Indeed. It's why even though some of what he's said in the last 5 years has mirrored some of what's been brought up here and other KIA subs, I've never liked or trusted the fucker.
He's always been a neocon and con artist, through and through. And he'd love nothing more than to trample over our rights whenever it suits his benefactors.
Oh, I've openly expressed this sentiment for years. I never for a moment trusted the old-guard Republican party, even as leftists were stabbing me and almost everyone else in the back.
The party could've maybe gone somewhere useful (IE, focusing on prioritizing first amendment rights) if it wasn't still being dragged down by these ghouls. But even that's probably too optimistic given how totally corrupt every and any politician quickly becomes.
And to reply to the second part of your comment somewhat, I do think that consistent and nearly total support for freedom of speech is probably the best baseline to work from. Granted, there "might" be some gray areas to factor in, but generally speaking, I've yet to see any instance where censorship or widespread surveillance has ever been used for legitimate good. And it's one of the most reliable indicators that'll reveal whether or not someone is a grifter with a hidden agenda.
Indeed. It's why even though some of what he's said in the last 5 years has mirrored some of what's been brought up here and other KIA subs, I've never liked or trusted the fucker.
He's always been a neocon and con artist, through and through. And he'd love nothing more than to trample over our rights whenever it suits his benefactors.
He's definitely a broken clock that's right twice a day. The rest of the time he is batshit insane.
Oh, I've openly expressed this sentiment for years. I never for a moment trusted the old-guard Republican party, even as leftists were stabbing me and almost everyone else in the back.
The party could've maybe gone somewhere useful (IE, focusing on prioritizing first amendment rights) if it wasn't still being dragged down by these ghouls. But even that's probably too optimistic given how totally corrupt every and any politician quickly becomes.
And to reply to the second part of your comment somewhat, I do think that consistent and nearly total support for freedom of speech is probably the best baseline to work from. Granted, there "might" be some gray areas to factor in, but generally speaking, I've yet to see any instance where censorship or widespread surveillance has ever been used for legitimate good. And it's one of the most reliable indicators that'll reveal whether or not someone is a grifter with a hidden agenda.