Unfortunately, elections will never change a thing. At least with the electoral mess we have right now. Two sides of the same coin is just that--the same coin, and it ain't in your pocket or mine. The tree of liberty has been in need of a very deep watering for a very long time now. The only way out of the mess we the people have permitted this government to create is to dismantle the entire system an have a do over. Yes, like all changes in government it will be a long, hard struggle, but as in 76, it is needed, and has been for most of my life (77). One of the founders (Jefferson?) said that a true patriot was one who was willing to defend his country from it's government. Time for America to once again withdraw it's consent, and throw off the tyranny we have permitted to rule us.
On thing is certain from history, the electorate will always choose status quo until that is removed as an option. Human nature fights substantial change and hates putting up more effort than is absolutely necessary. It seems, however, that events are conspiring to remove status quo as a choice. The question, then, is how much effort will the general public put into reform? Revolutions are fought and won by a relatively small portion of the population, and the Bumbledicks are way ahead in their efforts (part of why we are at this point). There are substantial issues to be addressed and it remains to be seen whether a significant segment of the population will put the the right efforts in the right direction. If nothing else, it's an exciting time to be alive.
"At this point, the system is pretty much irreversable. It would require unwinding the Fed mess, disbanding the IRS, killing off an entire industry (tax preppers), repealing three Constitutional Amendments, getting rid of the standing miliary, and repudiating the national debt. Not that any of it is a bad idea, but it ain’t gonna happen."
Excellent post, but I question this part just a little. I believe it is reversible, and will reverse, just not intentionally. In my mind inflation and a collapsing economy will do the heavy lifting of the reversal. Trust me, a part tof me hopes I am entirely wrong.
I believe you are correct. I don't think anything is impossible, just highly improbable, especially with just four years to achieve it. The imperative for change will certainly come from the economy, but the Merkin electorate is finicky -- they won't willingly choose such radical changes without some unavoidable reason to act. Unfortunately (or not as your views may dictate), the moment of change is upon us and the choice to stay the course is not an option. The important issue here is to form a majority that will steer the outcome. We can be absolutely sure that the Bumbledicks are already working on this.
Amen! I think we all recognize the NEED, but generating the WILL is the big hurdle to clear. In this respect, I think Trump is a good example. He could have easily to ride out his golden years at the peak of his success, but he is obviously throwing it all away to fight. If there's any take-away from watching him, it is that one thing I find most compelling.
You are right. It's hopeless. Even Representative Massie (congress) says it's impossible to save this Country. It's going to be a slow crashing burn out I think. Clif says the same thing. Prepare for the Collapse of Civilization as we know it. And years to even come close to getting back on our Proverbial FEET. But on the bright side, Clif is sure there will be Aliens to fight too! :)
It is hopeless, but only in the sense of the system reforming itself. It will happen, but not from within the system. The change will be exogenous and irresistible. It will take a complete dismantling of the current system, which will bring all sorts of hazards with it, both internal and external; however, it is inevitable. The biggest problem is not starting a revolution - that's pretty easy. The Big Problem is steering the outcome in the right direction through a jungle of variables and competing interests. This takes a level of commitment and fortitude that most people do not have. Significant reform never comes from within a system; it is always an external and unavoidable series of events that kicks things into gear.
The SCOTUS agreed with Bill Benson that he'd proven, in his book, The Law That Never Was, that the 16th Amendment was never lawfully ratified, but they let it stand on "tradition."
Of one thing we can be absolutely sure: the judiciary is populated by cowards who hide behind every bush they can find. The system created by the Constitution IS the problem, aided and abetted by general complacency. Both of those issues need profound overhaul, and getting a significant portion of the population to willfully accept hardship for future benefit is the hardest sell there is. Trump might be the marketeer to pull it off, but it's a tall order.
That's true, but at least he has run successful companies that generated shareholder value, hired a lot of people, and created real-world value. Name one thing Biden has done in any one of those categories. He is a world-class leech. If forced to choose between the two, I will take the former. Ego I can tolerate, scum I can't.
Having ideas and knowing markets is part of leading a company, and I am quite sure he knows a good bit about the engineering of a high rise. Most politicians have never added to their environments. They suck air and food and produce nothing of value. For all his faults, I grant Trump his knowledge and experience in the real world.
Trump's problem was relying on the political enemies that he put in his cabinet and letting them do whatever they wanted, regardless of it being deliberate or grossly ignorant. If he does that in a second term, it will confirm that he is a domestic enemy, even in ignorance.
I absolutely agree, but any efforts begun the the 2nd Trump administration would immediately be reversed by the 2028 elections, in all likelihood. Repealing the 16th, 17th and 23rd Amendments is the first best line of attack, but the process is a long and tedious one with severe headwinds, hot the least of which is 35 states ratifying and the SecState signing off. Furthermore, the military is one of the primary beneficiaries of the income tax, and Trump worships the military, and the Military-Industrial Complex will not go quietly. Getting rid of the income tax won't happen without a major systemic shock and internal realignment.
Probably whoever Trump chooses as his running mate, even if s/he is not a natural born citizen, as meant by the men who wrote the phrase from Vattel into the document.
There are those who argue the "native born" clause only referred to the founding generation, and it's an interesting ponder that Obama has already rendered moot by precedent. The effort will absolutely require a super majority in the Senate and a loyal VP, which is a lot of "ifs".
It isn't 'native born,' it is natural born citizenship and the men who wrote it into the Constitution got it from Emer de Vattel, who defines it in his classic book, Law of Nations, as being someone who was born to two citizens.
Lake seems to be the best all-round choice, in terms of loyalty, scrappiness and ticking the diversity box, without the "native born" clause coming up (Vivek). In any case, Trump needs full control of the Senate, both initially and after mid-terms, and he needs to stop picking Deepsters to fill key posts. He's not going to buy the Deep support with any appointments.
Lake has never held a political office, so starting in the second highest job in the executive branch of the federal government is something she'd be even less suited to than Trump himself, who found out the hard way that being the chief executive officer of the government of a corrupt constitutional republic was nothing like being the CEO of a multi-billion dollar real estate holding company.
Trump started at the top with the same qualifications. I actually think no prior experience is a plus in her corner, and I would support banning lawyers and incumbents from holding office in any case. I would much rather have someone with real world experience running things, than blood-sucking career leaches like Biden. Furthermore, lawyers have a built-in conflict of interest, since they are making laws that they ultimately benefit from as attorneys and consultsants.
"No one will knowingly and willfully choose that path."
Some will, even if only because they are suicidal or misanthropic. Others will go along for ideological reasons, say, theocracy or an authentic religious rejection of secularism. As for conservatives, reactionaries, and obstructionists, why does it matter whether they know and understand or not that reform entails their possible immiseration? They go along with the status quo without understanding it, and this for their own selfish reasons. They can go along with another way, instead, yet still have their darkness, as more than 100m retards do in the USA right now.
Think about their "federal" Constitution for a few moments. It begins with a blatant lie even though many fewer than ½ of "the People" were responsible for it. The Con also assumes sovereignty of absolutely everyone, even children—who are nothing if not people. How could a constitution be more obscene without inducing nausea in a well educated reader?
It's not controversial, or it ought not to be, that any alleged law which begins with a gross lie and which assumes an absurdity essential to the alleged law is no law at all. That thing is so contrary to truth that it assumes its own authority and partial "Establishment" before the "Ratification" alleged in A7 to be sufficient to make it binding law.
It would appear that you prove my case, in that a rational and aware individual would not willingly chose such a course. You have clearly read (or should in the near future) Lysander Spooner and the fallacy of the Constitution. The basis for society is justice, not law. There is no need for law in a just society, since the educated and well-adjusted human knows instinctively what is right and wrong. Law is thus coercion to behave in a way that is contrary to rationality, since rational humans would assume such edicts without the need for law.
"Basically, we can get all the morphine we want to quell the pain of the tiger gnawing on our backside, but we are forbidden to acknowledge the tiger itself."
That sums it up right there.
Besides, Trump is beholden and loyal to the Talmudists. Nothing after that matters.
The point I rarely see addressed about Trump is that his entire net worth is based on the good will and support of the banking cabal. They can pull his plug any time and leave him penniless. They've done it to entire nations, why not? The only real power he has is the ability to point a finger and have millions of devotees descend on the target. Politics is veiled warfare, but it is warfare nonetheless.
Rufus: You have a great living room! Very cool! I like what you've done. The rug really ties the room together.
Hahaha! Trump's tax, border wall, tariff, (insert noun here) plan is always a joke. Trump is a good marketeer as you point out.
There is no future. Birthrates and lifespans in the USA are dropping. The next generation was permanently damaged by the injections and school lockdowns. There is no future.
As the mountain climber in the movie "The Eiger Sanction" said to Clint Eastwood as they were in deep shit traversing a steep ice field:
"No. We aren't going to make it. But we shall continue with style."
And that is what I am doing one day at a time.
There is no future.
PS: Libertarian philosophy is all based upon the Non Aggression Principle (NAP). Force can only be used in self-defense. The income tax uses force to steal our money, so Libertarians are against the IRS. It is a philosophical outlook, not an economic one.
Thank you for noticing! Truth be told, the rug was a last-minute addition. I spent more time fretting over the window treatments and fixtures, and a high-quality hookah brings the room's focus to a wonderful vertical sweep, I think.
As for Libertarians (Big L), they are primarily a bunch of malcontents who want change for its own sake, and not for some ideological end. The libertarians (Small L) have a unifying philosophy with each point reinforcing the ultimate goal. Spooner, Rothbard and von Mises have comprehensive arguments that are well thought out, but as Trump's speech at the Libertarian "convention" highlighted, they are anarchists with no real concept of how the world works. Not to discount all their ideas, but they only see ends and not process or consequences.
Is it all over? No, just this chapter. There's plenty more history to write, though. As I point out in the forthcoming expanded edition of "Paper Golem," European culture has divorced itself from its raison d'etret. Without the philosophical and theological underpinnings that created the culture, it must perforce collapse. Is that a bad thing? History is the record of the rise and fall of dominant cultures. It's an organic process that repeats at every scale (bacteria in a Petri dish). It is what it is, and the emotional content is what we place on it as observers and participants in the cycle.
Rufus: Since my children don't have children and never will, I am ambivalent about the future of the human race. It is frustrating to grow up in America in the 1950s and 60s, even the early 70s, and then watch it all self destruct.
I can't argue with that. A simple example: I used to walk out on the tarmac, with Dad climb the stairs onto the airplane, take an empty seat, and Dad paid the stewardess cash for the tickets. another? Thursday was skeet club in high school. There were literally hundreds of guns and thousands of rounds on campus, and not one single person ever got hurt. Of course, I also remember the chaos of t he 60s, and the economic collapse and rash of highjackings in the 70s, so it wasn't all guns and roses. Three major assassinations in the US alone in the space of 5 years. Ongoing war in Asia (starting with Korea). Whenever I get morose about the future, I just pour a Bombay Sapphire martini with a twist and figure to hell with the world at large.
Rufus: Haha! David Jones, the famous stunt pilot and aerial coordinator I worked for in Belem, Brazil would always have two Bombay Sapphire double gins as we sat on the outdoor Terrace Bar overlooking Avenida Presidente Vargas. He liked that gin.
Obviously David was/is a man of discerning taste. Sapphire makes the finest martini on the planet, as long as you don't ruin it with olives. Just a twist of lemon in a chilled glass misted with dry vermouth. Oh, and never let metal touch the gin. Use a glass shaker. When I'm in the mode, even a nuclear hellstorm couldn't shake me.
Unfortunately, elections will never change a thing. At least with the electoral mess we have right now. Two sides of the same coin is just that--the same coin, and it ain't in your pocket or mine. The tree of liberty has been in need of a very deep watering for a very long time now. The only way out of the mess we the people have permitted this government to create is to dismantle the entire system an have a do over. Yes, like all changes in government it will be a long, hard struggle, but as in 76, it is needed, and has been for most of my life (77). One of the founders (Jefferson?) said that a true patriot was one who was willing to defend his country from it's government. Time for America to once again withdraw it's consent, and throw off the tyranny we have permitted to rule us.
On thing is certain from history, the electorate will always choose status quo until that is removed as an option. Human nature fights substantial change and hates putting up more effort than is absolutely necessary. It seems, however, that events are conspiring to remove status quo as a choice. The question, then, is how much effort will the general public put into reform? Revolutions are fought and won by a relatively small portion of the population, and the Bumbledicks are way ahead in their efforts (part of why we are at this point). There are substantial issues to be addressed and it remains to be seen whether a significant segment of the population will put the the right efforts in the right direction. If nothing else, it's an exciting time to be alive.
"At this point, the system is pretty much irreversable. It would require unwinding the Fed mess, disbanding the IRS, killing off an entire industry (tax preppers), repealing three Constitutional Amendments, getting rid of the standing miliary, and repudiating the national debt. Not that any of it is a bad idea, but it ain’t gonna happen."
Excellent post, but I question this part just a little. I believe it is reversible, and will reverse, just not intentionally. In my mind inflation and a collapsing economy will do the heavy lifting of the reversal. Trust me, a part tof me hopes I am entirely wrong.
I believe you are correct. I don't think anything is impossible, just highly improbable, especially with just four years to achieve it. The imperative for change will certainly come from the economy, but the Merkin electorate is finicky -- they won't willingly choose such radical changes without some unavoidable reason to act. Unfortunately (or not as your views may dictate), the moment of change is upon us and the choice to stay the course is not an option. The important issue here is to form a majority that will steer the outcome. We can be absolutely sure that the Bumbledicks are already working on this.
From you lips to EVERYONE’S ears.
Amen! I think we all recognize the NEED, but generating the WILL is the big hurdle to clear. In this respect, I think Trump is a good example. He could have easily to ride out his golden years at the peak of his success, but he is obviously throwing it all away to fight. If there's any take-away from watching him, it is that one thing I find most compelling.
You are right. It's hopeless. Even Representative Massie (congress) says it's impossible to save this Country. It's going to be a slow crashing burn out I think. Clif says the same thing. Prepare for the Collapse of Civilization as we know it. And years to even come close to getting back on our Proverbial FEET. But on the bright side, Clif is sure there will be Aliens to fight too! :)
It is hopeless, but only in the sense of the system reforming itself. It will happen, but not from within the system. The change will be exogenous and irresistible. It will take a complete dismantling of the current system, which will bring all sorts of hazards with it, both internal and external; however, it is inevitable. The biggest problem is not starting a revolution - that's pretty easy. The Big Problem is steering the outcome in the right direction through a jungle of variables and competing interests. This takes a level of commitment and fortitude that most people do not have. Significant reform never comes from within a system; it is always an external and unavoidable series of events that kicks things into gear.
The SCOTUS agreed with Bill Benson that he'd proven, in his book, The Law That Never Was, that the 16th Amendment was never lawfully ratified, but they let it stand on "tradition."
Of one thing we can be absolutely sure: the judiciary is populated by cowards who hide behind every bush they can find. The system created by the Constitution IS the problem, aided and abetted by general complacency. Both of those issues need profound overhaul, and getting a significant portion of the population to willfully accept hardship for future benefit is the hardest sell there is. Trump might be the marketeer to pull it off, but it's a tall order.
Trump has never done anything to accept hardship if it didn't stroke his narcissism.
That's true, but at least he has run successful companies that generated shareholder value, hired a lot of people, and created real-world value. Name one thing Biden has done in any one of those categories. He is a world-class leech. If forced to choose between the two, I will take the former. Ego I can tolerate, scum I can't.
His employees did most of the actual running of his companies while he danced in the limelight.
Politicians only have to take bribes and campaign donations while they dance in the limelight.
Having ideas and knowing markets is part of leading a company, and I am quite sure he knows a good bit about the engineering of a high rise. Most politicians have never added to their environments. They suck air and food and produce nothing of value. For all his faults, I grant Trump his knowledge and experience in the real world.
Trump's problem was relying on the political enemies that he put in his cabinet and letting them do whatever they wanted, regardless of it being deliberate or grossly ignorant. If he does that in a second term, it will confirm that he is a domestic enemy, even in ignorance.
Bernard, while the Donald's plans might seem unattainable, we gotta start somewhere. My greatest concern is, who will we hand this over to in 2028??
I absolutely agree, but any efforts begun the the 2nd Trump administration would immediately be reversed by the 2028 elections, in all likelihood. Repealing the 16th, 17th and 23rd Amendments is the first best line of attack, but the process is a long and tedious one with severe headwinds, hot the least of which is 35 states ratifying and the SecState signing off. Furthermore, the military is one of the primary beneficiaries of the income tax, and Trump worships the military, and the Military-Industrial Complex will not go quietly. Getting rid of the income tax won't happen without a major systemic shock and internal realignment.
Probably whoever Trump chooses as his running mate, even if s/he is not a natural born citizen, as meant by the men who wrote the phrase from Vattel into the document.
There are those who argue the "native born" clause only referred to the founding generation, and it's an interesting ponder that Obama has already rendered moot by precedent. The effort will absolutely require a super majority in the Senate and a loyal VP, which is a lot of "ifs".
It isn't 'native born,' it is natural born citizenship and the men who wrote it into the Constitution got it from Emer de Vattel, who defines it in his classic book, Law of Nations, as being someone who was born to two citizens.
It is very well documented and explained at jayweller.com/natural-born-citizen-defined/
Who then? Vivek? Kari Lake? Tim Scott? He better not choose a WEF puppet as VP. That would be the last straw for me!
Lake seems to be the best all-round choice, in terms of loyalty, scrappiness and ticking the diversity box, without the "native born" clause coming up (Vivek). In any case, Trump needs full control of the Senate, both initially and after mid-terms, and he needs to stop picking Deepsters to fill key posts. He's not going to buy the Deep support with any appointments.
Lake has never held a political office, so starting in the second highest job in the executive branch of the federal government is something she'd be even less suited to than Trump himself, who found out the hard way that being the chief executive officer of the government of a corrupt constitutional republic was nothing like being the CEO of a multi-billion dollar real estate holding company.
Trump started at the top with the same qualifications. I actually think no prior experience is a plus in her corner, and I would support banning lawyers and incumbents from holding office in any case. I would much rather have someone with real world experience running things, than blood-sucking career leaches like Biden. Furthermore, lawyers have a built-in conflict of interest, since they are making laws that they ultimately benefit from as attorneys and consultsants.
So you believe that all corporations should be lead by those with the least understanding of the job?
Where do you keep your certified list of WEF puppets?
I keep them in my head thank you. I watch, listen and see what people do,....and if they do what the WEF/UN/WHO want done, they are on my "list". :)
I guess you are less interested in having a list in your head of our domestic enemies.
It's surely not true that...
"No one will knowingly and willfully choose that path."
Some will, even if only because they are suicidal or misanthropic. Others will go along for ideological reasons, say, theocracy or an authentic religious rejection of secularism. As for conservatives, reactionaries, and obstructionists, why does it matter whether they know and understand or not that reform entails their possible immiseration? They go along with the status quo without understanding it, and this for their own selfish reasons. They can go along with another way, instead, yet still have their darkness, as more than 100m retards do in the USA right now.
Think about their "federal" Constitution for a few moments. It begins with a blatant lie even though many fewer than ½ of "the People" were responsible for it. The Con also assumes sovereignty of absolutely everyone, even children—who are nothing if not people. How could a constitution be more obscene without inducing nausea in a well educated reader?
It's not controversial, or it ought not to be, that any alleged law which begins with a gross lie and which assumes an absurdity essential to the alleged law is no law at all. That thing is so contrary to truth that it assumes its own authority and partial "Establishment" before the "Ratification" alleged in A7 to be sufficient to make it binding law.
The Con is fake law.
It would appear that you prove my case, in that a rational and aware individual would not willingly chose such a course. You have clearly read (or should in the near future) Lysander Spooner and the fallacy of the Constitution. The basis for society is justice, not law. There is no need for law in a just society, since the educated and well-adjusted human knows instinctively what is right and wrong. Law is thus coercion to behave in a way that is contrary to rationality, since rational humans would assume such edicts without the need for law.
"Basically, we can get all the morphine we want to quell the pain of the tiger gnawing on our backside, but we are forbidden to acknowledge the tiger itself."
That sums it up right there.
Besides, Trump is beholden and loyal to the Talmudists. Nothing after that matters.
The point I rarely see addressed about Trump is that his entire net worth is based on the good will and support of the banking cabal. They can pull his plug any time and leave him penniless. They've done it to entire nations, why not? The only real power he has is the ability to point a finger and have millions of devotees descend on the target. Politics is veiled warfare, but it is warfare nonetheless.
Yup, and that pretty much sums up the Rothschild control mechanism quite concisely.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/kTMv8c9lr3AZ/
Rufus: You have a great living room! Very cool! I like what you've done. The rug really ties the room together.
Hahaha! Trump's tax, border wall, tariff, (insert noun here) plan is always a joke. Trump is a good marketeer as you point out.
There is no future. Birthrates and lifespans in the USA are dropping. The next generation was permanently damaged by the injections and school lockdowns. There is no future.
As the mountain climber in the movie "The Eiger Sanction" said to Clint Eastwood as they were in deep shit traversing a steep ice field:
"No. We aren't going to make it. But we shall continue with style."
And that is what I am doing one day at a time.
There is no future.
PS: Libertarian philosophy is all based upon the Non Aggression Principle (NAP). Force can only be used in self-defense. The income tax uses force to steal our money, so Libertarians are against the IRS. It is a philosophical outlook, not an economic one.
Thank you for noticing! Truth be told, the rug was a last-minute addition. I spent more time fretting over the window treatments and fixtures, and a high-quality hookah brings the room's focus to a wonderful vertical sweep, I think.
As for Libertarians (Big L), they are primarily a bunch of malcontents who want change for its own sake, and not for some ideological end. The libertarians (Small L) have a unifying philosophy with each point reinforcing the ultimate goal. Spooner, Rothbard and von Mises have comprehensive arguments that are well thought out, but as Trump's speech at the Libertarian "convention" highlighted, they are anarchists with no real concept of how the world works. Not to discount all their ideas, but they only see ends and not process or consequences.
Is it all over? No, just this chapter. There's plenty more history to write, though. As I point out in the forthcoming expanded edition of "Paper Golem," European culture has divorced itself from its raison d'etret. Without the philosophical and theological underpinnings that created the culture, it must perforce collapse. Is that a bad thing? History is the record of the rise and fall of dominant cultures. It's an organic process that repeats at every scale (bacteria in a Petri dish). It is what it is, and the emotional content is what we place on it as observers and participants in the cycle.
Rufus: Since my children don't have children and never will, I am ambivalent about the future of the human race. It is frustrating to grow up in America in the 1950s and 60s, even the early 70s, and then watch it all self destruct.
I can't argue with that. A simple example: I used to walk out on the tarmac, with Dad climb the stairs onto the airplane, take an empty seat, and Dad paid the stewardess cash for the tickets. another? Thursday was skeet club in high school. There were literally hundreds of guns and thousands of rounds on campus, and not one single person ever got hurt. Of course, I also remember the chaos of t he 60s, and the economic collapse and rash of highjackings in the 70s, so it wasn't all guns and roses. Three major assassinations in the US alone in the space of 5 years. Ongoing war in Asia (starting with Korea). Whenever I get morose about the future, I just pour a Bombay Sapphire martini with a twist and figure to hell with the world at large.
Rufus: Haha! David Jones, the famous stunt pilot and aerial coordinator I worked for in Belem, Brazil would always have two Bombay Sapphire double gins as we sat on the outdoor Terrace Bar overlooking Avenida Presidente Vargas. He liked that gin.
Obviously David was/is a man of discerning taste. Sapphire makes the finest martini on the planet, as long as you don't ruin it with olives. Just a twist of lemon in a chilled glass misted with dry vermouth. Oh, and never let metal touch the gin. Use a glass shaker. When I'm in the mode, even a nuclear hellstorm couldn't shake me.