What stupid thing did the GOP say or do this time? Episode 3!
- Thread starter Ironbite4
- Start date
Of course we're going to have to live with this, just as we're going to have to live with everything else the regime has done and will do.
However (and this was my sarcastic point), the pattern up until now is to send the guard into democratic strongholds using crime as an excuse. He was gung-ho about sending them into Chicago, but the GOP has started to back off that one, probably in response (in part) to Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker's strong rhetoric against it, the horrible morale of the troops sent to D.C., and the wholly negative public opinion polls in regard to the Guard being used this way.
Those of us with working brains who care about reality know that crime rates have been dropping for years, and that the per-capita crime rates are higher in red states overall. So why hasn't he sent them to, say, New Orleans, Memphis, or St. Louis? Because that doesn't fit the narrative of Blue states being lawless wastelands, not to mention the need for some form of support from Red State governors.
So, could he deploy the Guard to Utah? Yes. Will he? I'm not so sure about that. Regardless, time will tell just as it always does.
Whoever it is, I hope they're on our side and not just an agent of chaos.
I'm sorry you had to see that.
After long ago seeing the horrible video-footage of the on-camera suicide of PA politician R. Bud Dwyer from 1987, I'm slightly desensitized to this sort of thing. Even so, I don't normally seek out footage of people getting shot, or beaten. In this case, when Kirk's condition was still listed at "critical", I did look up footage of the shot. When I saw it, I was like, "Welp. He's not going to make it."
Yeah. When I said he was absolutely dead, I'd seen it.
His kids were there. They saw that.
His kids were there. They saw that.
I figured you had, I'd had it described to me very clearly. I believe the words used to describe it to me was "Mortal Kombat fatality"
That told me everything I needed to know. I'm sympathetic to his kids and I hope they get the therapy they're going to need.
That told me everything I needed to know. I'm sympathetic to his kids and I hope they get the therapy they're going to need.
Human body has a startingly large amount of blood and it's always under very high pressure. God I hope I don't see it.
As for the wish that the guy is "on our side" yeah no. As much as I'd love to see certain GOP heads explode like Gallager, I'm not about that. This was murder. This was professional. This was a hit.
Ironbite-and only the Gods know who Charlie pissed off to this point.
As for the wish that the guy is "on our side" yeah no. As much as I'd love to see certain GOP heads explode like Gallager, I'm not about that. This was murder. This was professional. This was a hit.
Ironbite-and only the Gods know who Charlie pissed off to this point.
At the risk of sounding conspiratorial, it's also going to be a big distraction from the Epstein files for at least a week. Just sayin'...
Mm hmm. I don't at all endorse this thought, but the CIA has people that can make that shot.
The dumb conspiracy theories have gotten REALLY out of hand around here lately.
The reported shot isn't particularly crazy. Many militaries expect soldiers to be able to make hits at more than twice that distance using iron sights.
With a magnified optic zeroed for approximately that range, firing from a braced/rested/bi-poded position it would have been a fairly simple hit for anyone with a base level of rifle experience.
The reported shot isn't particularly crazy. Many militaries expect soldiers to be able to make hits at more than twice that distance using iron sights.
With a magnified optic zeroed for approximately that range, firing from a braced/rested/bi-poded position it would have been a fairly simple hit for anyone with a base level of rifle experience.
200 yards sounds like a lot. Carlos Hathcock made a shot more than 2000 yards away.
Unlike Vizzini, I'm not saying that to be triumphant or smug. It's just that, well, a quick look over your history makes your statement "a thing to strive for" rather than "a thing you have lost".
And seeing how at least there are groups that see Civil War 2.0 as inevitable (though not all of these black-pilled types think it desirable), well. Without going into the weeds (which would be a long essay, not necessarily outside the scope of this board, but would need a little more preparation), it's safe to say that not everyone is using the same playbook, or indeed even acknowledging the same consensus reality, as everyone else. Most people who talk about these problems aren't necessarily interested in coming up with solutions, either. But solutions are needed, and fast.
Stay safe, 'sparkers.
There's always a chance to pull back from the brink. Everybody forgets how bad 2004 was, because we got past it. But it does feel like we are at the brink.
I suppose that could be the case. But I would propose the scenario where they "find" a convenient patsy who happens to be a democrat or at least left-leaning would be equally, or nearly, as bad.
I will say that we are PAST the point of 2004 at this point, but I do believe we still have a shot of self-correcting before mass violence breaks out. We've been on the road towards civil war for a while now and are likely closer now than at any other point in my lifetime, but we ain't there yet. 2025 state and local elections are, generally, going our way and this momentum will hopefully continue into the 2026 midterms. All we need is control of the House to apply a bit of breaks to what is happening. We don't even really need the Senate(though we do have a slim opportunity there as well). Having the house in 2026 will hopefully get things bogged down enough that by the time 2028 rolls around, we can get someone in office who can properly dismantle a good chunk of the fascist machinery currently being put in place and HOPEFULLY they've learned their lesson after the Biden administration and actually fight.