brush. I feel like the partisans on the right – including Trump and a certain person here – are constantly painting us on the left as out to get your side, as violent, as criminal, as liars, as man-hating, as white-hating, as as as as as as…..

        I won’t deny that our politicians crap all over your side just as you would never deny that your politicians crap all over mine. And they’re assholes – the lot of them.

        BUT some of these positions (the Democrats are anti-man, anti-white) stem from hyper partisan blogs picking up and amplifying the tiny minority of loud-mouthed idiots. These people are lifted from obscurity into the echo chambers of the other side because they support the narrative. Because they paint the other side in the worst light. Because it is easier to argue with a dehumanizing caricature. Both sides do this constantly – just look at HuffPo or something and you can’t go a day without them highlighting some racist idiot on the right who voted for Trump being shown as “see, another mentally ill Righy comes out of the closet.” And you’ll note that I -DON’T- make a point of dragging that nonsense here. So I think you understand where I’m coming form when I object to a certain other person doing it against “my side” and then making broad assertions about the evils of the left.

        Both “sides” are basically the same. We’re lead by assholes we hate but who we think are marginally better than the other side’s leaders. We both hand lunatic fringe morons who the other side loves to use as a prop to show how stupid/bad/evil/racist/violent/etc our side is. We both feel that the other side is doing wrong by our side. We both are right about that.

        What drives me CRAZY is that you (I think) can see this. Of course you think your side is better on policy blah blah blah. But you don’t act like your side is good and mature and honest and decent while acting like mine is evil and violent and immature and stupid. It drives me nuts. More than half the country is on “my team,” such as it is, and a certain person here keeps acting like we are all defined by our worst elements while hand-waiving away the worst elements on his own side.

        His side is good. My side is white-hating, man-hating racist America-hating fascist morons. I guess if he were stupid, I could just write him off. If he were just ignorant, I could write him off. If he were dishonest or intellectually lazy, I could write him off. But he’s not. And, worse, JAC, who is VERY much not those things either, seems to be more-and-more taking the same view. If the people here – extremists and lunatics though you are – can’t find their way to a clear-eyed discussion without resorting to characterizing the other side, what hope is there for civil discourse in America at large?

        we are just cut from different cloth…..

        Not so different. We both want the right answer and can have a lucid conversation.

        It’s just that you’re wrong a lot of the time and I’m not. ::shrug::

        • we are just cut from different cloth…..

          Dibs on flannel!

          we are just cut from different cloth…..

          Politics aside, I’ve known you for a long time. I don’t think we’d have a damned thing to argue about other than politics. But lot of *ahem* protracted conversations *ahem* over a pint of grog.

  11. To whom it may concern:

    Here we have the case of Candice Keller.

    Who is Candice Keller, you ask? Who the hell knows? I’d never heard of her before today, and I’ll probably never hear about here again after today. She is a Republican state representative in Ohio. Unlike the never-was actress ::scrolls up:: Rosanna Arquette, Ms. Keller is an actual lawmaker, voted into office by Republicans and in a position to make and pass laws in the state of Ohio. Not a washed up actress, but an actual legislator.

    Here we see her blaming the Dayton shoot on, amongst other things, gay marriage drag queens, violent video games, open borders, marijuana, Obama, hatred of veterans, Colin Kaepernick, Democrats in congress (many of whom, apparently, are openly antisemitic), a lack of God in societal importance, and snowflakes who can’t accept Trump. (I especially like how she is pissed at the snowflakes for not accepting Trump, but still goes out of her way to blame Obama for something he had no involvement in).

    Now. Why am I posting about this person?

    Here’s why: SHE’S A FUCKING MORON AND IS NOT INDICATIVE OF THE RIGHT.

    See how I did that?

    I took the idiot de jure on the right and wrote her off as an idiot WITHOUT using her to draw some larger narrative about the moral and intellectual inferiority of the right.

    Here’s what happened: somehow, this woman got herself elected. No one knew who she was and no one cared because she was nobody. She was a minor state congresswoman who, so far as I know, has never been important. But then she ran her mouth. Someone saw it and alerted a left-leaning rag which signal boosted her. This was picked up by a bigger left-leaning rag like HuffPo or some such which foisted her into the national conversation. This forced MSNBC, CNN, BBC, USA Today, and even the NY Times to pick up the story. And, yes, Fox News, too. (Though not, as far as I can see, on cable, despite carrying the story about Rosanna Arquette… hmmm). And now, here we are, talking about this idiot because I copied the story from another site to post it here.

    What I’m not doing is saying: “LOOK! Another mentally ill Righty comes out of the closet.”

    Just because “my side” is able to cherry pick examples of the worst of the right doesn’t mean I have to buy into it. It’s seductive to feel morally and intellectually superior. It’s a warm and cozy feeling to say “I sure am glad I chose the right side.. just look at the idiots like this on the other side!”

    The Point is this: it’s easy to demonize the other side. I can post a story like this crap every single day. We can play tit-for-tat every single day of the year. You pick up some nobody from the left and use it to paint “my side.” I can pick up some nobody from the right and use it to paint “your side.” And we can fight to build competing narratives. See, I say, look how deranged and insane your side is, how mentally ill! And you say the same thing about my side.

    OR

    OR we can not act like idiots and fall into the trap of demonizing the other side and painting them with a broad brush. These people are morons and they’re few and far between and they’re not indicative of the wholes of our respective sides. They just make good click-bate for the media. Just as you would like me not to paint your side with a broad brush, I think it only fair that you refrain from doing so to mine.

    This woman ranting and blaming the shooting on drag queens and a football player and gay marriage and Obama is no more indicative of the mental health on the right as the woman who is ashamed of being white is of the left. I can see that. Can you?

    Can we please stop doing this?

    • Taken singularly, ever single point she makes is not sufficient to be the cause of our societal problems. Taken in total, they show a strong and unidirectional decline in our society. You are making a big mistake if you write her off as a kook.

    • Just A Citizen says:
      • It really shouldn’t be a shock to find that I think white people are people, too.

        If it’s not ok to say about a black person, it’s not ok to say about a white person.

        THAT SAID, I reject the assertion that there’s some massive movement afoot to “wage war” against white people or subjugate us. We are the hegemonic power in this country – something like 3/4 of Americans are white. We make up 78% of congress, control the Presidency (and the top dozen spots on the order of succession), 46 governorships (though 3 of those four sure do look white to me), and the top 15 (at least) spots on the richest Americans list. White people own the lion’s share of stocks and wealth in this country. We own Fox News, and are the CEO of all three major news networks.

        We ARE the power in this country, and the idea that anyone could plausibly subjugate us is absurd.

        What I’m trying to get at here is that no one with power has an incentive to wage war against the white population of the US. If it were the Democratic party, they would lose every election until the heat death of the universe. If it were MSNBC, they would go bankrupt.

        The only people doing and saying this kind of thing are a fringe minority of racists and/or morons.

        The PROBLEM is that “your side” keeps picking up on them, giving them an even bigger microphone, and then acting like the stray morons are indicative of “the left” or “Democrats” etc. This victimhood mentality is great for viewership and driving votes. This “us vs the crazy people” is great for viewership and driving votes. You know who it’s NOT great for? The left.

        So let me ask you this question: cui bono?

        • I think it’s a far left issue too, but the problem is that they are LOUD and on TV all the time. MSNBC, CNN push the “white man privilege” crap all the time. It don’t bother me, they are idiots and racists and are too stupid to realize the latter while screaming Trump is a racist.

          But you are correct, it is a fringe and not the whole. I know a lot of Democrats and NONE of them are like the kooks that we expose here.

    • Just A Citizen says:
    • Just A Citizen says:
    • Just A Citizen says:
    • Here we see her blaming the Dayton shoot on, amongst other things, gay marriage drag queens, violent video games, open borders, marijuana, Obama, hatred of veterans, Colin Kaepernick, Democrats in congress (many of whom, apparently, are openly antisemitic), a lack of God in societal importance, and snowflakes who can’t accept Trump.

      Sounds about right. What is your issue again?

    • You probably know this already, but the woman makes some very logical points. Like T-Ray says, it’s not just one thing in her rant, but the totality. The BIG problem is mental health, but how many things in her rant can trigger a breakdown? The Pulse shooting was an attack on gay’s, that’s undeniable.

  12. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/gop-lawmakers-town-hall-erupts-in-shouting-over-mass-shootings-trump/ar-AAFxobh

    If people think screaming and shouting for gun control, they are making the best case in the world AGAINST it.

    • If people think screaming and shouting for gun control is going to get it done,

    • They’re frustrated and they’re scared.

      Your argument for guns does not resonate with them.

      My position is difficult to understand and internalize and, so far as I know, I’m the only person on the planet making this case.

      That said, whether your side is ultimately right or wrong, it’s quite clear that the Republicans in congress are wholly owned subsidiaries of the gun lobby. And I think even you can see why that might piss some people off.

      Liberals don’t want to live in a world where they have to go around with body armor and carrying a gun for self-defense. They don’t want to have to send their kids to schools in armed fortresses. They want the threat to go away. They want the government to make them safe by taking away the dangerous things that nobody really needs anyway. They feel that the government is not doing its job to make them safe. And they feel this way because they believe that people like this lawmaker are in the pocket of the gun lobby rather than serving their constituents.

      And, whether that’s true or not, every time they try to blame video games or gay marriage or football players or drag queens or pushing the narrative that we’d be safer if more people had guns (which is absurd), while deliberately obfuscating and ignoring the the obvious-to-them answer of “just get rid of the guns, stupid,” they get just a little bit angrier.

      Imagine you had a neighbor who sets off fireworks at all hours of the night. Sometimes they hit your house. You consider this a danger. Let’s ignore your machismo that you’d just go shoot him in self defense. So you call the cops. The cops show up, ask some questions, then do nothing. You complain, and it turns out the guy is best friends with the police chief and a major donor to the benevolent society. You get the cops to show up again and they say, “wellllllll, we think the problem is that your house is painted the wrong color.. you should paint it green if you want to be safe.” And you should “no! It’s that he’s playing with fireworks, you moron!” And the cops keep pointing at the color of your house. More cops show up and they bring along more friends of your neighbor and they all just keep insisting that it’s your house color or that, maybe, you should also play with fireworks if you wanted to protect your home. “Do something about the fireworks! If you take away his fireworks, he can’t be a danger with fireworks!” you yell. “No, no, his fireworks are fine.. in fact, what we need are more fireworks. We’re trying to take care of the real issue… and that’s why we’re going to ban the house paint that you used.” See how that could piss you off?

      I’m not asking you to AGREE with them.. but are you able muster up enough perspective to see it through their eyes?

      • Just A Citizen says:

        How am I supposed to see things through the eyes of someone, per your long explanation, who is dumber than dirt or worse, flippin crazy?

  13. That’s it! I’m putting everyone on SUFA on timeout. Everybody needs a timeout every now and then. Homework assignment….take in this video and chill out. Pretty sure everyone here has heard about Dick Proenneke and his one man show in remote Alaska. Here, his modern protege, my man!, Shawn James, who has built his own log cabin, by himself, with only hand tools, in the Canadian back country, has chalked one off his bucket list and visited the famed Alaska cabin. Check it out, filmed during this past July…absolutely beautiful.

    • This was FAKE NEWS! That cabin was barely in this video!

      • A wiseguy, huh! This was actually part 5 of a 14 part series Shawn did. He says more details to come about the cabin on future videos. Your timeout extends to watch the entire series…maybe then you’ll lose the burr on your brow. Oh and…this is the ONLY REAL NEWS you need to know. Now what?

  14. A 20 year old walks into a Missouri Walmart with a loaded rifle and wearing body armor. An armed off duty firefighter held him at gunpoint until police arrive. NOONE was harmed.

    • As the left might point out, “if he didn’t have a gun, then he couldn’t have been a threat in the first place.”

      Again, I think I’ve established that this is not MY view. My view is that this guy is a statistical blip no different than lightning strikes or being crushed to death by a stampede of golden retrievers. It’s such a non-issue that we should just ignore it and move on with our lives the same way people don’t freak out about the number of people killed by cows each year (~20/yr).

      THAT SAID, it is easy to see the logic of “no guns = no gun violence.” And it is easy to see how and why the left might be pissed off when no one is making a reasonable case otherwise, instead offering up nonsense like this and blaming drag queens and video games.

      Did I just call this nonsense? Yes. Yes I did. Because every credible study shows that gun ownership makes you less safe, not more. Exceptions, of course, apply, but on balance, gun ownership makes you more likely to die via gun violence. Full Stop.

      Your odds of drowning increase if you own a pool. Your odds of dying via gun violence go up if you own a gun. Simple.

      Now, you might argue that that’s your right to take that risk for yourself – AND I AGREE! – but that’s not their objection. Their objection is that they shouldn’t have to take on that added risk. Instead, it should be that other people shouldn’t be able to put them in that position in the first place because (almost) no one “needs” a gun. In other words, you don’t have a right to put them at higher risk for no good reason. THAT’S their position.

      So you can prop up all the hero off-duty firefighters and 80-year-old grandmothers you want, but the left smells the bullshit coming off that argument, and they’re just feeling lied to.

      No wonder they’re pissed.

      • They’re gonna have to be pissed and scared then, cuz nothing is gonna change. Emotional eruptions do not make good policy. It is NOT the governments responsibility to provide for personnal security.

        • They’re gonna have to be pissed and scared then, cuz nothing is gonna change.

          True.

          Emotional eruptions do not make good policy.

          True.

          It is NOT the governments responsibility to provide for personnal security.

          We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

          • None of that provides for ones personnal security and you know that. They make laws for those purposes. Even the police are not responsible for personal security. Its actually called a personal responsiblity. Something many who want gun control cant seem to grasp.

            • We do all kinds of things to make society safer.

              I can’t drive to work at 100 miles per hour because (A) my car can’t do that and (B) it’s illegal. It’s illegal because it’s dangerous to others.

              Now, AGAIN, I don’t agree with the left on this, but can you explain to me why it’s ok to make some laws in order to stop people from being an unnecessary danger to others, but when it comes to guns, suddenly it’s not the government’s place to protect people anymore?

              • Because gun ownership is a human right.

              • Your concept of “human rights” is a little weird.

                On what do you base this assertion?

              • The Right is derived from historical facts. Over 200 million people killed by there governments AFTER the peoples guns were taken last century.

  15. “We choose unity over division. We choose science over fiction,” Biden yelled at the Iowa State Fair crowd, before adding “We choose truth over facts,” at which point the audience hollered.

    Is this a gaffe or how Liberals actually think? 😀 😀

    • With Biden………. who knows….?

      I liked when he congratulated the SF Giants on winning the Super Bowl.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        ROTFLMAO…………….never heard about that one.

        On Biden, among others. The fact he is running ahead in the Dem party polls and Trump is obviously the Rep. candidate, speaks volumes to the state of the Union.

  16. Mathius…how do you stop the anger that is going to come from the airing of the CBS movie about hunting down Trump supporters and killing them. CBS has said that it is protected speech and does not harbor hate and does not depict hate crimes.

    How would you expect this not to be a label and what would you expect the feelings of the right to be? CBS is a liberal TV site…..you react negatively to Trump Tweets….what would you expect back? Does CBS represent the liberal sentiment?

    • how do you stop the anger that is going to come from the airing of the CBS movie about hunting down Trump supporters and killing them.

      WHO? WHAT? HUH!?!

      What fresh hell is this?

      ::deep breath::

      Ok, I’m back… watched the trailer…

      It’s pretty damned clear to me that the “liberal elites” are the bad guys in this movie. The heroes are the hunted “regular Joes.”

      I didn’t see a word or even an implication about “Trump supporters” but I suppose it can be inferred because some of them are red necks or have southern accents. But even so, they’re the victims of liberal elites kidnapping them and hunting them down, fighting back heroically and, at least in a few places, turning the tables and killing the bad guys.

      Honestly, I’m not sure why the right should be taking umbrage on this.. it’s seems that the “liberal elites” are the ones being maligned here..

      CBS has said that it is protected speech

      It is.

      and does not harbor hate and does not depict hate crimes.

      Meh.

      At this point in my life, I’m finding it harder and hard to identify what is and is not a “hate crime” sometimes. What I can say is that these people are clearly assholes who don’t view the people they’re kidnapping as “people.”

      But as for “harboring” that hate.. no, I don’t think it does. It’s quite clear to me who is the bad guy and who is the good guy and the the ones doing the “hate crimes” are clearly the bad guys.

      It reminds me of the Hunger Games (meh).. you could very easily make the case that it depicts hate crimes… but you would never argue that it “harbors hate”.. the elites in the government are very clearly the bad guys, the victims are very clearly the good guys, and, in the end, we’re all rooting for the woman who has been abducted and forced into a live-or-death fight in an arena to escape and kill her enemies.

      Did you watch this trailer?

      • Looks like a great movie!

        • Looks a bit derivative, to be honest.. I’ve seen a bunch of movies along these lines..

          Battle Royale
          Hunger Games
          The Most Dangerous Game (short story)
          At least a half-dozen episodes of Star Trek

          But, hey, I’d give it a shot.. looks like mindless fun watching a woman kick some ass, going from intended-victim to hunter.. lots of Sarah Connor vibes…

          • Yes, you are correct but you have not mentioned that the hunted are labeled “Deplorables” or did you over look that part….Yes the Deplorables end up winning the battle and the Lineral Elites, as they are named in the movie, are the ones that end up dead or losing and the heroes are the “red necks’……….sort of like HUnger games…….but I see you writing this off as MEH……if these were red hatted MAGA….i do not suppose your answer would be Meh.

            • They’re victims.

              Whoever they are, whatever their ideology and political strike, they’re victims of murderous sociopathic “liberal elites” (so called in the trailer).

              In Avengers, a whole bunch of New Yorkers got themselves killed by invading aliens. Presumably, being New Yorkers, most of these people were liberals. But the movie was not against liberals in any way – it was against murderous invading alien armies. No one would complain that the movie harbored hate and condoned murder of New Yorkers.

              Imagine the movie stripped of all nuance. The lady in the beginning, pitching the hunt, is Hillary Clinton, and she says “they’re not people, they’re deplorables, Trumpists.” Then we cut to a bunch of kidnapped people wearing MAGA hats and MAGA shirts. A bunch of them get killed before hero-Maga-chick turns the tables and hunts down and kills Clinton in an epic battle on the edge of a volcano.

              How is this in any way negative of team MAGA? This whole plot screams “Clinton and the liberals are evil and we have to resist them!” Doesn’t it? Any dead MAGAs in this plot are martyrs. Liberals are the villains in this movie.

              Maybe I’m just not following you. What, exactly, is your complaint about this movie? I really think that we “liberal elites” should be the ones griping, if anyone.

        • https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ads-pulled-hunt-wake-mass-shootings-1229829

          I think the real argument here is weather anyone should be making a movie like this with clear references to political parties , where they are killing each other. I’m expecting some kind of twist at the end , simply because the content is so political and per the producers a condemnation of our political climate. What that ending is will determine who is yelling about what . I also suspect by the time it’s released a lot of these identifiers will be gone, as will the debate. But I would go see it.

  17. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    We are told on one hand by the industry and its supporters that violent video games have NO effect on people, none at all. Then last night I watch an HBO show with Bryant Gumbel about how psychiatry has determined that video games are addictive, as addictive as heroin. We are taken to a clinic where addicts (mostly young men) are treated. It DOES NOT take a rocket scientist to put two and two together!

    I believe Adam Lanza spent most of his miserable, rotten, worm infested life on this earth playing them before he shot up the kindergarten.

    • We are told on one hand by the industry and its supporters that violent video games have NO effect on people, none at all.

      The industry might say that, but only a moron would really assert that it has “no” effect.

      It has an effect, just like everything we ever do has an effect.

      But it’s not the cause of gun violence.

      Then last night I watch an HBO show with Bryant Gumbel about how psychiatry has determined that video games are addictive

      They are. And they’re getting worse.

      Many are purposefully designed to engage you and psychologically addict you.

      I had to ban my kids from several games for this exact reason.

      as addictive as heroin.

      It can be, I suppose, but generally isn’t.

      We are taken to a clinic where addicts (mostly young men) are treated. It DOES NOT take a rocket scientist to put two and two together!

      I’m no rocket scientist, but I am pretty smart and I know a fair amount about rocket science, the rocket equation, fuel mixtures, propulsion, orbital mechanics and the like. Give me sever billion dollars and a decade and I can probably build you a moon lander from scratch.

      So, tell me, what two and two are you putting together?

      Because it sounds like you’re saying:
      A) video games are addictive.
      B) something something something
      C) that’s why people go on mass shooting rampages

      Maybe you could fill in step #2?

      I believe [redacted.. no name recognition/fame for these assholes] spent most of his miserable, rotten, worm infested life on this earth playing them before he shot up the kindergarten.

      He may have.

      I don’t know.

      But I don’t see the causal link you’re implying as given. It might exist in his case. But it assuredly doesn’t exist in other cases. And it doesn’t seem to correlate with other countries.

      Why, if video games cause mass shootings do countries that play more video games have less gun violence? Japan and South Korea both play more video games than we do and it’s FAR bigger in their culture. But they have only a fraction of our levels of gun violence. Porque?

      • I dont think video games, by themselves are the cause, but when we add mental illness to the mix…..

        • Sure.. mental illness plus.. well, anything.. makes a bad combination.

          But blaming video games is pretty absurd in that context, no?

          I could point to a dozen crazy people who mixed their crazy with religion and did bad things.. but no one would suggest that it’s time we start considering regulating religion or restricting religion or putting age-restrictions on religion etc. Fox wouldn’t be bleating about the dangers of religion.

          No, they’d say he’s a crazy person who did a crazy thing. Because that’s what crazy people do.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Mathius

            You are missing a very important part of the mental illness + video game connections. First of all, I would add TV and movies depicting gratuitous violence and mayhem to the list.

            The “part” is those mental issues that cause a blurring of reality and fiction. I take my son as a test subject in this. There is absolutely no doubt that if he watches hours of violent movies or watching violent video games with friends that his behavior takes a nose dive. He becomes “desensitized” to violence and bad behavior.

            More acting out, foul language, threats of harming us if he doesn’t get his way. His functioning level, social/intellectual, is low enough that he doesn’t go much further than this. Unable to put 2 and 2 together. And of course his TV and phone suddenly cannot connect to the internet. We blame the internet companies for the problem, and he assumes that is true.

            POINT, as you like to say, is that I do not think we really understand the potential connections between these games, TV, movies, YouTube videos, and even the constant harping on the Web has on people who are not really stable to begin with. You also underplay the other “cultural” changes that are occurring, and which are reflected in your graphic to a large extent.

            The statistics show a correlation between the massive increase in screen time and mental health issues. Especially in suicide attempts/rates and other acts of violence.

            Just blaming video games is a gross oversimplification of the problem and more an urban legend than anything.

            Many experts say that if we want the mass shootings to drop the media needs to stop carrying these stories. It isn’t a stretch to assume this muzzling should include Politicians and activists who use these events to their advantage. But then we are a free country, kind of. So for the sake of proving we have that freedom we will continue to ignore the realities and act like idiots.

            • And of course his TV and phone suddenly cannot connect to the internet. We blame the internet companies for the problem, and he assumes that is true.

              This is a mistake.

              This leaves his “good” feelings for the experience intact, making him continue wanting it when he can get it. “ok, I’ll just try again later.”

              What you need to do is slow down his internet speed to AOL dial-up levels.

              The buffering, pixelation, and random freezes will suck all the joy out of the experience until he doesn’t want it anymore.

              ::evil laughter::

              • Just A Citizen says:

                Mathius

                The ISP does that all on its own. The “streaming” service sucks much of the time. Much of which we cannot run more than one device in the house without somehow sucking all those electrons away from the other devices.

                You seem to forget that we all do not live in one of those glorious Big Cities.

              • Slow it down even more!

                I didn’t see the bottom of a web page until I was a teenage.

            • There is absolutely no doubt that if he watches hours of violent movies or watching violent video games with friends that his behavior takes a nose dive.

              Ain’t that the truth!

              I have banned a number of shows in my house and am a fascist about screen time for this very reason.

              It’s easy to see how that could correlate into a mentally ill person “acting out” following a binge of violent video games.

              BUT… but… the question then remains, why do we have so many more shootings (both regular and mass) than other countries which have comparable or higher levels of video game consumption?

              • Just A Citizen says:

                Mathius

                Because you lumped all shootings, non-suicide, in the sample. And you ignored the causation potential of combining video games with culture. In other words, you did not Control for the other factors in your comparison.

                But generally, video games alone are not the cause of a majority of shootings. Just as those who have mentioned video games also included many other factors. Which could be summed up as EROSION OF OUR CULTURAL VALUES. I would go deeper and say LOSS OF OUR MORAL COMPASS. But I digress………

                If we focus on the killings by crazy people, not just socio-paths or criminals, and bore down on the why of what they did, I expect we will find more correlation and causation than assumed today. Again, not just video games, but the totality of the effect of games, etc. that desensitize young “unstable” people to violence and which can build the delusion that mass killings will somehow resolve the issues that are eating away at their souls.

              • My money says that they’re doing it for (A) fame/recognition/notoriety (B) get their message heard / make a statement (C) out of some personal vendetta / fixation.

                And I’d bet on (A) taking the lion’s share.

                I know we can’t do it because of that whole “we have a Constitution” thing.. and I wouldn’t want to open that door anyway.. but if we could just ban the media (all media – total blackout) from discussing the identity of such killers and their manifestos, so much of this problem would go away.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                Mathius

                Moved to bottom for new thread.

      • Your statistic does not add up. (2.4/100,000)*330,000,000 = 14,190 mass murder deaths/yr. This is not the mass murder rate in the US. It is more like the total murder rate by guns in the US, much of that we already know is drug and gang related.

  18. Oh, and …

  19. Just A Citizen says:

    In other news, Govt. employee declares the Deep State is a myth. Then goes on and proves that it does exist, and CNN doubles down with even more proof. All while thinking they are actually just embarrassing a sitting President.

    Side note: Visiting with one of my friends who hates Trump last week. After about the third reference to DOTARD is said “That is Mr. President Dotard, in case you were wondering.”

  20. El Paso says Donald Trump still owes them $569,204 for services related to his February rally… up from $470,417.05 due to late fees.

  21. Just A Citizen says:

    Mathius

    “My money says that they’re doing it for (A) fame/recognition/notoriety (B) get their message heard / make a statement (C) out of some personal vendetta / fixation.

    And I’d bet on (A) taking the lion’s share.”

    I am sure this is a factor but not one that is independent of the others. They obviously want their acting out to be very public. But my understanding is the need to act out comes first and would thus be the primary cause. On the other hand, they may not act out if they knew nobody would notice, or they would not become famous. So I am not sure we can say that notoriety is the “lion’s share”.

    “I know we can’t do it because of that whole “we have a Constitution” thing.. and I wouldn’t want to open that door anyway.. but if we could just ban the media (all media – total blackout) from discussing the identity of such killers and their manifestos, so much of this problem would go away.” That is certainly what many experts have claimed. But we all know how experts go these days.

    One other thing on the video game comparisons. You need to look at the affect of those games first in the context of American Culture. Then I think you could compare reactions over time in other cultures, when comparing changes within that culture. I do not think it valid to compare Japan against the USA, for example. Just as you cannot compare the effectiveness or happiness of people living under Social Democracy in Scandinavia or Indonesia with how that might work out in the USA.

    Now the big egg vs. chicken question. Did games cause the violence or did an increase in violent tendencies drive the expansion of games?

    • Did games cause the violence or did an increase in violent tendencies drive the expansion of games?

      I’m pretty sure humans have always been violent – especially the male of the species. It wasn’t that long ago that we were burning people at the stake, after all.

      Video game makers are businesses and businesses have to sell a product people want. If we were peaceful as Hindu cows, no one would buy their games, and they wouldn’t make them. A great many businesses have stopped existing because they got this formula backward and thought they could create a product which would generate its own demand.

      That is certainly what many experts have claimed. But we all know how experts go these days.

      Well, as the world’s foremost expert in un-testable / un-falsifiable hypotheticals, I declare this to be absolutely true.

      You need to look at the affect of those games first in the context of American Culture.

      While I don’t necessarily disagree, per say, my views tend to be more toward the “a human is a human” kind of framework. Certainly, Japan is a different culture than the US, and certainly, this has an effect….

      But what is that effect? What drives it? Can you expand on your thoughts here?

      And, can you explain why you believe this cultural effect is more significant in terms of “gun violence” than the fact that, you know, they don’t really have guns? Seems to me that the most obvious answer as to “why doesn’t Japan have mass shootings” is “because Japan got rid of the guns.” (Never mind the followup: “why does Japan have so many mass-stabbings?” which has the same answer).

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Mathius

        One thought is the willingness to comply with Govt edicts. Something you alluded to when describing Democrat’s view on gun control. They look to Govt. as a solution. But that is not nearly as much an American value as it is in other places of the world. Hell, most of the world.

        The other factor, re: Japan, is its recovery from the culture that led to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Their reluctant understanding of what happened in China. But they reacted in the predictable “Societal” or “Unified” response. The kind of response that you would expect in a society which evolved under centralized controls. Much like China.
        Now in the following, note that the police are not armed either. This reduces the general perception of gun violence of any kind being OK. It also reduces tensions.

        https://www.arcgis.com/apps/Cascade/index.html?appid=44623e58a9f1497094c0136feef6c9e3

        In the USA the issues we have with dealing with this problem are rooted in our creation as a Nation. INDEPENDENT people living in a wilderness with guns. Defending themselves against ravage attack and of course killing food. Then with those guns we discovered that we not only had a right to sever ties with an oppressive Govt. but we had the MEANS. Americans tend to reject authority over their lives, as impose by others-including govt.. It is tolerated to a point. But we maintain the view that we have the right to rebel and to do so we need the MEANS. Because someday, voting will not be enough. That is why the Second Amendment is considered so sacred by so many. And that is why we have guns available for lunatics to use to carry out their delusions against society.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Mathius

        One other thought. Since so many think we Americans are so violent and love to shoot people.

        The US has one of the highest per capita gun ownership rates in the world. Certainly among the supposedly more civilized “developed nations”. Yet if you look at the killings by guns compared to the availability of guns we are pretty low on the totem pole.

        So let me ask you. What do you think the mass killing rates would be in other developed countries if they had the same access to guns we Americans have? How would they compare to the USA then?

        • They would probably (mostly) be much higher. I think if you had the same proportion of guns in the UK, half the country would be dead by the end of the week.

          But doesn’t that support the left’s case? That it’s the prevalence of guns which “drives” the mass-shootings?

          • Nothing supports the Lefts case. You claiming the Uk would lose half itd population if guns were allowed is absurd.

            • You claiming the Uk would lose half itd population if guns were allowed is absurd. a facetious jab at our friends across the pond.

              Nothing supports the Lefts case.

              JAC seems to be implying that, if other countries had more guns, their gun-murder rates would be higher. Which implies the inverse – that if we had fewer, we’d be more like them.

              Gman, it really is impossible to logically reject the very simple assertion that few guns begets less gun-violence. It’s really just insane to argue otherwise. The left is – absolutely – correct as far as that goes. It WOULD reduce gun violence. There WOULD be fewer mass-shootings.

              The argument you should be making is mine: that people are inherently shitty, and if you take their guns away, they’ll just kill each other with swords instead.

              • I do agree with you point and it has been proven, if nothing else than the crime rates where guns are banned. Would the murder rates go up if guns were legaluzed in those countries? I say NO and where guns are in the hands of law abiding citizens, crime rates was are lower. We have literally zero murders in my neck of the woods. Violent crimes, the same. Where there are strict gun laws that remove the law abiding from the picture, crime is ridiculous, see Chicago for example.

              • An intersting stat. ALASKA and Nevada have produced the most serial killers with Alaska way ahead.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                Mathius

                AND……….. if I cannot have a gun then there is a much greater chance I will become a victim of Sword Killing or being stabbed to death.

              • Another stat, gun related violence is far more predominate in poorer regions. Mississippi is in the top 5.

              • The left is – absolutely – correct as far as that goes. It WOULD reduce gun violence. There WOULD be fewer mass-shootings. No, sir….incorrect. That would be impossible to prove. I post the opposite…..that there would be no reduction….because you are not taking out the equation of the black market….and the people that want guns will get them. I will further hypothesize that if get rid of every single gun manufacturer in the Unites States, that the rate of gun deaths will go up and not down..

              • As previously stated: Well, as the world’s foremost expert in un-testable / un-falsifiable hypotheticals, I declare this to be absolutely true.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Mathius

            OBVIOUSLY the existence or presence of GUNS allows GUN Killing to happen. No Gun then nobody would be killed by gun. I believe I stipulated that fact long ago.

            But is being killed by a gun the real issue? I say no, and I think you agree.

            Also, what the “left” or “liberal” thinks is being driven by political winds playing off the emotional state of most people. That is why nobody wants to allow the question to be addressed “So if we ban all the guns then what?”. Or “What is the long term cost to the American experiment if we ban all guns”?

            Now here is a rational and objective discussion on the topic but with a somewhat surprising conclusion (if not for the location the article was posted). 🙂

            https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/08/will_any_single_intervention_eliminate_mass_shootings.html

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Mathius

            Along the lines of Democrats just want to ban all the guns…… 🙂

            “In 1963, communist Lee Harvey Oswald shot President Kennedy with a surplus Italian rifle he had ordered in the mail. Instead of banning communists, Democrats banned the mail order of guns. ”

            “In 1968, James Earl Ray shot Martin Luther King with a pump-action Remington hunting rifle. He bought it at a sporting goods store, not through the mail. That same year, Palestinian immigrant Sirhan Sirhan shot Robert Kennedy with a cheap .22 revolver; Democrats then proposed banning “Saturday Night Specials.” And in 2005, the Democrat-led California Legislature banned single-shot .50 cal. rifles — even though no crimes had ever been committed with them.”

            • That’s why it’d be just so much easier to ban “all firearms.” Much more straight forward. 😉

              I read a really great book by Leon Uris some years ago…… it centered around a Presidential candidate running on a platform of repealing the 2nd Amendment… very well written…

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Like he said, he is NOT ALL THAT SMART.

      Income inequality is a POLITICAL issue. Not a real economic issue.

      Nobody has ever pushed “trickle down” as an actual economic theory. It was a political meme designed to denigrate supply side theories. To make fun of Say’s Law.

      • I think there’s definitely an economic component which is to say if they’re poor to the point of not being able to consume sufficiently, then that’s bad for the economic cycle.

        But I think HIS point is more closely tied to: they’re going to come kill us soon.

        This is an argument I’ve been making, too, by the way.

        Nobody has ever pushed “trickle down” as an actual economic theory.

        I don’t think I’ve ever heard a different “economic theory” coming from the right. My ears are probably just full of wax. What are conservatives thinking in terms of economic theory? I doubt it’s just…..

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Mathius

          If he had limited his talk to just that point I would have agreed. Like I said, it is a political issue. One that can be manipulated to enrage the masses.

          As for the “conservative” economic theory, it is articulated in the Republican Party platform, as near as I can tell. Since the supposed “conservatives” drove that process prior to Mr. Trump’s arrival.

          Namely, Free Market Capitalism. Of course you and I know they don’t really mean that completely. The broader argument is that an “expanding economy raises all boats” or that “increasing the size of the pizza increases the size of each piece”. Note that neither of these phrases implied “trickle down” as this fellow describes. That is that if the rich do better then the poor will do better.

          But lets go with his argument, ignoring the difference between investors like him and those who actually develop the solutions and bring them to market. How in the world could an ever increasing wealth gap be sustained? As he correctly points out, there is only so much that the rich can consume. They cannot get richer making stuff for themselves.

          One real reason that they get richer than ever before was the globalization of markets for the services they developed. Increased productivity drives massive consumption. Lower margins and much, much higher volume increases profits/net income.

          Now let us explore the hypothesis of the Ford Model. How many computers are the employees of Apple going to buy with their higher wages?? How does increased “eating out” help Apple increase its bottom line?

          Here comes the big surprise for you. I agree that the economy is messed up. That the middle class is getting squeezed. Not by the rich but by the Govt. The rich only to the extent they are able to escape the wealth confiscation the Govt. craves. But I do not see how taking more of their money to do things is going to make people in the middle any better off in actual terms. Unless that money is directed to things that improve productivity over all. Which means NOT TO WELFARE but to INFRASTRUCTURE.

  22. Dale A Albrecht says:

    And Pelosi and a congressional delegation consisting of members of the “squad” who venomously oppose Trump and the current Guatamalan government, on the eve of their election on Sunday. If that’s not MEDDLING in a foreign governments politics and elections I don’t know what is.
    Pelosi and congressional delegations ran to ASSAD’s side in Syria. Bush very much had to proclaim they were NOT an official delegation.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      When Hillary became Secretary of State visiting on an official basis was in her job description but she continued the anyi Bush support of Assad by proclaiming him a “progressive leader and someone we can work with” that is until he was of no further use.

  23. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Mathius

      The law is simply to permissive in this case. Note that the penalties are limited primarily to fines on a “per alien” basis. Which amount to thousands or hundreds of thousands. Not millions, not loss of license, not jail time.

      https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1324a

      Oh, were these people actually “arrested” or were they simply rounded up and then detained for processing? Because I saw where about half of those detained were released.

      • It seems silly to me to advocate for a wall to keep them out, jail to punish them for breaking them in, and then a slap on the wrist for those who hire them illegally while evading taxes, paying sub-minimum wage, and denying those jobs to Americans citizens…

        Oh, were these people actually “arrested” or were they simply rounded up and then detained for processing? Because I saw where about half of those detained were released.

        Who knows? It’s a picture I stole from the internet – I wouldn’t take it as gospel.

    • It depends on all the facts, which I haven’t read yet. Did the illegals use stolen SSNs? Did he know they were illegals? If he knew then he should be dealt with for breaking laws like anyone else.

      • 680 illegal immigrants at all using stolen ssn’s? Probably very little English spoken by any of them, all being Hispanic… oh, someone at the company was in on this.

        At the very least the HR director. But what are the odds that that person knowingly took that risk without involving the CEO? And all that profit with minimal payroll? Probably cash payments? Come on.

        I can’t say with any certainty that the CEO knew or was involved, but someone high up was behind this.

        If he knew then he should be dealt with for breaking laws like anyone else.

        The problem is that the penalties are insufficient. It’s a slap on the wrist. JAC says thousands of dollars, up to hundreds of thousands of dollars. If that’s 680k, to make my life easy, that’s $1,000 per worker. You think they didn’t save 1k on payroll and payroll taxes?

        Now, to be clear, I think they should be free to hire whoever they want. But they should still have to pay minimum wages, give the required benefits, pay payroll taxes, etc. It should all be above board.

        But my criticism is that, for those who think these immigrants should be locked up and shipped back to the border, why aren’t you calling for the heads of the people who illegally gave them the incentive to come here in the first place and who will end up with a slap on the wrist?

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Not sure who you are complaining about since I thought SUFA unanimously adopted the TEXAS MODEL, per the Colonel’s description.

          Hire illegals…………. NO MORE BUSINESS.

          I am not sure you would find your claim true among the “working class” who have supported the whole WALL idea along with tighter immigration restrictions and enforcement. It is probably true among the political types who use the issue to drum up votes, however.

          • I thought SUFA unanimously adopted the TEXAS MODEL, per the Colonel’s description.
            Hire illegals…………. NO MORE BUSINESS.

            I did not.

            Nor, I believe, did DPM or BF.

            [Mathius’ claim] is probably true among the political types who use the issue to drum up votes, however.

            Probably… but that’s my point. These politicians are using illegal immigrants as a whipping post, but give passes to the companies and their wealthy owners.

            Seems to me that y’all should be screaming to high heaven about that.

            • Do your research properly….

              • Yes, revoke the business charter.

              • Now, Mr. The Colonel, just to see where you truly stand on this…

                Conglomo-corp has STRONG policies in place. It has a STRICT policy against hiring illegal workers. It has, in the fast, fired HR workers and blackballed them for violating the policy, cancelling their pensions and booing them as they walked in shame through the halls after being publicly fired. But in one manager in one small corner of the company cut some corners by hiring illegal immigrants. He did not tell superiors. They had no reason to suspect anything (other than bigger profit margins which they attributed to him being a superior performer).

                The company gets caught.

                Revoke the charter for the whole company? Arrest the CEO?

                —-

                Mathius Corp is rivals with ColonelCorp. ColonelCorp just keeps beating MathiusCorp at every turn. If only there were a way to murder an enemy company, Mathius thinks… so in the dark of night, he hatches a plan. Quietly, a friend and close confidant resigns his position at MathiusCorp and, being a highly sought after professional, joins ColonelCorp (with a juicy signing bonus). A month after settling in, the employee hires an illegal immigrant under the table to clean his office. Acting on a “tip,” Mathius reports ColonelCorp and its charter is revoked. Mathius takes over all the business of the now-defunct company. And when the employee gets out of jail (if, indeed, he ever went to jail), he’ll be offered his old job back at MathiusCorp… for 10x his previous salary.

        • I think those who benefitted from the hiring of illegals should be relieved if their freedom and profits via jail and fines, do i agree with you on this. The illegals, sadly, should be sent back where they came from.

          If, and i say if, the company did not at least pay the minimum wage, they should be shut down and the owners and management jailed for exploitation and human trafficking.

          • So now, here’s a question for you. Conglomo-corp employs 45k people in 40 states across hundreds of different subsidiaries and sub-entities. One of them employs illegal immigrants at sub-minimum-wage. Do you shut down the whole company? How do you think about this?

    • Yes……throw his ass in jail.

  24. Just A Citizen says:

    On Mathius’ posted data on “Violent Gun Deaths”.

    Are not ALL deaths by guns VIOLENT by definition?

    vi·o·lent
    /ˈvī(ə)lənt/
    Learn to pronounce
    adjective
    using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.
    “a violent confrontation with riot police”

    • I suppose there are suicides, which I wouldn’t call “violent” per say. Also, accidents.

      Maybe some other exceptions I haven’t thought of…?

  25. Just A Citizen says:

    Thought

    On these rich people using wait staff to argue for increasing minimum wages. WHO is going to pay the cost of these increased wages??? In short, WHO pays for those higher priced meals? The Rich guy who owns the chain or restaurant?

    Or the patrons who are more than likely “middle class” workers?

    Beware of Greeks bearing gifts.

    • There’s a very circular argument going on here… if the wait staff – everywhere – makes more, then the entirity of the class makes more. More people have more money to buy more stuff and this increases demand for goods and services which increases hiring which increases demand for labor which raises wages which means more people earning more money have more money available to buy those meals.

      The big risk is that you give people higher wages in one area and they spend it on cheap crap from Asia instead of local businesses.

      • No sir…the circular argument is that does inflation mean a robust economy.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Mathius

        If the wait staff everywhere suddenly make more, then the cost of the food increases. Then those who buy that food pay MORE which means they now have LESS for other things. All those things you think will be made now to meet the new demand of the wait staff.

        So on balance, have you actually increased demand for “things”? Or will the demand for food decline so people can maintain the money for those “things”?

        And per the Colonel’s comment. WHO benefits from inflation more, the rich or the middle class?

        • WHO benefits from inflation more, the rich or the middle class?

          The only people who benefit from inflation are debt-holders since they can pay their debts back with cheaper dollars.

          The wealthy lose value on any non-inflation-resistant assets (eg, cash in the mattress), but will generally have most of their money in the market which will inflate accordingly. Their bond holdings will suffer.

          The elderly will suffer the most as their holdings will be mostly fixed income and it gets decimated (quite literally).

          The young are either immune or beneficiaries (since they either have nothing or they have debt).

          The middle class gets screwed (as always!) because their wages lag inflation, they don’t have much debt, and they don’t have much stock. So they get all the downside and none of the upside. Now, that’s not quite true as they may have a mortgage, which suddenly becomes much cheaper, but in that case, it’s just another version to debt-holders benefiting.

  26. https://thehornnews.com/kamala-harris-promising-to-tear-up-the-second-amendment/

    Exactly why Crats should never be in charge…ever.

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      The FBI, the DOJ, the CIA and a goodly portion of the executive branch already TORE UP the constitution about four or five years back. Caesar, male or female can always override the written law.

  27. Mathius……..your scenario really stretches it some……If it is an obscure hiring in an office or something, and it was done with the intent of hiding it from the higher ups,,,,there MIGHT be room for some doubt. However, 600 illegals at sub par rates….is not a happen stance. It is not accidental and I will guarantee that the top echelon knows it. In addition, there should be some oversight in a company that large. I have very little patience for ignorance and the “wink wink” I did not know…is bull shit.

    I am hard corp on this, Mathius. The President of any company whether 4 employees or 350 which our peak was…..should know. There should be follow up and there should be accountability. We know the penalties…..we made it clear. When you run something like this, you cannot be worried about innocent employees….the rules are absolute.

    If the President knew about it and condoned it….he goes to jail and the supervisors under him. You fine the company into bankruptcy.

    If you dry up the hiring, you dry up the border. It is employers hiring the illegals…..they are not immigrants,,,,they are illegals…..pure and simple. They go back home. There are ways to bring them into this country within 72 hours……and our Congress wants this confrontation. They could stop this right now and they do not.

    This is where I stand.

    Now, Texas is not as strict as I am…..but not too far behind. Dry up the ILLEGAL hiring.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      The government has been winking at this for decades.

      As you said there are ways to get workers here “legally” in a very short time.

      Our neighbor up on the hill behind us, a me ivan family, very wealthy, that was their business. Brokering, working out details and bringing in workers from Mexico as needed, LEGALLY.

      I remember as a kid in SoCal, even though you just cleared the border coming from Mexico, within a few miles of the border where there was no way to turn around, duck down a side road, you would always run into a road block of Border Patrol agents.

      The US lords over other countries proclaiming we are a nation of laws. Yet for decades when an administration tries enforcing them or bypassing them they’re pilloried for political reasons. Even the evil Koch brothers are against trump and his enforcement policies.

      These past few days Richard Gere is lending his celebrity to the efforts to encourage no enforcement of Italy’s policy of stopping human traffickers and NGO’s dumping them in Italy. All the publicity photos show tons of women and children. The reality is that 9/10 of the “migrants” legal or otherwise are MEN.

      These NGO’s are going right into Libyan waters and organizing the pickups not rescuing. Carol Rackets admitted in an interview in Germany her crashing the blockading ships and crushing a guardia de Finance ship was orchestrated by the German government so the “migrants” would be registered in Italy instead of those migrants being taken directly to Germany as was offered by Rottenburg.

      Easier to deport them to Italy and not back to Nigeria, Mali Congo etc

  28. I just want to let you all know that I’m having a churro right now.

    It’s delicious.

  29. Dale A Albrecht says:
  30. U.S.—A lot of people have been curious as to where people associated with Donald Trump live, so they can march on their houses with torches and pitchforks and have a civil conversation with them about politics. They’re just trying to be neighborly, and we really sympathize with that impulse. So we started looking into it so we could release our own map of names and addresses of people associated with Trump.

    Well, we’ve got the big reveal for you activists. After weeks of work, we are publishing this map of everyone whose president is Donald Trump. Red states have people whose president is Donald Trump. The light red and medium red states represent the same thing. There may be a few we missed, like people who are visiting Canada for some reason, so be sure to check up there also.
    We encourage you to use this map to find people who have Donald Trump as their president and dox them, even if that means you have to assault yourself. The nation isn’t going to get un-racist like it was three years ago if you just sit around not punching yourself in the face, so get to it. Only through your efforts can we rid this country of President Donald Trump’s influence.

    • I am totally in conspiracy land here.

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        You and me both!

        The Clinton’s have yet added another coincidental death to their resume. Man that Christmas card list must be getting short!

        • “Suicide,” my ass.

          • Dale A Albrecht says:

            On a suicide watch which just happened to NOT be “watching” at the time of his death. According to ABC news.

            To bad it wasn’t in the shower and he just happened to slip on a bar of soap and struck his head.

            I dont know which would have cost more his trial or the congressional committees ramping up because they feel cheated if implicating Trump

      • Ah come on everyone, we all know Trump did it 😀 😀

  31. Just A Citizen says:

    Curious about why “laws” are used to enforce private regulation of property for an act that is otherwise lawful.

    “Senate Bill 535 will reduce penalties for people who carry guns at “churches, synagogues or other places of worship” that prohibit firearms. … The bill treats places of worship in the same way private businesses are treated: They can still post signs prohibiting firearms, but will reduce penalties for people who unknowingly carry.”

    Yes, I see the relationship to “trespassing” but maybe that should be reconsidered as well.

    In this case, the Govt says carrying guns in public is legal. Then a person says “but not in my house”. Just because that person says no the one carrying the gun suddenly becomes a lawbreaker. The owner changes his/her mind and poof, no longer lawbreaking.

    In short, whether you are breaking the “law” depends on the whims of someone else.

    Trespass on the other hand is illegal everywhere. It is only where a business is conducted that trespass is waived since the person entering is being asked or encouraged to enter. After hours, trespassing is back in affect.

    Along these lines, I saw where the guy in Missouri who went into the Walmart was being held on “terrorism” charges. This is also because of a clause in the State’s terrorism law that makes it an act of terrorism if someone “feels they have been threatened or intimidated”. Not an exact quote here, so go easy on me. But you get the gist.

    So the guy did nothing to actually threaten or damage or anything else. Yet because the manager pulled a fire alarm because he “felt” there was a threat, the stupid kid is a TERRORIST.

    This is when I wish Buck was still passing through once in awhile. Could really use a “trained” lawyer to provide some insight on these kinds of laws.

  32. Just A Citizen says:
    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      The Germans didn’t do much but wring their hands and sell arms to the Croats and Serbs and denied arms to the Bosnians while genocide was being committed in the Balkans. They also denied entry to refugees fleeing those war torn countries. Claimed they were to busy condolidating the two Germany’s and couldn’t be bothered

  33. Just A Citizen says:

    More on how the Rich Elite are getting all the cookies and the rest of us should be envious. And of course, grab a pitchfork. Notice that not one of these articles ever dives into the why of the growth. This one tries to blame it on current changes in interest rates, taxes and regulation. But the list is GLOBAL, not just the USA. Just perhaps it has more to do with the Elite capturing the regulatory institution, using it to reduce competition. Then again, maybe it is just the mathematical reality of compounding interest.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/features/richest-families-in-the-world/

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      Maybe I should check to see if I’m related to the “aldi” store owners. Only a couple of the albrechts emigrated. The rest stayed in Getmany.

    • Economics is not my strong point, but what I noticed was this: ” In all, the world’s 25 richest families have $250 billion more wealth, compared to last year. ” Compared to the US’s yearly budget, that’s not a lot of money..

      • Just A Citizen says:

        V.H.

        2018 Medicare Budget was $582 BILLION
        2017 Medicaid Budget was also $582 BILLION
        2019 Defense discretionary spending budget is $686 BILLION

        • Okay, you’re making a point here, I’m just not sure what it is 😊. The whole budget was over 4 trillion.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            V.H.

            Just providing numbers to support your comment. YES, the wealth they grew is nothing compared to just the USA FEDERAL GOVT expenditures.

  34. Just A Citizen says:

    A comment written in response to an article at American Thinker. Worthy of SUFA, I think.

    Fedwell
    155 comments1 vote0 followers
    Full Profile
    Fedwell
    1h
    Liberals are in a pickle. Once the country became successful enough to produce leisure time, the leisure class soon rejected the principles of freedom that their parents generation had employed to produce their wealth in the first place. So now they had time to rail against their parents values by finding people who had not yet achieved their same level of success and using them as a cudgel to pound their own origins. It’s an unhealthy dynamic from the beginning to reject the things that produced you. You have to be totally hypocritical and that leads to lie upon lie being built to justify your position. The lies infiltrated the educational curriculum most quickly because all good liberals know that, left to the school of hard knocks, no one will become a liberal, so you must create a tissue of theories to re-explain the world to kids, so they won’t get confused by real-world lessons. The left’s success has been so complete that now socialists can run for president. The only hope now is that immigrants will fight for the true freedoms they came here to find, instead of compromising for the soft tyranny proposed by progressives intent on enslaving a new generation of converts. Odds are not good that immigrants can discern friend from foe in this battle- particularly because foolish conservatives believe enough of the liberal mis-education to question their own moral standing, making them content to step back and let emotional liberals claim the stage and the moral high ground.

  35. WASHINGTON, D.C.—After a tough week dealing with several national crises, meeting with victims, and just generally making America great again, President Donald Trump rewarded himself for his good work with a “World’s Best President” mug from the White House gift shop, sources confirmed Friday.

    “People say I’m the best president,” Trump said. “They go, ‘We’ve never had a country as great as this one. You’re a great man and you really are making America great again.’ Really. All the best people say things like this.”
    He then held up his new “World’s Best President” mug. “I think that pretty much sums it up.”
    Trump did become angry when “that darn prankster Mike Pence” put his mug in Jello, but his spirits were again lifted when he had Pence call in Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to fake-fire him.
    “Classic!” Trump said as Pompeo left the room weeping.
    At publishing time, sources had confirmed that Trump had sent a free “World’s Best President” mug to all of the families affected by the mass shootings this week.

  36. WASHINGTON, D.C.—Joe Biden has apologized for his recent seemingly racist comment, where he said that poor kids are sometimes as smart as white kids.

    “Everyone who knows me knows I’m not a racist,” said Biden. “I even have a black friend, Barry. Smart, articulate guy.”
    Aides were then seen signaling him to stop talking, but Biden pushed on.
    “Rest assured,” Biden said. “I like all races, even the bad ones.”
    Aides threw up their hands in exasperation.
    “What? What’d I say?”
    Media immediately jumped all over Biden’s comments, responding to his horrifying gaffe by calling on President Trump to resign.

  37. Just A Citizen says:

    Maybe the reason people are not “woke” yet is because you are confused, delirious, a bigot yourself, or just plain stupid. Seems POTUS Trump is now pushing white supremacy on America but we racist rat bastards just can’t see it.

    https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/11/opinions/charlottesville-two-years-later-row/index.html

  38. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Jeffery Epstein.

    I am amazed that my local paper devoted less space to that death today than they did to decline in reform Jewish congregations in my area!

    Now, my eldest, the Lt. Col, threw this one out…….. MOSSAD!

    He seems to remember that one of the reasons Epstein got off so lightly last time according to the prosecutor was that he was an “intelligence asset” for somebody. Since nobody has apparently been able to nail down the source for his apparently endless finances would it NOT make sense to speculate that they were from an intel agency? When I think about it, how brilliant would it have been to recruit Epstein, fund him and have him go about getting incredibly compromising info on absolutely everybody who might someday have some influence in government.

    Before you go off and dismiss this. Remember, it was very common and very successful for the KGB to recruit Brit agents by getting the goods on their homosexuality and then blackmailing them?

    I do NOT believe it was the Russians though. Not this time.

  39. I’m in conspiracy land, lots of things are possible, this situation doesn’t just affect the rich and powerful in America, it’s an international scandal. Not ready to point fingers at any particular person, group, or governmental institution, but there are many that aren’t unhappy about his death.

    Read this article, all his women assistants got immunity and he got to, pretty much just walk on his charges. So what information did he give them and why have they kept it quiet all this time?

    https://nypost.com/2019/08/10/meet-jeffrey-epsteins-gang-of-accused-slave-recruiters/

  40. Dale A Albrecht says:

    No independent research on the numbers, but I dont remember much if any uproar about separating children at the border under Obama. The photos used to blast trump were taken during Obama’s administration.

  41. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Two of our illustrious congresswomen the other week called for violence against the Israeli’s. What a way to celebrate one of your holiest times. But also resulted in Jews being blocked from attending their holy days at the Temple Wall.

    “Several Muslim faithful who celebrate Eid al-Adha, Feast of Sacrifice, today were injured during riots with Israeli police that broke out on the Temple Mount for Temple Jews in Jerusalem. The Israeli daily ‘Ha’aretz’ speaks of 61 wounded hospitalized. In anticipation of possible tensions today – which sees the Eid-al-Adha festival coincide with the day of mourning and fasting for the Jews, the Tisha B’Av, the police had closed the esplanade of the Mosques to Jews and tourists.

    The riots – reports Ha’aretz – citing law enforcement agencies – broke out when Muslims started throwing objects. The agents used stun grenades and tear gas . Meanwhile, the decision to close the Temple Mount to the Jews has raised up members of the Israeli nationalist right: Transport Minister Bezalel Smotrich has called for its reopening “after the removal of the terrorists”.

    Meanwhile, an armed Gaza terrorist approached the Israeli border and shot at the Israeli military . The military returned fire and killed him. This is what the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) reports. Later, Israeli tanks targeted a Hamas target, the IDF always reports. It is the second consecutive time that armed terrorists are trying to cross the border. In fact, four Palestinian militiamen were killed by the Israeli army while they were trying to penetrate the territory of Israel from Gaza.

    There would be no Israeli injuries. A spokesman for the Ministry of Health in Gaza said shortly after that the body of a 26-year-old Palestinian from Beit Hanun in the northern Gaza Strip was taken to hospital.” ADNKRONOS

  42. Dale A Albrecht says:

    “The same government that couldn’t keep a key witness safe in his jail cell while on a suicide watch is the same government that says they’ll keep you safe with more gun control”

%d bloggers like this: