Dan Bongino leaving the FBI already???

[Rthur]

Many here have lived/seen when the government was "shut down".
They had to invent problems, like closing the Washington monument and Yellowstone, for most to notice.
A version of staying the fuck out of my life for a bit.
I'd say the best times we experience is when they are all not in session.
While this may be a bit simplistic it still applies.

R

 

[hlee]

Many here have lived/seen when the government was "shut down".
They had to invent problems, like closing the Washington monument and Yellowstone, for most to notice.
A version of staying the fuck out of my life for a bit.
I'd say the best times we experience is when they are all not in session.
While this may be a bit simplistic it still applies.

R

There was a time when “do nothing Congress” was a pejorative. Now, it is the best we can hope for…

 

[Terry Cross]

Oh, we could be... as long as whoever dresses the wound and puts on the new band-aid are the people we want doing that.

I'd always be concerned that a "complete reset" would cause such disarray as to allow the dems and socialists/commies an opportunity to get in there and market a new campaign of their own, making things a whole lot worse.... a true "frying pan into the fire." We would have to guard against that, somehow. Remember, they (socialists/commies, etc.) live for opportunities like that and don't waste them. If they see disarray among society, they are quick to jump in and paint their own picture. We can't allow that.

I may be wrong in my perception but the Dem/Socialist/Communist leeches are already in there.

They are using the very framework of the existing system to their advantage. They are opportunistic parasites that do most of their damage behind the scenes until it is too late in the game to easily remove them. . . . just like cancer. They could be removed. Just not easily and at great cost.

So while I agree with you that a reset could leave the door wide open for an infection to occur, it is most certainly inevitable anyway if we do continue within the current "system".

Would a reset requiring an open competition for leadership at least succeed in getting most of the cards on the table for everyone to see? Perhaps bring the political maneuvering and battles out into the open at least somewhat?

As long as we keep a very watchful eye on how it's happening and it's progress, then yeah... reset away!

I think the toll of hardships and sacrifice would be severe enough that keeping a watchful and wary eye on the process would be a natural condition.

 

[Terry Cross]

Like bringing up legitimate safety problems at work after we all talk it out before the meeting. I stand up and talk. One mean old coworker with liver cirrhosis poorly articulates that he agrees. Everyone else refuses to even look up, let alone repeat what they said outside 10 minutes ago. Young idealists and the very old will still charge the figurative machine gun nests, but being left “left out in the bush by the team” a few times really cuts into a guy’s hero complex.

It has always been this way with man and it will always be this way.

Only a small percentage have the conviction and determination to act. Usually the same ratio regardless of whether you are looking at a work environment, helping neighbors, inserting themselves to stop a mugging/rape/robbery, or risking everything for a Republic.

It is the tiny section of that bell curve that is precisely and accurately modeled in your high school Sociology class. Even Col. Grossman refers to this slice of the pie in more than one of his excellent books.

 

[hlee]

It has always been this way with man and it will always be this way.

Only a small percentage have the conviction and determination to act. Usually the same ratio regardless of whether you are looking at a work environment, helping neighbors, inserting themselves to stop a mugging/rape/robbery, or risking everything for a Republic.

It is the tiny section of that bell curve that is precisely and accurately modeled in your high school Sociology class. Even Col. Grossman refers to this slice of the pie in more than one of his excellent books.

"Of every 100 men, ten shouldn't even be there, eighty are just targets, nine are the real fighters, and we are lucky to have them — for they make the battle. Ah, but the one. One is a warrior, and he will bring the others back."

 

[Fx51LP308]

I may be wrong in my perception but the Dem/Socialist/Communist leeches are already in there.

Yes, but not necessarily as "effective" as they could be at the point of "total disarray" (i.e. at the beginning of that reset).

They are using the very framework of the existing system to their advantage. They are opportunistic parasites that do most of their damage behind the scenes until it is too late in the game to easily remove them. . . . just like cancer. They could be removed. Just not easily and at great cost.

So while I agree with you that a reset could leave the door wide open for an infection to occur, it is most certainly inevitable anyway if we do continue within the current "system".

Agreed. Keep those wounds dressed and the "Bactine" at the ready! {Let's see how much Googling that generates!!! }

Would a reset requiring an open competition for leadership at least succeed in getting most of the cards on the table for everyone to see? Perhaps bring the political maneuvering and battles out into the open at least somewhat?

It would, but at that point I'd think the commies have us beat (i.e. we preach "Self-reliance" and working hard, and they preach "Free stuff" for everyone! ). Hard to overcome.

I think the toll of hardships and sacrifice would be severe enough that keeping a watchful and wary eye on the process would be a natural condition.

If we could only get "out kind" to believe that.

 

[BigTex]

Buy more ammo

 

[hlee]

Yes, but not necessarily as "effective" as they could be at the point of "total disarray" (i.e. at the beginning of that reset).



Agreed. Keep those wounds dressed and the "Bactine" at the ready! {Let's see how much Googling that generates!!! }



It would, but at that point I'd think the commies have us beat (i.e. we preach "Self-reliance" and working hard, and they preach "Free stuff" for everyone! ). Hard to overcome.



If we could only get "out kind" to believe that.

Bactine? The old fuckers round here have fond memories of mercurochrome…

 

[Gunfighter14e2]

Exactly why the board should be reset.

That is the only path that will save this country. The none thinking, weak ass dead weight, has been so finely cultivated by ticks so long to take point the path of least resistance, its just sicking. That evidence is plain as day in a few threads here.
When the founders set it all up, I don't think they ever envisioned the levels of what all, we are seeing today. The only cure is any event the brings the ROL down long enough, for the trash to be taken out. Then when it comes back it should be in a manner that no one is above the law, and is truly justice for all, and that is not spelled Just-Us.

 

[Gunfighter14e2]

Bactine? The old fuckers round here have fond memories of mercurochrome…

Those are modern meds. Old is knowing what a Mustard root poultice or any poultice is, for that matter, or how to charm off warts.

 

[Gunfighter14e2]

It would, but at that point I'd think the commies have us beat (i.e. we preach "Self-reliance" and working hard, and they preach "Free stuff" for everyone! ). Hard to overcome.

The only thing keeping them in power are those people who still somewhat believe in the ROL. Once that is gone or the reward of taking out the trash is greater than the pain of, it all will change.

 

[Fx51LP308]

The only thing keeping them in power are those people who still somewhat believe in the ROL. Once that is gone or the reward of taking out the trash is greater than the pain of, it all will change.

I fear that most people won't be willing to "take out the trash" as that may involve a bit too much "wet work." Particularly, wet work that involves their own kind....

 

[Gunfighter14e2]

I fear that most people won't be willing to "take out the trash" as that may involve a bit too much "wet work." Particularly, wet work that involves their own kind....

They won't have to take out their own kind, as they are not the trash that needs removing. They are being restrained now because the reward is not worth the pain of losing everything, at this point. Should the ROL go away or the reward be greater, than any pain man can deal out then things will rapidly change.

It's because of most people (aka the weak) that we have arrived at the point of being a nation of washer woman & robots.

 

[Fx51LP308]

They won't have to take out their own kind, as they are not the trash that needs removing. They are being restrained now because the reward is not worth the pain of losing everything, at this point. Should the ROL go away or the reward be greater, than any pain man can deal out then things will rapidly change.

It's because of most people (aka the weak) that we have arrived at the point of being a nation of washer woman & robots.

No, but the other side will defend themselves... resulting in "wet work" needed on our side... hence, our own kind.

 

[Gunfighter14e2]

No, but the other side will defend themselves... resulting in "wet work" needed on our side... hence, our own kind.

Tyrants and those who are protecting tyrants are not our kind,...they are in fact worst than the tyrant, no matter their rags or title.

 

[Terry Cross]

I fear that most people won't be willing to "take out the trash" as that may involve a bit too much "wet work." Particularly, wet work that involves their own kind....

As pointed out earlier, historically there has always been only a very small slice of a group that will take action.

Only a very small percentage of infantry truly fight. Only a very small percentage of a society will fight for freedom. Only a very small percentage of a crowd will step forward to stop a crime or atrocity against a vulnerable person. Etc. etc. etc.

98 - 99% of any control group will be risk averse. They are the sheep.
They are the ones that don't want to rock the boat. Don't want to upset their predictable lifestyle. Don't want to risk punishment.
They are the ones that may express their disdain for a situation in close circles but will deflect any ownership for change because "most people won't be willing".

Only a handful will take a necessary action to change an outcome. Typically, only a fraction of that fraction have the skillsets to efficiently affect change.

This small fraction willing to risk personal harm will also typically induce a few others to take action that were otherwise on the fence. The same way a few can induce many to panic, a few can also bring courage to many.

I'm not trying to persuade you toward any conclusion, but rather reinforcing that your above stated fear is well founded in human history. Basic Sociology and Psychology posit that such behavior will always be exhibited by our species. History documents that a small handful will always be the ones that bring change on a large scale.

 

[Emerson0311]

They won't have to take out their own kind, as they are not the trash that needs removing. They are being restrained now because the reward is not worth the pain of losing everything, at this point. Should the ROL go away or the reward be greater, than any pain man can deal out then things will rapidly change.

It's because of most people (aka the weak) that we have arrived at the point of being a nation of washer woman & robots.

Klaus Schwab believes most “useless eaters” should be deleted. I don’t support his motives, but it sounds like there are some shared beliefs there.
See how the water just got really deep really fast there? Situations like this are why “black hat vs white hat” are never as simple as they are presented.

 

[Gunfighter14e2]

Klaus Schwab believes most “useless eaters” should be deleted. I don’t support his motives, but it sounds like there are some shared beliefs there.
See how the water just got really deep really fast there? Situations like this are why “black hat vs white hat” are never as simple as they are presented.

He is correct. There is a huge segment of people all over this rock that pop out children because they either want the gov tit money, or could care less about the product of fucking. The amount of unwanted children is staggering let alone the harm done to them that then spreads during their lives, its a run away cancer. People like that need to be removed or forced to see the light, but the sheep don't have the balls or brains to think that far ahead. Then again that B/S does grow segments of the economy, that also dumb down other segments. In confusion there is opportunity,...

 

[Terry Cross]

In confusion there is opportunity,...

Damn.

Looking around, there must be a metric shit ton of opportunity!

 

[Holliday]

ATTENTION EVERYONE! Boebert needs attention everyone!

 

[DuneBoer]

Klaus Schwab believes most “useless eaters” should be deleted. I don’t support his motives, but it sounds like there are some shared beliefs there.
See how the water just got really deep really fast there? Situations like this are why “black hat vs white hat” are never as simple as they are presented.

Klaus Schwab is a useless eater and should be eliminated.

 

[Fx51LP308]

As pointed out earlier, historically there has always been only a very small slice of a group that will take action.

Only a very small percentage of infantry truly fight. Only a very small percentage of a society will fight for freedom. Only a very small percentage of a crowd will step forward to stop a crime or atrocity against a vulnerable person. Etc. etc. etc.

98 - 99% of any control group will be risk averse. They are the sheep.
They are the ones that don't want to rock the boat. Don't want to upset their predictable lifestyle. Don't want to risk punishment.
They are the ones that may express their disdain for a situation in close circles but will deflect any ownership for change because "most people won't be willing".

Only a handful will take a necessary action to change an outcome. Typically, only a fraction of that fraction have the skillsets to efficiently affect change.

This small fraction willing to risk personal harm will also typically induce a few others to take action that were otherwise on the fence. The same way a few can induce many to panic, a few can also bring courage to many.

I'm not trying to persuade you toward any conclusion, but rather reinforcing that your above stated fear is well founded in human history. Basic Sociology and Psychology posit that such behavior will always be exhibited by our species. History documents that a small handful will always be the ones that bring change on a large scale.

Just out of curiosity, how many "revolutionaries" were there (i.e. arms bearing etc.) amongst all the people in Colonial USA during the 1770's? What was the percentage there?

 

[Terry Cross]

Just out of curiosity, how many "revolutionaries" were there (i.e. arms bearing etc.) amongst all the people in Colonial USA during the 1770's? What was the percentage there?

I haven't a clue. My highschool yearbook doesn't go back that far.

Web search comes up with an estimate of less than 2% of the population actually participated in the effort.

 

[Gunfighter14e2]

I haven't a clue. My highschool yearbook doesn't go back that far.

Web search comes up with an estimate of less than 2% of the population actually participated in the effort.

IIRC in the 6th - 8th (1958-60)grade we were always,... Told,... it was between 2.75- 3% active, w/ 4-5% none armed, active behind the wire types. With about 10-14% unarmed & changing sides like the wind. The rest set it all out, completely. Then when it was all over like every many things, most all claimed to be XYZ during.

 

[mosin46]

Just out of curiosity, how many "revolutionaries" were there (i.e. arms bearing etc.) amongst all the people in Colonial USA during the 1770's? What was the percentage there?

30% of male pop of right age? i have read that active support was about that. just guessing on fighters but a small minority for sure. 20% loyalists,
50% on fence?
i think support was higher in France in 1789 but centered in Paris so never read re pop in general. Russia a much larger support for Kerensky workers,army,navy,peasants. Bolsheviks after the fall of Czar was very small group. Lenin won out anyway. to my knowledge most successful revolutions have very small % of armed support and feint support of security/mil factions. armed matters.

 

[diggler1833]

Just out of curiosity, how many "revolutionaries" were there (i.e. arms bearing etc.) amongst all the people in Colonial USA during the 1770's? What was the percentage there?

Was it.......... drum roll.......... III%?