Charges? Plenty of obstruction charges so far. Well over 850 (874?) Trumpists have been charged with attacking the capitol and police, some charged with treasonous sedition, some admitting to sedition….at Tump’s request and direction.

Perhaps you don’t know, the committee doesn’t charge criminals, it makes criminal referrals to the DOJ. The point is to find out what happened, and who caused it, not to charge anyone (except those who ignore their subpoenas or lie under oath, even then they only make referals). They don’t have that power, they have referral power only. They have made referrals for defendants that were charged, so you’ve been misled.

New charges? That’s up to Garland, who is dragging his feet, but criminal referrals to the DOJ with verified evidence of serious crimes Trump himself and his lackeys committed leading up to, during, and after the Jan 6 Trump led attack on democracy and against America are definitely coming soon. Cheney has said exactly that, there is more than enough direct evidence that Trump personally committed multiple serious crimes in relation to the Trump Treason of Jan 6…but the investigation is ongoing.
After the last hearing tons of new witnesses and evidence has come flooding in from people who finally realized they are on the wrong, and losing side of history here and are no longer hiding or refusing to testify about what they know or have proof of. There’s no statute of limitations on treason, or attempted murder, or actual murder (and everyone involved is guilty of killing a police officer legally just as much as if they murdered him themselves because they acted as a group, a gang, or a private army trying to take over a country.) The criminal referrals will come after testimony and evidence stops flowing in….but there are already multiple referrals in the works based on what they know now, with more coming if more comes to light.

Q: do you have any idea how many denials have become admissions due to the work of the committee? Hundreds. “I never gave tours.” Became “I gave one small family one tour.” Became “I gave 20 or so young militia members tours of security stations, back hallway routes to Democratic offices, and the secret escape route for congress and let them photograph and video all of it, then denied it, but now that the video is public I admit I did that, but it’s perfectly normal and not a bit suspicious.” That’s just ONE failed denial of hundreds the cons have tried.

Sorry, that’s hardly nothing. Maybe to a Russian troll it is, but it’s not nothing to Americans.

How are those rapidly dropping gas prices working for you? Democrat policies at work! Lol.

Cue Don LaFontaine voiveover:
"Imagine a world, with an untouchable minority of elite who make the laws, private armies outside of these laws, and robotic, hind-brained minions to enforce that law and corral the interred.....If you are not part of one of these three groups.... (cue moans, screams, slamming cell doors-montage)

Then you are....part of the problem.....PLANET NOW!. (coming soon to the theater of every city on Earth)

I both agree and disagree.
Cops should try do de-escalate when possible, but also should not allow felonies to continue unabated and/or felons to just walk away from the violent crimes they just committed in front of officers, as they did.

Like you said, if Wesley Snipes had called out the crips and bloods (not to be racist, it's an extreme example) to protect his right to not pay taxes, the cops would almost certainly NOT have 'backed off'...I would like equal treatment across the board. They didn't back down in Waco, or Boston, or Pakistan, or Afghanistan, or Iraq....why start now to 'save lives', especially the lives of admitted traitors to the USA? (if you proclaim your readiness and willingness to fight an armed battle against the federal government that you publicly denounce, and ask others to join your armed insurgency, you ARE a traitor to the USA, period, in my opinion...look up "the whiskey rebellion" for historical context.)
EDIT: I think they should have called the national guard to restore order, since the local officers were so outmatched. A couple of heavy armored vehicles and a few hundred machine guns and/or a few attack helicopters buzzing about would have made them think twice about advancing, unlike the smattering of officers with pistols that backed away and allowed the theft (and killing) of confiscated cattle.

Some human lives need to end. :-) In this situation it's not about putting one person away, it's about upholding the rule of law, which is being publicly broken not only by one jackhole, but by all the armed 'terrorists' that have proclaimed 'war' on the federal government with him, and therefore on the USA.

It does 'blow a hole' in that 'tyrannical state' argument, but that argument was so full of holes to begin with it didn't need another to prove it wrong. He doesn't even believe in the federal 'state', so how can it be tyrannical? :-)

I'm also certain this isn't over, the first time he or his wife go to town without their private army they'll likely be going to the pokey. I also assume their accounts have been frozen (I hope so anyway) and the title to their family land has a federal lien on it. I also hope all federal welfare support for his family has dried up, along with his mail service and any other federal program(s) they take advantage of. He has no right to federal services, he's a tax cheat and felon.

i dont pay taxes.
i refused ten years ago and have stuck with that path.
and its been sunshine and rainbows ever since....
ok..not really.my income is severely crippled due to me not paying taxes BUT goddamn does it make me feel good!

i do not pay taxes not to be a cheap ass but rather to protest a system that is so obviously rigged against me.(and you).

as for american libertarianism.
i will say they have the civil rights down.
i totally agree with their philosophy of personal liberty and right to do whatever you want as long as you aint stepping on another blokes shoes.

but when they start with the "free market" sermons i start to look at them as wide-eyed and innocent children.
do they not SEE whats going on?
free market?
what is this free market you speak of?
america is NOT a free market.
it is corporate socialism.
or welfare if you want to troll a bit.

go ahead and de-regulate corporate america.
see what happens.
better yet,just look at some african nations,or former soviet states.
guilded estates with private armies for the uber-wealthy and elite while the majority of the population live in either indentured servitude or total squalor.

i am noticing a disturbing trend here in america.its like they are preparing.
we have a government bought and paid for by corporate america,which does the corporations bidding.
the co-opting of the tea party and the crushing of occupy.
a massive surveillance operation.
militarized police forces across the country.
civil liberties made into mere "suggestions" and no longer inalienable.
executions of american citizens with no due process (bye bye habeas corpus).
a standing army that has been in place for over 60 years and a war on terror that will never end.

it is madness.

so i cannot blame my libertarian friends for calling for smaller government.
because the government has become TOO big and no longer is "for the people,by the people".
it serves its corporate masters.
which is why the "de-regulate" argument truly baffles me.

just as my liberal friends who wish to use the system to correct these imbalances.
what?
the system is utterly BROKEN.
we no longer have a functioning democracy!
why would you even suggest to use a system that threw us all overboard to lick the boots of their masters 30 yrs ago?
the mind..it boggles.

every political philosophy has its flaws.none are perfect.
libertarianism has some very good points while others are a bit...naive in my opinion.

for me the end result is this:
i do not trust power nor authority because i find them to be illegitimate until they prove themselves otherwise.
so i am suspicious when someone tries to force their authority on me based on arbitrary and subjective parameters.(like a cop,or judge or some rich dude).

i am a humanist by nature so my political philosophy flows from that birthplace.
i will never step on you to further my career nor take food out of your mouth.
corporate america has spread a propaganda campaign that is insidious.

capitalism is good.
greed is good.
dog eat dog world out there.
here,buy this,it will make you feel better.
wear that and you will be sexy.
you are lone wolf,against the world,drive this car you lone wolf and be a rebel.

its all bullshit.
human beings feel better when they are co-operating.
when they feel their life has purpose and that they are needed.
not by living in a perpetual 7 yr olds wet dream.

oh
my
god.
you fuckers got me ranting!
i hate you both......
/drops mic

>> ^MrFisk:

They don't teach us this in journalism school.


They taught me just to show up at the disclosed location for the piece of paper that is handed out by the PR guy and bring it back, for the news! I noticed that our rival newspaper always copied our stuff; what gives with the plagiarism-OMG?


On a serious non-sarcasm note:

What a complete and utter blowjob fest so much of this world is now suffering from pointedly in the political, media, and corporate worlds. This just shows that we are evolving towards a precipice rather than backing away from it; I wonder if any of these idiots even realize it, as it WILL affect the mega-rich, whether they think they are safe on their private land with their "enforcers" or "private army" or not. If shit hits the fan, they WILL NOT BE. If society falls apart it will become...UGLY. I mean that in the WORST possible sense as I'm sure everyone reading understands.

Wolf Blitzer (as do many other prompter lead talking head "journalists" out there) calls himself a journalist, but he's the epitome of the very problem of the system--Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart, THOUGH COMICS are closer to journalists in every way as they have integrity, function, ability, information, tenacity, knowledge, WIT, comprehension, and reliability than any of the leading "News" networks... I could list other qualities they have to be sure, they have a great many, both. But, the point is that are news and information is becoming rapidly vapid and obsolete except to the idiotically inclined viewers, that unfortunately seem to still watch and worse still believe and accept what they say as true... Even though much of the information presented is in the form a Junior High student could understand, showing that they truly do know their audience as well...

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^ghark:
Besides, by saying the GOP made nice comments about Arab Spring then bad comments about these protests, aren't you highlighting their hypocrisy? So what's the big deal about highlighting hypocrisy when it comes from the other side?
Yes, I'm highlighting their hypocrisy, because they are actually being hypocritical.
Democrats are not. They are sympathetic to OWS. They are saying good things about OWS. They are not capable of issuing orders to the police protesters are clashing with, and they definitely are not ordering a violent crackdown on demonstrators who are largely arguing for Democratic proposals.
>> ^ghark:
I agree that Republican obstructionism is not good, but if Dem's had the significant majority in both the house and senate would it make a big difference? I think in the past it might have, when the corporate influence in politics wasn't so great, these days... I think it's a very hard argument to make, especially considering the fact they didn't do anything significant when they did have the numbers after the last election.
Let's do some quick math. Suppose the Democratic Party consisted only of clones of Bernie Sanders and Joe Manchin. Further, let's suppose that in any given election, the Democratic party sends 80% Bernies, and 20% Joes to Congress. For simplicity, let's assume all the Joes always vote with Republicans, and that 100% of the Republicans vote against anything OWS wants.
You need 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. How big does the Democratic Party's margin of victory need to be for there to be 60 clones of Bernie Sanders in the Senate? Answer: 75. You need Democrats to carry 75% of the Senate. That means a minimum of 25 of 50 states need to have both their Senators be Democrats. Are there 25 blue states? And that scenario also requires ALL the remaining states be purple, with no pure red states at all.
Now, if Republicans weren't filibustering everything and anything, then the math changes only slightly. Democrats could pass legislation with just 50 votes (plus Biden), but as long as the Republican party stays 100% unified against anything even remotely like what OWS wants, you need 63 Democrats in order to wind up with 50 Bernies.
This is my way of saying "Democratic purity isn't the problem" -- 80% Bernies would be a massive, massive leap forward in Democratic ideological purity, and it still wouldn't do jack shit for us, because the deck is stacked against us by a) the rules of the Senate, and b) lockstep Republican opposition to sane policy.
So, are you out there working to help give Democrats that kind of majority, or improve their purity, or at least doing something about Republicans? Fuck no, you're out there taking potshots at Democrats because you didn't get a pony from Obama.
It ticks me off, because it's part of what's killing this country. To quote Yeats, "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity."


I think the argument has to go a little deeper than that - you are talking about improving the number of 'rational-acting' Democrats which is a noble idea, and one which I of course support. However, at some point (if things stay the way they are) people are going to be unhappy with the system so you're going to get swing voters voting Republican. So unless both parties are brought into line we'll just persist with the current system where, no matter what anyone votes, there will never be enough Bernie Sanders' to make a difference.

The answer to both your Democratic problem, and the Republican problem can be mostly solved by just one change, removing the money in politics.

I don't think it should ever be about which side is better, it should be about 'how do we get the results we want' - talk is cheap after all.

The reason I don't think you can just hope for more people to vote Democrat and expect change that way is Obama had a huge wave of support in the last election; you'd just had years of Iraq war, Afghan occupation, colonialism just about anywhere there was oil, corporate looting, disastrous economic decisions etc by Bush, 2008 was the moment where the Democrats could have made a difference. But what have they done? I mean seriously, while we debate this nonsense people are getting slaughtered all over the world in the name of oil, by your troops, by your private armies, by your weapons and often with other countries support (including mine). There is a time for debate, but we must also realize that we are destroying our own livelihoods and the livelihoods of our children, we need to fix the path we're on sooner rather than later.

All they need is to run institutions that house people who can't control their psychic abilities and we'll have a pretty decent groundwork for a Starcraft in real life. Next steps are for them to utilize their private prisons for their own private army, develop stims, then branch into space traffic control (hinges on developing our space tech -- lazy present humanity) and we're alllllll set. The real Jim Raynor can then be taken out of prison and employed as a marine.

I like the way you think, Serco, because if we don't have a private company to do this, we're gonna get fucked up by a tenacious alien race.

The idiots at freedomain couldn't answer my questions and blocked me. I'm guest_14d3.

[20:20:52] Guest_14d3:
Had a question about anarchy. Any takers?
[20:21:42] Noesis to Guest_14d3:
I'm at least willing to listen.
[20:22:09] Guest_14d3:
How is an anarchy enacted or enforced?
[20:22:38] Guest_14d3:
What's to stop corporations from swooping in and taking control?
[20:22:41] aelephant:
Anarchy is enacted and enforced voluntarily.
[20:22:48] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
corporations
[20:22:51] Noesis to Guest_14d3:
So you haven't listened to Stefan's podcasts, or watched his videos, or read his books, then?
[20:22:54] aelephant:
De-centralization of authority.
[20:22:57] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
are legal fictions created and maintained by governments
[20:23:25] aelephant:
What's to stop you from punching me? I might punch you back.
[20:24:07] Guest_14d3:
Say a corporation comes and takes your property? Who is to stop them?
[20:24:23] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
who is to stop them now lol
[20:24:25] aelephant:
You could arm yourself and practice self-defense.
[20:24:34] Guest_14d3:
The state stops them now.
[20:24:39] aelephant:
You could hire out your self-defense to a protection agency.
[20:24:40] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
my property would be covered with land mines
[20:24:51] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
corporations are created by governments
[20:24:52] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
and preferably id like to have a gatling gun
[20:24:57] aelephant to Guest_14d3:
But who stops the government from taking your property?
[20:25:14] senorbuzco to aelephant:
IMMINENT DOMAIN
[20:25:22] Guest_14d3:
The corporation hires blackwater to demine your home and disable your weaponry. What do you do now?
[20:25:58] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
sooooo how is this different from right now?
[20:26:02] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
where is the cooperation getting fiunding for this?
[20:26:16] Guest_14d3:
The state protects private property. Are you unaware of this?
[20:26:19] aelephant to Guest_14d3:
Why is the corporation willing to pay Blackwater so much to demine my home and disable my weaponry (at considerable threat to their own life and limb)?
[20:26:45] aelephant to Guest_14d3:
The state has no duty to protect. Are you unaware of this?
[20:26:51] Guest_14d3:
Also, if your contention is that your system offers no benefit over the current one, then why are you pushing for it?
Sam left this room.
[20:27:03] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
you're basically saying "once you replace government with government, what happens?"
[20:27:15] Guest_14d3:
The state protects private property. To pretend otherwise is dishonest.
[20:27:28] aelephant to Guest_14d3:
That is not what the courts have ruled.
[20:27:33] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
ever heard of imminent domain
[20:27:35] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
or taxes
[20:27:42] Guest_14d3:
How is anarchy enforced. What is to stop the super rich from taking control?
[20:27:52] aelephant to Guest_14d3:
D.C.'s highest court [said] that it is a "fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen."
[20:27:55] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
the super rich USE THE STATE to take control
[20:27:57] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
because they'd go broke
[20:28:30] aelephant to Guest_14d3:
http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html
[20:28:41] Guest_14d3:
True, the Rich use the state, but only because they are forced to. Without the state as a middle man, their power would be limitless.
[20:29:04] aelephant to Guest_14d3:
Not at all. The State makes the wealth of the rich much more powerful than it otherwise would be.
[20:29:28] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
whoa, i never thought of it like that before
[20:29:29] aelephant to Guest_14d3:
In an anarchic society $100,000 buys you $100,000 worth of goods
[20:29:35] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
i have to rethink this whole anarchy thing
[20:29:44] aelephant to Guest_14d3:
In a Statist society, $100,000 might buy you a politician
[20:29:48] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
you're making great points
[20:29:51] aelephant to Guest_14d3:
and all of the power that comes along with that
[20:30:43] aelephant to Guest_14d3:
read this brah: praxeology.net/invisible-hands-and-incantations.pdf
[20:30:59] Guest_14d3:
Not at all? You have no idea how things would play out in an anarchy?
[20:31:27] Guest_14d3:
So, say Capitalcorp takes your land by force. What do you do?
[20:31:49] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
whose paying capitalcorp money?
[20:31:56] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
who's*
[20:31:59] Guest_14d3:
Customers.
[20:32:03] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
why?
[20:32:10] aelephant to Guest_14d3:
Why would Capitalcorp take my land by force? I will kill any Capitalcorp agents who come onto my property with the intent of seizing it.
[20:32:36] Guest_14d3:
Capital corp has a private army and they murder you and your family and take your land. What happens then?
[20:32:46] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
game over
[20:32:51] Guest_14d3:
Exactly.
[20:32:56] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
they get to the final level
[20:33:16] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
they beat the world
[20:33:42] Guest_14d3:
They beat the world, indeed.
[20:33:55] aelephant to Guest_14d3:
why would Capitalcorps army be willing to put their life and limb on the line to take my property?
[20:34:25] Guest_14d3:
Because it sits atop some kind of valuable natural resource.
[20:34:38] Guest_14d3:
You are dancing around the question.
[20:34:58] Guest_14d3:
Who is to stop them from taking your land and killing your family?
[20:35:10] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
remeber when i said that corporations are created and maintained by governments, and then you ignored that forever
[20:35:23] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
cuz i do
[20:35:28] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
who's to stop me from taking your land right now and killing your family?
[20:35:37] Guest_14d3:
So, corporations would 'voluntarily' disband?
[20:35:43] Guest_14d3:
I don't get your point.
[20:35:55] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
WHY DO COPROATIONS EXSIST AND HAVE POWER
[20:35:56] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
when companies dont provide a service they go broke
[20:35:57] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
THE FUCKING STATE
[20:36:11] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
THE STATE THAT TAXES ME
[20:36:17] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
AND GIVE IT TO CORPORATIONS
[20:36:19] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
AND THEIR BEHEST
Guest_1746 joined the room.
[20:37:04] Guest_14d3:
You don't think a large business could sustain itself without a government?
[20:37:07] Guest_14d3:
Why is that?
[20:37:29] Guest_14d3:
As long as they turn a profit, they can do as they please.
[20:37:32] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
Do yu listen to the fdr podcasts?
Guest_69fa joined the room.
[20:37:37] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
you*
[20:38:36] Guest_14d3:
What leads you to believe big business is not self sufficient?
[20:38:46] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
subsidies
[20:38:47] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
lol
[20:38:55] senorbuzco to Guest_14d3:
TAXES
[20:39:11] Guest_1746:
that doesnt make sense
[20:39:19] Guest_14d3:
How so?
[20:39:31] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
Do you listen to the fdr podcasts?
[20:39:48] Guest_14d3:
Exxon Mobile makes billions. They have a product that we cannot live without. They don't need the government to survive.
[20:39:58] Guest_14d3:
Not interested in the podcasts.
Guest_0f56 left this room.
[20:40:15] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
In that case, I'm blockin ya
[20:40:20] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
Show ya how anarchy works
[20:40:21] Stephen C to Guest_14d3:
Bye
[20:40:29] Guest_14d3:
put your fingers in your ears.
[20:40:47] Guest_14d3:
Wouldn't want to question your pre conceived notions.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

^Don't be naive, the invisible hand loves violence. Private armies are a 120 billion dollar industry and growing:
http://www.i
ndependent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/making-a-killing-how-private-armies-became-a-120bn-global-industry-403062.html


And that went away in your regulated Crony-Capitalist US market?

^Don't be naive, the invisible hand loves violence. Private armies are a 120 billion dollar industry and growing:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/making-a-killing-how-private-armies-became-a-120bn-global-industry-403062.html

Blankfist, since you're admitting that Obama isn't 'guilty' of anything here, maybe you can edit the video title and description to say that "Obama Understands Government is Monopoly on Violence"? Because that's what it is - any nominally educated person understands that the government of a nation state holds a monopoly on violence in that state. If the citizens didn't grant the government a monopoly on violence, there would be private armies throughout the country, and independent fiefdoms wherever someone chose to set up and defend a border. There would be no justification at all for a police force, since every citizen would be equally entitled to arrest the cops, as the cops would be to arrest them.

The government of any democracy holds a monopoly on violence because it needs to be the only actor that is given the right to use violence against the citizenry. We give the government this right as long as it follows the rule of law; we agree to submit to this use of violence in order to legitimize the legal system and establish the possibility of actually enforcing the law. If the government doesn't have a monopoly on violence we have none of those things.

The only thing that really concerns me with private contract is that there is at present no oversight with them. They have the equivalent of diplomatic immunity. So at best, the only account they can be held to if they mess up is not being hired again. A "monopoly" on force doesn't preclude the government in seeking out specialists in war; if the same was held for developing new technologies the ability to keep an edge in war would be stymied (no lockhead making new tech for the military, would have to be all in house).

What is interesting to me in a constitutional scene is if this is legal. The idea of an army is pretty universal throughout mans history, and the constitution gives powers to the government to see over the formation, equipping and controlling of this hypothetical army. In a private army, all of those controls are given to some other organization; akin to the fed doing the congresses job of regulating the money system. It seems unwise when compared to the boondoggle the FED had done over the years, but I do allow that war isn't the same beast as the economy.

Anywho, that is all I had to bring the this conversation, I haven't really given much thought to the idea of military contractors doing war since Jericho (the show) ended. Though it does seem like if there is some combat unit with is "The best" at this very specific job, you would want them doing it, or at least advising on how it should be done...civilian or military personal be damned.

Max Weber for the win for having the idea that the state has to have a monopoly of violence for there to be cohesion. Bush/Nato/Obama for the fail in arming independent warlords with their own private armies in Afghanistan. And a personal Obama fail for refusing to regulate private military firms that they are hiring.

^On the so what parts, let's take the socialism thing for example. Did you go to a public school? Socialist.

I am by law forced to pay for public schools, and by law forced to go to school. I don't think that makes me a socialist, I think that makes me a slave.

Does your driveway connect to a toll road you pay for each time you want to go somewhere and does all the other roads between home and destination, or do you share that burden with your fellow citizens and share the cost? Socialist.

Again, I am by law forced to pay over 40 cents per gallon of gas I buy whether I use that gas for driving on public roads or not. On what grounds does using a product make me a socialist anyways? If I buy a Koran does that make me Muslim? If I buy a cheap plastic toy does that make me a communist?

How about security, planning on hiring private guards to replace those socialist cops you aren't wanting anymore? Your own private army instead of this socialized and shared one we've got now?

Can you personally think of any ways to build schools, roads, or fund law enforcement which don't involve physical violence or forced taxation? If you can't, does that settle the question?

>> ^imstellar28:
As far as I can tell in this thread, 5/8 of Keyes claims have been confirmed by other posters, and 3/8 have not been addressed by any posters. Funny how the world flips ass over kettle when evidence is required.
Most people hear loud, extreme words like COMMUNIST......INFANTICIDE.....NOT A CITIZEN...and assume insanity. The human mind has the capacity to filter emotion, and it is extremely useful in situations such as this...


Nonsense. Sorry to be slow answering, had to take care of something else, but it's still nonsense. A couple such as Thinker gave you some points but even at that it's a big so what on some of them and he outright shot down others which you just mentioned such as infanticide. "because it was already law" isn't exactly because I like to kill babies. It's a bit closer to there is already a law on the books for that. Most didn't even agree with you on that much. Your math isn't any better than your claims that others need "evidence" while with you already rejected by the courts assertions should do.

On the so what parts, let's take the socialism thing for example. Did you go to a public school? Socialist. Does your driveway connect to a toll road you pay for each time you want to go somewhere and does all the other roads between home and destination, or do you share that burden with your fellow citizens and share the cost? Socialist. How about security, planning on hiring private guards to replace those socialist cops you aren't wanting anymore? Your own private army instead of this socialized and shared one we've got now?

As I pointed out already it's nonsense for the most part. Some more than others though. I liked this one in particular. "Evidence a bankrupt government can fix a bankrupt economy".

Let me ask you something here. Company, nation, whatever else. If they AREN'T bankrupt how are they supposed to solve a problem that they DON'T have? Of course a bankrupt country can solve a bankrupt economy, they are the only ones who can. If they aren't bankrupt they don't tend to have that problem to fix and yes, I'm pretty sure it's happened and nations have come back from it.

It's been fun and I do wish I'd been here a day or two earlier, but this one is done I'd think. Overplaying a joke just ruins it.