Dude! Federalist Papers! You are selling yourself short. This is New New Testament Gospel Level. Time to unleash that ego of yours. Your humility is misplaced. I mean just as ‘Twilight’ is far better than that cheap soap opera ‘Romeo and Juliet’, and I am glad someone finally was smart and interesting enough to see that, your essays are impossibly BRILLIANT. Putting your brilliance into the same category as the Federalist Papers is absurd. It is like saying those exceptional masterpieces ‘Dick and Jane’ is somehow not more genius than ‘wind in the willows’.
I came to the same conclusion as Decker Tuesday,although I didn’t go so far as to say “kill”. It’s an entirely reasonable point and I think we’ve probably all thought about it,just afraid to take it to its natural conclusion.
if a government you live in is unjust and tyrannical you think it’s not ethical to resist against it? I don’t think the Trump Admin has gone that far but let’s say you lived in the Confederacy,would it be wrong to not resist against it even if you’ll be maimed or killed?
You lived for four years under a deep state installed place holder, whilst no one you ever heard of made the choices only an elected president is allowed to make, and yet now you feel like a tyrant is in charge? Unjust was what we voted against. We are finally seeing a little real justice.
Sadly, that’s such a superficial read on it. The vast majority of the south were not slave owners. Yes, slavery played role, but there was a lot more going on at the time.
Only 30% of southerners owned slaves,yes that’s true. The south seceded to protect and expand slavery and their racial hierarchy,though. If they lived in a free society,than there would be no difference between the poor white man and the poor black man,that was unacceptable to the south.
I think the reason many people took it as a threat is because they can see that Trump is getting closer to the threshold than any previous president has, and a lot of online Trump supporters openly want him to cross it and become a dictator. Is it Decker's fault that Trump has done multiple of the things the founding fathers pointed to as tyranny in the Declaration of Independence and that he constantly talks about wanting to do things that would be clearly dictatorial? If Trump supporters don't want people considering at what point revolution is justified, they should also be against fantasizing about doing things that would make revolution justified. As it stands now, they constantly indulge those fantasies, rightly making others worried that they will actually do them.
Complete and utter hornswoggle from a TDS sufferer. You just need your Hitler don’t you. Biden’s deeds just weren’t authoritarian enough. An entire censorship apparatus wasn’t enough. Killing childhood for a disease that didn’t affect kids wasn’t enough. (No, I’m not going to tell you the IFR for kids under 20 if you own news sources didn’t.) Getting us into another CIA driven regime change war wasn’t enough. No, but what might work is defending rapists, murderers and child traffickers. Yes, that’s the ticket! Trump is such a bad bad man for wanting to get rid of them!
Everything you said was either a false equivalence and whataboutism (complaining about things Biden did that weren't even close to comparable to what Trump has done, let alone what he's said he wants to do), or a strawman that completely ignores the reasons people are worried about Trump's authoritarianism. If you can't tell the difference between saying people shouldn't be deported to a horrific foreign prison without due process when there's no evidence they committed crimes, or that the government should not violate court orders, and "defending rapists, murderers, and child traffickers," then you've fully drunk the Kool Aid, and there's not much point arguing with you. I'm not going to convince someone that detached from reality to think reasonably.
Also, I think if you're so utterly devoted to one man that you call any criticism of him a "derangement syndrome" and think that qualifies as an argument, your opinion can be safely dismissed as the mad ravings of a cultist without much consideration.
Algorithms and virality are so incredibly fascinating to me. How 500 words can generate so many thousands of responses out of nowhere is so wondrous, yet it happens consistently. Some people even practice it like an art form.
There is no shortage of uninformed takes calling for revolting against any given administration (I'd guess there are hundreds a day on Twitter? Maybe thousands on Reddit?), so why does the collective latch onto any given take to be outraged at? Maybe because it's made by someone who's not obviously deranged? Or maybe just random chance.
I enjoyed the post since you could replace the first two paragraphs with something about Biden shitting his pants and it would have been equally appealing as this post was outrageous (and vice-versa depending on the reader).
As a not quite so dumb person, Decker is a 🚬. His comparison to King George III supposes that Trump's tariffs and Trump's trials of noncitizens are a bridge too far, when we live in a country with inescapable income taxes and an intelligence agency that keeps tabs on all the regular citizens and tries to bait the crazy ones into doing crimes in order to say they catch terrorists. Decker thinks all that garbage is fine, but Trump doing it is the worst thing ever and that the tree of liberty must be fed so that we can go back to the liberal utopia of the Obama administration. What a loser!
I do think there is a meaningful difference between tracking down the head of Al-Qaeda and contravening a court order not to deport someone, and so I am much less concerned about the first one.
I wasn't referring to the CIA when referring to entrapment cases.
When Decker talks about needing to water the tree of liberty, what exactly is he going to change about the government besides removing Trump and his supporters? Perhaps he could give his vision for what a liberal government should look like besides "not Trump".
I think we saw it under Biden. Don’t let those nasty MAGA people say what they want. If they protest, swat them and throw them into prison for one tenth of what Antifa did just months before. Require loyalty oaths in the form of DEI so no white boy grows up thinking he deserves anything, no matter how hard he works. Oh, and let’s make trannies into the new priesthood while telling girls they’re bigots for wanting their own dressing rooms.
So the detainment of immigrants is the only thing you care about, and all the rest of the Declaration of Independence sentiments about taxes and trade are just window dressing?
A call to kill Trump and an unspecified number of additional Trump-affiliated people is neither smart nor interesting. Wanting to kill the bad people and solve political problems with violence is one of the lowest, basest instincts that we have. This Decker fellow is hardly the first person to have the impulse, he's just autistic enough to say it out loud. You could even agree with him and think that we need to kill Trump, but that still doesn't mean the thought is somehow "smart" or "interesting." It just means that sometimes the most obvious solution is the correct one.
The whole thing is a bit of a farce though because let's be real here--no one is doing jack shit, least of all liberal Substack authors. It's already cringe when right wingers do this whole LARP, and our side is the one that actually likes guns. If people didn't rise up and "water the tree of liberty" and all that stuff during COVID, which I'd argue was a better candidate for it than Blumpft, then they definitely aren't going to start doing that now. There will be no killing of Drumpfler, what's going to happen is people are going to cry about it on social media for the next 4 years and then there will be another election, just like when the shoe was on the other foot for the past 4 years.
The article is not a call to kill Trump or associates. It is pretty clear from the article that he does not think you should do that unless things get mich worse. He suggests that canceling the next election would be a reasonable threshold for violence to be justified, since it would prevent any other recourse, and that's pretty far from the point we're at now. He also says that assassinating Trump would not solve any political problems.
In fairness they have tried to kill Trump several times, and presidential assassinations are not unheard of. Beyond that, riots and shootings are common political occurrences. Just look at Tesla right now.
The left practically made a saint out of the guy that shot a healthcare CEO. They have a healthcare bill proposal named after him in California.
Until now the general mood has been “it doesn’t matter if the right wins an election, because we control the beuracracy and can wait it out without them being able to change anything important.” But Trump is trying to attack that. To make it a real election with real consequences. Whether you agree with them or not, it’s definitely new.
I can totally see someone with nothing to lose reading this stuff and taking up violence.
Sure, but the Decker guy isn't just calling for random acts of violence by lone wolves--he explicitly says that just assassinating Trump won't be enough. He is alluding to a violent overthrow of the administration wholesale. A *gasp* coup, if you will.
I repeat: If right-wingers weren't willing to do a heckin' violence during COVID, left-wingers sure as shit won't do anything. Random acts of terrorism or the occasional chimp-out in an urban center, perhaps. Organized violence aimed at overthrowing the government, i.e. literally risking a civil war? Because one Latinx guy got deported by mistake? Not a chance.
Decker scooted as close to the line as he could possibly get, and then when it was rightfully criticized as obvious warmongering, he scurried away like a coward.
“but that we’re closer to the sort of King George III tyranny that justifies revolution according to the American founding tradition than we’ve been at any point in recent memory”
How about 4 months ago when nobody knew who was running the executive branch and orders were being signed by “auto pen” in the name of a figurehead who was deemed by multiple sources to be mentally incapable of normal decision making?
Or when that same government waved foreign flags in congress while they positively cheered at the thought of giving away the countries armaments to a corrupt government on the other side of the world with no plan on how to refill the coffers?
Or when that same government decided to empty the strategic oil reserve just prior to a midterm election in order to keep prices low and voters complacent?
Or when the government literally shutdown the economy and put thousands of Americans out of work and permanently shut down thousands of small businesses and arrested people for walking outside?
Were any of these cause for concern? Or is it just the government doing things that are widely popular that you personally don’t like that justify murdering half the country?
The economy was shut down in 2020. Biden wasnt president. The shutdown happened under Trump.
Biden inherited an epidemic that was out of control. Had he washed his hands of the mess and let it run it's course he would be attacked by the opposition for doing that.
How is this relevant? You wrote "Or when the government literally shutdown the economy and put thousands of Americans out of work"
This seems to be in regard to the pandemic shutdown in 2020, which did not happen when Biden was in office. So he did not "shut down the economy".
As for what Biden did. Whatever he did with the pandemic would be attacked. Once the government flubbed on the early response to the pandemic (by having far too few tests to do adequate contact tracing and quarantine) the epidemic was out of control. Anything Trump or Biden could do would be criticized because a lot of people were going to die.
Trump's administration got a vaccine out in record time, but then he attacked his own success story. Doing this resulted in thousands of unnecessary deaths among his own base. Why do this? It's shooting yourself in the foot.
How is this relevant? Most of the aid going to Israel is just recycled back to our defense contractors, but still not really relevant. WhattaboutIsrael?
You wrote "Or when that same government waved foreign flags in congress while they positively cheered at the thought of giving away the countries armaments to a corrupt government on the other side of the world with no plan on how to refill the coffers"
I assumed this was a reference to weapons and other aid sent to Ukraine after the Russian invasion with no plan for repayment, that is it is a gift. I pointed out we have done this same thing for decades with Israel. In both case the money mostly goes to defense contractors.
The relevance is why is the aid sent to Ukraine more objectionable than that sent o Israel or any of the other countries. Over the last 75 years presidents from both parties get us into wars or provided military aid to which many Americans object. Biden is not remarkable in this way.
Well of course they sent weapons, they were fighting a war. Spending was authorized to buy replacements for weapons sent out.
As far as money, I seem to recall missing money from a number of US interventions over the last 25 years. I distinctly recall lots of articles on huge sums disappearing in Iraq and Afghanistan. Considering how many resources we pouring into the Afghan military including lots of training over a period long enough to rear a whole generation of soldiers under American doctrines, I was amazed at the speed at which the military collapsed.
One reason I favor supporting Ukraine (and the Israelis) is that these guys actually fight, and they aren't anti-Western forces like jihadists or the Commies of my youth.
What I loved about Decker's article is that it provided the best defense for the Second Amendment from a Leftist that I've ever heard. The irony of his article is that he finally caught up with conservative thinking regarding tyranny. Hell, conservatives have been discussing that question for a very long time. They've also heavily debated secession and, yes, revolution to get away from Leftist tyranny. So, welcome to the conservative conversation. Let's not ruin it with the communism and fascism of the Left, though, please?
The least funny part of this whole debacle is it's not a particularly "takes smarts" argument.
"You should let your state be turned to a dictatorship if it's not possible to stop it judicially, congressionally, or electorally"
If you disagree with that statement, you already agreed with him that there is a point at which it is justifiable to oppose tyranny with your 2A, which was all that he was saying.
His posts about committing immigration fraud to bring people over and finding a sperm donor instead of biologically having a child are far more interesting and smarter.
They haven't been told close to verbatim hundreds of years ago (by very famous people), for one!
“A smart and interesting person is someone who notices these inconsistencies and doesn’t simply paper them over.”
And this is why Nick isn’t smart nor interesting. For many or all the parts of his essay you bolded one can easily make the case that the last administration did the same. Yet Nick doesn’t appear to notice that inconsistency.
I'll say to you what I said to Drecker. He did not respond.
You want to kill your fellow Americans to save DEI, transing kids, flooding the country with tens of millions of military aged mercenaries, and $2 trillion dollar deficits?
Your question is not a real question. It's a rhetorical question, and it's obviously intellectually dishonest. You have to seriously be retarded to not understand this.
However, I'll answer your non-question really simply: no.
Hahaha. No one has ever talked to me like that face to face. So strong online! You are a pawn of the globalists trying to destroy America. You know nothing about transing kids, how many fighting aged men have crossed the border and how many NGOs have helped those men to flood America, or DEI and the debt would lead to the collapse of America. Good luck with that.
Are liberals even able to answer a question before they insult the person who asks? Most of the MAGA folk I know are more open to discussion than liberals/progressives.
No, it was a fair question. Decker drew repeated analogy to the Founding Fathers' grievances against George III, which Glenn laid out.
"The present administration is engaged in barbarism; it has arbitrarily imprisoned its opponents, revoked the visas of thousands of students, imposed taxes upon us without our consent, and seeks to destroy the institutions which oppose it. Its leader has threatened those who produce unfavorable coverage, and suggested that their licenses be revoked. It has deprived us, in many cases, of trial by jury; it has subjected us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and has transported us beyond seas to be imprisoned for pretended offenses. It has scorned the orders of our courts, and threatens to alter fundamentally our form of government. It has pardoned its thugs, and extorted the lawyers who defended its opponents."
That paragraph is lifted practically word for word from Deep State media. Every line in it is either BS, a gross exaggeration or emasculated whining. Comparing Trump to King George is historically ignorant.
“Deep State Media” is a perfect example of the MAGA gobbledygook that afflicts self-described freethinkerd who do nothing but regurgitate nonsense like automatons.
Says the guy regurgitating what the media says. You like most of the commenters here are tools of globalists who want to destroy America. No Americans have been rounded up, no taxes have been increased, pity the few hundred foreign students who hate America who lost their student Visa. So on down the line, pure hyperbole signifying nothing.
Would it be a stretch to call Decker's article Federalist #86?
I personally like to think my articles take spots 86-90 but I’ll happily cede him #91
surely my post on RFK deposting a dead bear in Central Park should be thrown in there too
Link please
https://open.substack.com/pub/theoshouse/p/and-with-that-i-win-america-bingo?r=31obph&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
Hold up, did you really just suggest these screeds are on par with the Federalist Papers? Wow.
Yeah they’re much better than the Federalist Papers actually. When did James Madison ever talk about invertebrate welfare?
Dude! Federalist Papers! You are selling yourself short. This is New New Testament Gospel Level. Time to unleash that ego of yours. Your humility is misplaced. I mean just as ‘Twilight’ is far better than that cheap soap opera ‘Romeo and Juliet’, and I am glad someone finally was smart and interesting enough to see that, your essays are impossibly BRILLIANT. Putting your brilliance into the same category as the Federalist Papers is absurd. It is like saying those exceptional masterpieces ‘Dick and Jane’ is somehow not more genius than ‘wind in the willows’.
Can I get your autograph, genius?
This is very kind, but flatly preposterous.
I came to the same conclusion as Decker Tuesday,although I didn’t go so far as to say “kill”. It’s an entirely reasonable point and I think we’ve probably all thought about it,just afraid to take it to its natural conclusion.
It’s natural conclusion is you lose.
if a government you live in is unjust and tyrannical you think it’s not ethical to resist against it? I don’t think the Trump Admin has gone that far but let’s say you lived in the Confederacy,would it be wrong to not resist against it even if you’ll be maimed or killed?
You lived for four years under a deep state installed place holder, whilst no one you ever heard of made the choices only an elected president is allowed to make, and yet now you feel like a tyrant is in charge? Unjust was what we voted against. We are finally seeing a little real justice.
Ironically, the Confederacy was the Confederacy because they felt it was ethical to resist.
No,the confederacy was the confederacy because of a planter class that wanted to expand slavery. There’s nothing wrong with secession
Sadly, that’s such a superficial read on it. The vast majority of the south were not slave owners. Yes, slavery played role, but there was a lot more going on at the time.
Only 30% of southerners owned slaves,yes that’s true. The south seceded to protect and expand slavery and their racial hierarchy,though. If they lived in a free society,than there would be no difference between the poor white man and the poor black man,that was unacceptable to the south.
I think the reason many people took it as a threat is because they can see that Trump is getting closer to the threshold than any previous president has, and a lot of online Trump supporters openly want him to cross it and become a dictator. Is it Decker's fault that Trump has done multiple of the things the founding fathers pointed to as tyranny in the Declaration of Independence and that he constantly talks about wanting to do things that would be clearly dictatorial? If Trump supporters don't want people considering at what point revolution is justified, they should also be against fantasizing about doing things that would make revolution justified. As it stands now, they constantly indulge those fantasies, rightly making others worried that they will actually do them.
Complete and utter hornswoggle from a TDS sufferer. You just need your Hitler don’t you. Biden’s deeds just weren’t authoritarian enough. An entire censorship apparatus wasn’t enough. Killing childhood for a disease that didn’t affect kids wasn’t enough. (No, I’m not going to tell you the IFR for kids under 20 if you own news sources didn’t.) Getting us into another CIA driven regime change war wasn’t enough. No, but what might work is defending rapists, murderers and child traffickers. Yes, that’s the ticket! Trump is such a bad bad man for wanting to get rid of them!
The only "TDS" here is whatever brain disease made you post this comment.
Agreed. It's called lack of being smart and interesting.
I take that as a compliment. No argument just ad hominem. Means you got exactly nothing.
Everything you said was either a false equivalence and whataboutism (complaining about things Biden did that weren't even close to comparable to what Trump has done, let alone what he's said he wants to do), or a strawman that completely ignores the reasons people are worried about Trump's authoritarianism. If you can't tell the difference between saying people shouldn't be deported to a horrific foreign prison without due process when there's no evidence they committed crimes, or that the government should not violate court orders, and "defending rapists, murderers, and child traffickers," then you've fully drunk the Kool Aid, and there's not much point arguing with you. I'm not going to convince someone that detached from reality to think reasonably.
Also, I think if you're so utterly devoted to one man that you call any criticism of him a "derangement syndrome" and think that qualifies as an argument, your opinion can be safely dismissed as the mad ravings of a cultist without much consideration.
Algorithms and virality are so incredibly fascinating to me. How 500 words can generate so many thousands of responses out of nowhere is so wondrous, yet it happens consistently. Some people even practice it like an art form.
There is no shortage of uninformed takes calling for revolting against any given administration (I'd guess there are hundreds a day on Twitter? Maybe thousands on Reddit?), so why does the collective latch onto any given take to be outraged at? Maybe because it's made by someone who's not obviously deranged? Or maybe just random chance.
I enjoyed the post since you could replace the first two paragraphs with something about Biden shitting his pants and it would have been equally appealing as this post was outrageous (and vice-versa depending on the reader).
As a not quite so dumb person, Decker is a 🚬. His comparison to King George III supposes that Trump's tariffs and Trump's trials of noncitizens are a bridge too far, when we live in a country with inescapable income taxes and an intelligence agency that keeps tabs on all the regular citizens and tries to bait the crazy ones into doing crimes in order to say they catch terrorists. Decker thinks all that garbage is fine, but Trump doing it is the worst thing ever and that the tree of liberty must be fed so that we can go back to the liberal utopia of the Obama administration. What a loser!
I do think there is a meaningful difference between tracking down the head of Al-Qaeda and contravening a court order not to deport someone, and so I am much less concerned about the first one.
Man. Didn’t have lefties defending the CIA on my bingo card.
I wasn't referring to the CIA when referring to entrapment cases.
When Decker talks about needing to water the tree of liberty, what exactly is he going to change about the government besides removing Trump and his supporters? Perhaps he could give his vision for what a liberal government should look like besides "not Trump".
I think we saw it under Biden. Don’t let those nasty MAGA people say what they want. If they protest, swat them and throw them into prison for one tenth of what Antifa did just months before. Require loyalty oaths in the form of DEI so no white boy grows up thinking he deserves anything, no matter how hard he works. Oh, and let’s make trannies into the new priesthood while telling girls they’re bigots for wanting their own dressing rooms.
So the detainment of immigrants is the only thing you care about, and all the rest of the Declaration of Independence sentiments about taxes and trade are just window dressing?
A call to kill Trump and an unspecified number of additional Trump-affiliated people is neither smart nor interesting. Wanting to kill the bad people and solve political problems with violence is one of the lowest, basest instincts that we have. This Decker fellow is hardly the first person to have the impulse, he's just autistic enough to say it out loud. You could even agree with him and think that we need to kill Trump, but that still doesn't mean the thought is somehow "smart" or "interesting." It just means that sometimes the most obvious solution is the correct one.
The whole thing is a bit of a farce though because let's be real here--no one is doing jack shit, least of all liberal Substack authors. It's already cringe when right wingers do this whole LARP, and our side is the one that actually likes guns. If people didn't rise up and "water the tree of liberty" and all that stuff during COVID, which I'd argue was a better candidate for it than Blumpft, then they definitely aren't going to start doing that now. There will be no killing of Drumpfler, what's going to happen is people are going to cry about it on social media for the next 4 years and then there will be another election, just like when the shoe was on the other foot for the past 4 years.
The article is not a call to kill Trump or associates. It is pretty clear from the article that he does not think you should do that unless things get mich worse. He suggests that canceling the next election would be a reasonable threshold for violence to be justified, since it would prevent any other recourse, and that's pretty far from the point we're at now. He also says that assassinating Trump would not solve any political problems.
In fairness they have tried to kill Trump several times, and presidential assassinations are not unheard of. Beyond that, riots and shootings are common political occurrences. Just look at Tesla right now.
The left practically made a saint out of the guy that shot a healthcare CEO. They have a healthcare bill proposal named after him in California.
Until now the general mood has been “it doesn’t matter if the right wins an election, because we control the beuracracy and can wait it out without them being able to change anything important.” But Trump is trying to attack that. To make it a real election with real consequences. Whether you agree with them or not, it’s definitely new.
I can totally see someone with nothing to lose reading this stuff and taking up violence.
Sure, but the Decker guy isn't just calling for random acts of violence by lone wolves--he explicitly says that just assassinating Trump won't be enough. He is alluding to a violent overthrow of the administration wholesale. A *gasp* coup, if you will.
That isn't in the cards.
We’ll see. In Europe they are cancelling elections, jailing opposition politicians, and arresting people for Facebook posts.
I repeat: If right-wingers weren't willing to do a heckin' violence during COVID, left-wingers sure as shit won't do anything. Random acts of terrorism or the occasional chimp-out in an urban center, perhaps. Organized violence aimed at overthrowing the government, i.e. literally risking a civil war? Because one Latinx guy got deported by mistake? Not a chance.
Decker scooted as close to the line as he could possibly get, and then when it was rightfully criticized as obvious warmongering, he scurried away like a coward.
What he invoked is war. War is hell.
Are you people willing to follow boys into it?
“but that we’re closer to the sort of King George III tyranny that justifies revolution according to the American founding tradition than we’ve been at any point in recent memory”
How about 4 months ago when nobody knew who was running the executive branch and orders were being signed by “auto pen” in the name of a figurehead who was deemed by multiple sources to be mentally incapable of normal decision making?
Or when that same government waved foreign flags in congress while they positively cheered at the thought of giving away the countries armaments to a corrupt government on the other side of the world with no plan on how to refill the coffers?
Or when that same government decided to empty the strategic oil reserve just prior to a midterm election in order to keep prices low and voters complacent?
Or when the government literally shutdown the economy and put thousands of Americans out of work and permanently shut down thousands of small businesses and arrested people for walking outside?
Were any of these cause for concern? Or is it just the government doing things that are widely popular that you personally don’t like that justify murdering half the country?
I think Joe Biden should be in prison and it would have been perfectly fine for someone to write an analogous essay four years ago.
The economy was shut down in 2020. Biden wasnt president. The shutdown happened under Trump.
Biden inherited an epidemic that was out of control. Had he washed his hands of the mess and let it run it's course he would be attacked by the opposition for doing that.
Have you ever heard of TDS?
How is this relevant? You wrote "Or when the government literally shutdown the economy and put thousands of Americans out of work"
This seems to be in regard to the pandemic shutdown in 2020, which did not happen when Biden was in office. So he did not "shut down the economy".
As for what Biden did. Whatever he did with the pandemic would be attacked. Once the government flubbed on the early response to the pandemic (by having far too few tests to do adequate contact tracing and quarantine) the epidemic was out of control. Anything Trump or Biden could do would be criticized because a lot of people were going to die.
Trump's administration got a vaccine out in record time, but then he attacked his own success story. Doing this resulted in thousands of unnecessary deaths among his own base. Why do this? It's shooting yourself in the foot.
This country has given enormous sums of military aid to Israel for decades and received nothing in return.
How is this relevant? Most of the aid going to Israel is just recycled back to our defense contractors, but still not really relevant. WhattaboutIsrael?
You wrote "Or when that same government waved foreign flags in congress while they positively cheered at the thought of giving away the countries armaments to a corrupt government on the other side of the world with no plan on how to refill the coffers"
I assumed this was a reference to weapons and other aid sent to Ukraine after the Russian invasion with no plan for repayment, that is it is a gift. I pointed out we have done this same thing for decades with Israel. In both case the money mostly goes to defense contractors.
The relevance is why is the aid sent to Ukraine more objectionable than that sent o Israel or any of the other countries. Over the last 75 years presidents from both parties get us into wars or provided military aid to which many Americans object. Biden is not remarkable in this way.
With Ukraine they sent physical weapons stockpiles and the “cash” is unable to be accounted for.
Well of course they sent weapons, they were fighting a war. Spending was authorized to buy replacements for weapons sent out.
As far as money, I seem to recall missing money from a number of US interventions over the last 25 years. I distinctly recall lots of articles on huge sums disappearing in Iraq and Afghanistan. Considering how many resources we pouring into the Afghan military including lots of training over a period long enough to rear a whole generation of soldiers under American doctrines, I was amazed at the speed at which the military collapsed.
One reason I favor supporting Ukraine (and the Israelis) is that these guys actually fight, and they aren't anti-Western forces like jihadists or the Commies of my youth.
Russians lie a lot about Ukrainians, including through useful proxies in the west.
https://cepa.org/article/a-year-of-lies-russias-information-war-against-ukraine/
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/02/22/4-myths-about-ukraine-war-00142513
https://euvsdisinfo.eu/kremlin-disinformation-attacking-the-legitimacy-of-ukrainian-authorities/
What I loved about Decker's article is that it provided the best defense for the Second Amendment from a Leftist that I've ever heard. The irony of his article is that he finally caught up with conservative thinking regarding tyranny. Hell, conservatives have been discussing that question for a very long time. They've also heavily debated secession and, yes, revolution to get away from Leftist tyranny. So, welcome to the conservative conversation. Let's not ruin it with the communism and fascism of the Left, though, please?
"It's good to be smart and interesting" lol Lmao even. You EA people are all the same.
The least funny part of this whole debacle is it's not a particularly "takes smarts" argument.
"You should let your state be turned to a dictatorship if it's not possible to stop it judicially, congressionally, or electorally"
If you disagree with that statement, you already agreed with him that there is a point at which it is justifiable to oppose tyranny with your 2A, which was all that he was saying.
His posts about committing immigration fraud to bring people over and finding a sperm donor instead of biologically having a child are far more interesting and smarter.
They haven't been told close to verbatim hundreds of years ago (by very famous people), for one!
“A smart and interesting person is someone who notices these inconsistencies and doesn’t simply paper them over.”
And this is why Nick isn’t smart nor interesting. For many or all the parts of his essay you bolded one can easily make the case that the last administration did the same. Yet Nick doesn’t appear to notice that inconsistency.
I'll say to you what I said to Drecker. He did not respond.
You want to kill your fellow Americans to save DEI, transing kids, flooding the country with tens of millions of military aged mercenaries, and $2 trillion dollar deficits?
If you were smart enough to understand either his article or mine you would have your answer.
Well, you responded at least, though only to insult my intelligence. Wanting to kill your fellow Americans for being dumb is not a better answer.
The fact you think is a clever or insightful response is genuinely funny to me. You guys are just so fucking dumb it's unbelievable.
Like I said to Laurence, it seems the only thing you are capable of is insulting people who ask a question you don't want to answer.
Your question is not a real question. It's a rhetorical question, and it's obviously intellectually dishonest. You have to seriously be retarded to not understand this.
However, I'll answer your non-question really simply: no.
Not a tough one, you fucking moron.
So tough. I’ll just assume then you support everything I mentioned.
Are you retarded? Read your stupid question again and then read my answer again. Jesus fucking Christ.
Hahaha. No one has ever talked to me like that face to face. So strong online! You are a pawn of the globalists trying to destroy America. You know nothing about transing kids, how many fighting aged men have crossed the border and how many NGOs have helped those men to flood America, or DEI and the debt would lead to the collapse of America. Good luck with that.
Do MAGA conservatives know how to read?
Are liberals even able to answer a question before they insult the person who asks? Most of the MAGA folk I know are more open to discussion than liberals/progressives.
No, it was a fair question. Decker drew repeated analogy to the Founding Fathers' grievances against George III, which Glenn laid out.
"The present administration is engaged in barbarism; it has arbitrarily imprisoned its opponents, revoked the visas of thousands of students, imposed taxes upon us without our consent, and seeks to destroy the institutions which oppose it. Its leader has threatened those who produce unfavorable coverage, and suggested that their licenses be revoked. It has deprived us, in many cases, of trial by jury; it has subjected us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and has transported us beyond seas to be imprisoned for pretended offenses. It has scorned the orders of our courts, and threatens to alter fundamentally our form of government. It has pardoned its thugs, and extorted the lawyers who defended its opponents."
None of these concern your pet distractions.
That paragraph is lifted practically word for word from Deep State media. Every line in it is either BS, a gross exaggeration or emasculated whining. Comparing Trump to King George is historically ignorant.
No, every single line is accurate.
“Deep State Media” is a perfect example of the MAGA gobbledygook that afflicts self-described freethinkerd who do nothing but regurgitate nonsense like automatons.
Says the guy regurgitating what the media says. You like most of the commenters here are tools of globalists who want to destroy America. No Americans have been rounded up, no taxes have been increased, pity the few hundred foreign students who hate America who lost their student Visa. So on down the line, pure hyperbole signifying nothing.
Decker sounds like a total idiot who understands nothing of any consequence. A libtard, in other words.
Idiot, by the looks of you, I would be careful saying things like that. You won't last long in the big house
History didn’t begin in 2016 bois.