patrick.net

What would it take to create a viable third party?

Goran_K says

it just goes to show, both parties are beholden

FortWayne says

We get to pick lesser of two evils my friend.

You're making me post this again:

Feux Follets says

Given the extreme running off at the mouth that Potus has displayed since back in early 2016 this should not have been a problem to make a decision especially for a "stable genius" of all people - the Stephen Hawking of deal making - not.

What were his choices with only a few hours to go until government shut down?

How about placing blame where it belongs, on the game congress plays right up to the deadline. It's not like they didn't know when the shutdown was going to happen.

Patrick says

What would it take to create a viable third party?

A decent candidate for starters.

You available?

Sniper says

You available?

Maybe one day. First I'd like to work out a coherent platform that could possibly get the enthusiastic support of 51% of the population.

ThreeBays says

Guns are being stockpiled by a minority of disgruntled Americans that fear other Americans. All it will take is for them to flip and turn their gun power on other Americans, triggering a brutal civil war.

You need a clarifier to "Americans". Those Americans will be the politicians/legislators and law enforcement who try and unconstitutional take away those guns. The American who swore to "uphold the constitution", but don't, will be the ones hunted down.

ThreeBays says

After that is done you can kiss goodbye to gun freedoms.

After that, the gun owners will finally be in charge.

Oh, I'd be careful calling them a "minority". It only takes 3%.

Patrick says

What would it take to create a viable third party?

A better first question is why are less than 20% of Americans deciding who will be the President?

People are stuck in 1776. Devolution is obviously real. How about we bring the USFEDGOV and it’s System of Governance into the 21st century. Why is it not desirable to have more people participating in the process?


First I'd like to work out a coherent platform that could possibly get the enthusiastic support of 51% of the population.


Personal Responsibility over ones health, the only way to truly be free. Staple the food pyramid to The Cross and burn that shit, and have The State fess up that The Liberals were wrong, and if you eat The Food Pyramid, you’re going to be at the doctors office frequently, scratching your heads over why you’re having adverse reactions to the things you put in your body. It’s not the butter, it’s the margerine. When you’re not at the doctors you’ll be watching tv where the largest advertisers are pharmaceutical companies who like how ll the shit you consume in media is designed to get a reaction of you, of Fear. The Mexicans are coming for your jobs and the niggers are going to be raping err pumping all your white bitches, if we let them use Cannabis...err plant based medicine in general, would surely pave the way for a Healthcare system to compete with Land Owners for the last drops of Economic Rent that Labor has to give.

There is nothing more popular in this country politically than Rescheduling Cannabis. Fact

So why do you continue to support Politicians like Donald Trump who will sit a top the entire System lobbing wild shots at anyone he chooses any time of day, somehow feels he’s changed things from MAGA to KAG, hasn’t had the courage or business acumen to stand up and do what’s right. To speak the Truth?

He’s too busy doing the only thing he know how, selling bullshit as one of the best marketers in the game (as if that’s some valuable trait). Oh he tweeted that he would veto the ominbus bill LOL i see, Fart of the Deal he was blabbering on about it yesterday blaming the Democrats? WTF

ThreeBays says

All it will take is for them to flip and turn their gun power on other Americans, triggering a brutal civil war. After that is done you can kiss goodbye to gun freedoms.

That would never happen. 3 Percenters are nationalistic (overwhelmingly), why would they attack America? That sounds like a leftist fantasy.

Also, you severely underestimate how effective the armed militia would be, and over estimate how effective statist/leftist would be at countering them.

Many of the NRA's board members, many who have their own hobbyist gun channels, are former military comprised of NAVY Seals, officers with Command experience, and other special forces. The general Apple Seed participant is a top notch shooter who could put three .223 rounds into the middle of a quarter at 100 yards.

What do leftist have? Guys who don't know what gender they are? Soy boy cucks who majored in Comp Lit to try and get into the pants of a fat retarded feminist? Most of these guys don't even know how to EAT without there being a Whole Foods Market 1.2 miles away, let alone hunt, dress, butcher their own food while surviving off the land.

How the fuck do leftist win a Civil War against the armed militia? I'd estimate one average rifleman would force multiply to around 10-20 soy boy cucks.

All I see is lots of Democrats/leftist being put into mass graves, and their leftist leaders swinging by their necks until dead. It would be a joke of a conflict. You seriously don't want that to happen (neither do I).

Tenpoundbass says

MAGA GOOGOO KAG KAG KAG!

Feux Follets says

Wasn't the official U.S. line for Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan etc. ?

Exactly. That's what happens when an armed militia engages in asymmetrical warfare against a usurpatious government. The government forces get their asses kicked even with OVERWHELMING military force to muster.

Thank you for proving my point about why the 2nd amendment is so valuable.

ThreeBays says

As I was mentioning, the 2nd amendment will be destroyed by an abuse of that freedom by a concentration of power used to turn against other Americans.

Which would never happen. 3 Percenters don't believe in concentration of power (that's the antithesis of the meaning of the 2nd amendment and the founders vision), that's leftist/democrats who want that, and they would die on that hill. There is literally no way an army of soy boy fucks beats a militia of pissed off 3 percenters.

Feux Follets says

I did ?

Yes you did.

Was Vietnam/Afghanistan solid proof that armed militia can withstand a national army through the use of small arms and IEDs? 16 years going and Afghanistan is still in turmoil?

You think the 2nd amendment really has no value?

ThreeBays says

The quarter of Americans that own guns don't believe in the concentration of power. However the 3 percent that own most of the guns ARE a concentration of power. It's not a matter of belief.

So? The NRA has 5,000,000 members (nearly 6 million members now that David Hogg started opening his mouth). They are a concentration of power against a tyrannical government. You have a problem with that? Do you want the concentration of power to only be with the Federal government?

See? This is proving my point that leftist want power concentrated with the government.

Tim Aurora says

Trump has no ideology to stand on.

YAY! All of America's troubles in the past few decades have been ideologues and their shitty ideology.

errc says

A better first question is why are less than 20% of Americans deciding who will be the President?

People are stuck in 1776. Devolution is obviously real. How about we bring the USFEDGOV and it’s System of Governance into the 21st century. Why is it not desirable to have more people participating in the process?

I take it then you are opposed to the EU, in favor of Scottish and Catalonian Independence.

Feux Follets says

But as I type, aren't you of the camp that believes our military can kick ass when ever where ever just because we're Murica ?

Uh no. I was against the Iraq and Afghan wars (the ones your hero Hillary voted for). I think we should let the muslims sort themselves out.

Tim Aurora says

I see you as a threat from Putin. Trying to sow discord among Americans or it is pure fluff

Given the efficiency of guerilla groups, it seems more like it's Putin that is engineering this campaign to ban firearms.

Goran_K says

Thank you for proving my point about why the 2nd amendment is so valuable.

Same reason the Japanese never dreamed of actually invading the continental USA. They hesitated in planning an occupation of Hawaii given the firearms ownership rate.

"A rifleman behind every blade of grass" - Admiral Yamamoto

Tim Aurora says

Compare that with countries that achieved independence through peaceful methods, India,

Not peaceful. That's the Ghandi Myth. There were attacks on the British every day, hundreds of casualties a month. The Brits had to quit India because the British Indian Army and Navy mutinied when the Brits convicted Indian National Army members. There was no way the British Public would have paid for the British Army to occupy India, nor any public desire to draft the hundreds of thousands of British Soldiers that would be required at a minimum. It was force that forced the British to quit India.

Official Downing Street Plans were to delay the transfer until 1980.

ThreeBays says

I don't think that the power of gun owners is comparable to the power of the modern government with drones, nukes, etc.. but I acknowledge your point about messy gorilla warfare.

Go do some research about the cop, Chris Dorner, in LA and read how ONE experienced guy with a gun tied up HUNDREDS of cops during his manhunt.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/14/christopher-dorner-last-stand-manhunt

Now multiply that by hundreds of thousands at least across the country. Remember, it takes 3% and there are over 100 million gun owners in the country (do the math).

The lesson America should have learned from Vietnam, SoViet Afghanistan, and others is simply this: you can’t declare war on the people and expect to win.

You can declare war on a regime, face down an army or a navy, destroy a foreign government and the like... but if your conflict ever escalates to include the people of a nation, you’re going to lose.

This is what Leftists don’t understand. If they ever actually get power enough to make the nationalist conservative Americans concerned they will face a backlash that will drive them from that power and probably from America entirely. Trump’s election was just a hint of what can happen when conservatives get a little bit angry and think the establishment are trying to actually destroy the country.

Tim Aurora says

Also, no one is against guns but want some "gun control" .

Tim Aurora says

Limits are already there , we are just looking readjust that.

OK, so what specifically do you want done? What NEW laws need to be written? It's already a felony to shoot and kill someone.

What NEW laws will change that and make criminals obey?

ThreeBays says

I missed the news when the Iraqui and Afghani were victorious

We've been fighting the rag-tag goat herders, with basic weapons in Afghanistan with our "mighty" military forces for how long? 15 years? Have we won yet?

But you think that same military will have no problems against 100 million experience shooters in the US?

Really?

Tim Aurora says

Partially true. British left India as they could not make any money from Indians due to non-cooperation. It is the economy stupid ( not directed towards you)

No offense taken.

Ghandi was a weirdo religious fanatic who thought India should be an primitive agrarian country under his peculiar brand of Hinduism which was far out of the mainstream. He thought Dalits and others should know their place, not be uppity, and trust upper caste individuals like him and never organize or get saucy. He was also a sex pervert who declared a vow of chasity but had an enema fetish, especially if administered by pretty young girls. Basically, a kind of pegging dude.

Ghandi was a non-entity after 1942. After that, it was all Congress and the Pakistani sepratists under Jimah, who employed political pressure, and various revolutionary groups with endless violence against the British. Ghandi wanted Peace Talks with Germany and wanted the Jews to apologize for their industrialization and modernization in Germany. Ghandi was a primitivist who believed all ills came from modern society and wanted to go back to the Stone Age.

It was Subhas Chandra Bose's legacy of violent resistance that eventually won India her independence.

Tim Aurora says

WE all decide that includes you . It should be on the table and we should discuss that like civil people and not fan the flame of conspiracy theory like Russia wants us to. There are many countries to look at as model including Australia.

Australia has an effective ban on firearms for all intents and purposes. We're not doing Canadian or Australian style gun control, forget it.

If you want to save lives, restrict pistols to CCW holders or those over 35 and that might knock out a chunk of suicides and homicides. Rifles, including so-called "Assault Rifles" and Shotguns, have very little to do with the murder rate.

Also, ANY plan to further restrict firearms must come with Federal Laws that supercedes State Laws about forcibly hospitalizing the Mentally Ill. And not just for 72 hour evaluations, but permanent hospitalization. Cruz didn't fall through a crack, he fell through about 30+ cracks, over and over and over again because Liberals have made it almost impossible to hospitalize somebody. No deal with out it, in my mind.

Oh, Baby Dyke.

Tim Aurora says

He was the one who saved Muslims from slaughter in Bengal

You mean, he prevented Hindus from taking revenge against their Imperialist Muslim Oppressors who committed atrocities against them for centuries.

Islam did not spread to India by missionaries, but with the sword.

Tim Aurora says

Totally wrong. He brought Dalits in the mainstream

Pretty much no Dalit Activist agrees with you. Dalits overwhelmingly identify Ghandi as a "Problematic" figure.

https://medium.com/@dalitdiva/why-it-is-time-to-dump-gandhi-b59c7399fe66

Here at the top results on Google for "Ghandi Dalits"
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=ghandi+dalits

It's entirely either "Ghandi sucked for us Dalits" and previously ignorant Leftie Nonviolent Westerns saying "Wow, I didn't know the Dalits hated Ghandi"

Tim Aurora says

Can you give some reference or all you have is some conspiracy theories.

You can read Mountbatten and all the rest. I've read them, and I don't have their quotes handy, but they viewed Ghandi as a useful idiot, because he excluded any violent revolutionaries from his platform, he always stopped his movements whenever the British asked - just when they were being truly effective, he was actually quite dovish on Indian Independence as was willing to settle on Dominion Status.

For starters, how about:
"If somebody calls the police and says they want to be committed or they're going to do some fucked up shit, the police are obligated to mentally hospitalize him."

That would have stopped Cruz, since we know he called 911 at least once begging to be hospitalized. Instead, he got a police interview and they left him at home.

(Posted in Wrong Thread)

Tim Aurora says

And for record, I am just for licensing to own a Assault weapons which should go to check your background.

OK, first, what is a "Assault weapon"? Can you give me a link to a supplier or manufacturer's page where I can buy one? My firearm supplier has no idea what that is.

Second, do you know what a 4473 form is?

Tim Aurora says

Criminal can always get guns, just like in other countries, and so can you if you are a law abiding citizen.

Exactly right about criminals. So, why are the Democrats against law abiding citizen buying them to protect themselves and their families?

TwoScoopsPlissken says

Is she going to cry that her 1st amendment rights are violated when she has to use a clear backpack, and everyone will see what she's carrying?

https://patrick.net/post/1314688/2018-03-24-the-special-snowflakes-get-what-they-wished-for-parkland-school-requiring-clear-backpacks

Goran_K says

Done with Republicans and Democrats, yup. Done.

Another follower leaves the religion of the divisiveness paradigm, finally realizing that while the coin has two sides, it's still the same coin.

Sniper says

when she has to use a clear backpack,

You are assuming that "it" is a "she". A clear microaggression, or misdemeanor according to CA laws.

NuttBoxer says

Goran_K says

Done with Republicans and Democrats, yup. Done.

Another follower leaves the religion of the divisiveness paradigm, finally realizing that while the coin has two sides, it's still the same coin.

Actions speak louder than words

RafiMaas says

Tim Aurora says

I see you as a threat from Putin. Trying to sow discord among Americans or it is pure fluff

Great minds think alike.

I knew there was a connection.

So sad...

Hmmmm....

But the House Armed Services Committee version of the annual Pentagon policy bill included a common-sense provision to make sure the Pentagon isn't tasked with paying for the wall: "Section 1039. Rule of construction regarding use of Department of Defense funding of a border wall. None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this act or otherwise made available for the fiscal year 2018 for the Department of Defense may be used to plan, develop or construct any barriers, including walls or fences, along the international border of the United States."
...
An amendment was offered by Republican Reps. Steven Palazzo and Trent Kelly from Mississippi (which has coastline but no land border) to strike Section 1039. That means Pentagon money could be spent to construct a border wall. In the normal process of things, this amendment would have been accepted by the Rules Committee and then debated and voted on by the full House of Representatives. But nothing about this amendment can be called normal.

The Rules Committee took this one amendment and labeled it, "proposed to be adopted." In the arcana of House rules, this means that voting for the rule governing consideration of the bill was also voting for this amendment. This is known as a "self-executing rule." The ranking Democrat on the committee, Rep. Louise Slaughter of New York, offered an amendment to strike the self-executing portion of the rule and was defeated in committee on a party-line vote of 4-8.

On the House floor, the vote on the full rule passed. And at the end of a long and exhausting day (and story), that means Pentagon money can be used to construct a border wall. Talk about governing under the cover of darkness.

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/articles/2017-07-19/congress-slyly-diverts-pentagon-money-to-fund-donald-trumps-border-wall

There was no Darkness, if the auto-execution rule passed the committee and the rule passed on the House Floor. The author is the leader of a fake Taxpayer Group that only fights Border Security and Enforcement spending, but loves handouts to refugees and the like.

The new rules went into effect in 2018...

RafiMaas says

Sniper says

Second, do you know what a 4473 form is?

Is there something wrong with beefing up the 4473?

How many more pages and questions does it need?

Last summer, two Republican Reps got that Section 1039 language that prohibited Defense Funds from being used to build the Wall, removed.

This is very interesting though - somebody was so worried about the possibility of building the wall and putting up a barrier to mass illegal immigration they tried to preclude the possibility of Defense money going towards it by writing Section 1039. For 2018, this section was struck.

If it didn't get snuck back into this spending bill, it means the Donald can use Pentagon money to build the Wall, on top of the $1.6B.

Consider this tweet after Trump signed the spending bill:


#10FeetHigher #BuildTheWall