9
APDSmith 9 points ago +9 / -0

You do you, obviously, but I have Amazon anyway - this would literally be free for me to watch - and I'm pretty sure it's not worth the mere expenditure of time this would involve....

29
APDSmith 29 points ago +29 / -0

Why does the left so determinedly hate and want to destroy/desecrate monuments??

Because, like any good Cultural Revolutionary, they seek to re-write history to serve their narrative. Monuments are reminders of people or events past that do not comply with their preferred revolutionary narrative - very visible ones - and so, must be destroyed for the revolution to proceed.

10
APDSmith 10 points ago +10 / -0

The version of the military that the left supports would not be a threat to anybody outside American borders.

What you're seeing, I think, is the left attempting to change the military's mission to one they could get behind - persecution of domestic dissidents.

1
APDSmith 1 point ago +1 / -0

The MANPADS thing essentially played into Russia's own sub-optimal ordnance mix. With low quantities of stand-off weapons the Russian air force is having to fly into MANPAD range to get it's shots - of unguided weapons - off. Don't know if the same thing applies to China.

38
APDSmith 38 points ago +38 / -0

One flaw in this reasoning: Those liberals know this and will work to dictate similar terms to the rest of the country.

These people never expected to produce the next generation themselves, I think, and so have focused all their energies on ideologically capturing your children.

2
APDSmith 2 points ago +2 / -0

China's military has size on it's side but completely unproven.

In fact it's worse than that. China's been fighting Indian regulars along the Tibetan border in a slow-boil border dispute, and the PLA is coming off badly in these engagements.

Granted, India's not a slouch - they'd have been ploughed under by Pakistan long since if they were - but not opposition that someone as good as China thinks they are should struggle with.

4
APDSmith 4 points ago +4 / -0

There's that saying that that liberalism is a mental disorder. That's not quite right, but I think leftism largely is, and the leftist mindset is pretty fucking damaged.

Agreed. Unfortunately, liberalism - for all that I am a liberal - does fall victim to a leftie ideology specifically designed to infiltrate and destroy liberal ideologies and then wear them like some kind of skinsuit trophy.

I'd be happy to reach some sort of actual compromise with leftists

Also agreed, unfortunately, the only kind of "compromise" lefties seem to acknowledge is the one where you're dead, your children are gay and they're dancing on your grave. A lot of lefties simply do not seem to know how to de-escalate - it's not a skill the leftie ideology prizes - instead preferring to escalate until it reaches the level that involves the authorities, who will always come down on their side.

9
APDSmith 9 points ago +9 / -0

Part of the problem there is that the left is pretty much against self-control.

They're against rules in general, they're really against rules you are supposed to uphold yourself (for people they have ideologically, captured, of course. More normal people would be on the trains to the camps already if this lot were capable of making the trains run on time). They probably view it as some kind of psychological torture - after all, isn't just far easier to submit to your basest urges and then play language games to make the inevitable fallout someone else's problem?

23
APDSmith 23 points ago +23 / -0

It's getting to the point of fetishism.

It is. You've seen the glee they have at the idea of humiliating their ideological opponents - that's where the "you dead, your kids gay" thing comes from.

Their fantasy world appears to be some kind off dystopia where "for the good of the planet" you're forced onto cockroach puree for long enough to break your spirit before you're disposed of permanently.

17
APDSmith 17 points ago +17 / -0

Because they want to degrade and humiliate you. Best of all for them is for you to surrender and take this without the application of force, but sooner or later they'll get to the application of force.

22
APDSmith 22 points ago +22 / -0

No, they think we should be limited by the constitution. They themselves, as creatures of pure light and virtue - as evidenced by their cancelling anybody who disagrees with them - do not need a constitution.

13
APDSmith 13 points ago +13 / -0

I mean, yes, we can see Hunter carefully salting away the "Big Guy's" 10%, but there's no evidence that affected Joe Biden's policymaking!

8
APDSmith 8 points ago +8 / -0

In the latest example of state-as-a-religion, the LA Times is so sure of the FBI's virtue that the possibility of misconduct doesn't even cross their minds, at least for public comment purposes.

I'm sure Sarah D. Wire will soon be enjoying a job with the DNC or the White House.

2
APDSmith 2 points ago +2 / -0

Any FBI agent conducting law enforcement functions outside the purview of our State should be arrested upon sight

Well at least Fort Sumter is in a different state...

5
APDSmith 5 points ago +5 / -0

Perhaps Perry is being made an example of for refusing to comply with the Jan 6th Volksgerichtshof. Sending in the FBI instead of a strongly-worded letter indicates that the intention is more focused towards PR than process, and it would not be the first time.

8
APDSmith 8 points ago +8 / -0

That monster!

I take it all back. Repeal habeus corpus! Repeat the First, Fourth and Twenty-Third amendments!

Tear it all down!

13
APDSmith 13 points ago +13 / -0

At this point they'd charge him with original sin if they thought it would keep his name off the 2024 ballot.

10
APDSmith 10 points ago +11 / -1

Trump could be easily bought off, but they didn't and they keep digging their own hole here.

He could have been at the start, I suspect, by now, however, I expect Trump's taking this as a personal attack - which it is - and will come out swinging.

The only reason I can think of for being this brazen is already knowing Trump simply will not be allowed to win.

I mean, I'm sure the FBI thinks that ... but I'm sure Clinton thought that in 2016, too.

Regards DC and your money ... look at what they're doing with the dollar. It's already in progress, mate.

27
APDSmith 27 points ago +27 / -0

Honestly, I wouldn't be all that surprised if the FBI's response to the massive funding cut they deserve from Congress would simply be to supplement departmental income with illegal activities.

They've already shown they don't give two shits about the law; I'm unsure what's stopping them going all-in at this point.

12
APDSmith 12 points ago +13 / -1

But of course.

You're generally talking about a bunch of very middle-class failures to launch who's only chance at the power they so desperately crave is to try and con a bunch of working-class types that the brave communist fights for their cause rather than viewing them as merely ammunition to expend in their campaign to establish feudalism, only with themselves at the top.

20
APDSmith 20 points ago +20 / -0

A question: If the US were actively trying to devalue it's own currency, perhaps having forseen the effect of crippling levels of national debt on it's ability to operate ... what would it be doing differently to what it is doing now?

1
APDSmith 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well then I guess you need to define what you mean by "monopoly on money" - "mono" meaning "one", and all that - do you not?

Because if there is such a thing, there's no way Musk should have quite so much of it, is there?

7
APDSmith 7 points ago +11 / -4

I didn't even mention small hats...

But yeah, I'm always puzzled by this apparent opinion amongst some quarters that one particular ethnicity has a monopoly on all the assholes in the world.

One would think prior experience would indicate that there are more than enough to go around...

13
APDSmith 13 points ago +13 / -0

so why would they lose their legitimacy here?

I think they're working on the assumption that with a friendly media covering for them, they won't.

Remember, as long as they do what they're told by a bunch of unelected, unaccountable billionaires, they'll have almost every media organisation in the US going to bat for them.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›