(08-19-2020 07:22 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  The problem that you have is that there is an uprising of unrest with a relatively small portion of the country. But with our media acting the way it has (and still is), the squeaky wheel is getting ALL of the grease and it gives the appearance that the entire country is in upheaval.

Frankly, if this was as big as it is portrayed to be, there would many more clashes with the masses. Portland and Seattle (unfortunately) are overrun by these petulant children and incompetent leadership.... Leadership is in a no-win situation now that they created, they cannot just carpet bomb all these people and wipe them out - the asthetics would be bad, the message would be totalitarian and Hitler-like, and it would be fundamentally opposite of what our free society is supposed to be in the USA.

Where these officials have dropped the ball is that they have NOT enforced the law.... Some dumb kid throws a Malatov cocktail at police, they "arrest" him, then release him in 20 minutes.... That is not even a slap on the wrist.... you think some kid who is willing to do that, can be trusted to show up to court in 45 days for his hearing?

I am all for protesting for or against something you believe in, but as soon as you break the law, you should pay the penalty for doing that. These people are tearing down an entire city with no repercussions whatsoever.

If you don't want to deal with that, then build a wall around the northwest cut off all their services and treat them like a separate country - they can fend for themselves.

In 2 years - we can tear down the wall and let them back in and they will be more than happy to rejoin the USA.

I think there is a flaw in your premise. I agree that the radical left is a smaller percentage, BUT...about half the country is endorsing their actions by not condemning them.

Why? Because they want power back. So yeah, it's half the country vs. the other half.

We HAVE to make it!!!

... That's when the next round of conference realignment is going to happen.

(08-18-2020 11:47 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  I actually think if we break up, it could even go so far as a separate nation for every major metropolitan area. There will be a few that consolidate due to proximity (like NY-NJ-CT) but a dark blue island in a sea of red may not be a sure thing to rope in its neighbors.

That would be a logistical nightmare and not financially viable. Most major metro areas are not self sufficient in any way. They import their food, water, power, and even labor to an extent. Importing all that from a foreign country makes it a non starter if you want any chance of survival.

(08-19-2020 07:40 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-19-2020 07:22 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  The problem that you have is that there is an uprising of unrest with a relatively small portion of the country. But with our media acting the way it has (and still is), the squeaky wheel is getting ALL of the grease and it gives the appearance that the entire country is in upheaval.

Frankly, if this was as big as it is portrayed to be, there would many more clashes with the masses. Portland and Seattle (unfortunately) are overrun by these petulant children and incompetent leadership.... Leadership is in a no-win situation now that they created, they cannot just carpet bomb all these people and wipe them out - the asthetics would be bad, the message would be totalitarian and Hitler-like, and it would be fundamentally opposite of what our free society is supposed to be in the USA.

Where these officials have dropped the ball is that they have NOT enforced the law.... Some dumb kid throws a Malatov cocktail at police, they "arrest" him, then release him in 20 minutes.... That is not even a slap on the wrist.... you think some kid who is willing to do that, can be trusted to show up to court in 45 days for his hearing?

I am all for protesting for or against something you believe in, but as soon as you break the law, you should pay the penalty for doing that. These people are tearing down an entire city with no repercussions whatsoever.

If you don't want to deal with that, then build a wall around the northwest cut off all their services and treat them like a separate country - they can fend for themselves.

In 2 years - we can tear down the wall and let them back in and they will be more than happy to rejoin the USA.

I think there is a flaw in your premise. I agree that the radical left is a smaller percentage, BUT...about half the country is endorsing their actions by not condemning them.

Why? Because they want power back. So yeah, it's half the country vs. the other half.

Not condemning it and supporting it are two different things.... Prime example is the mayor of Seattle - It was the Summer of Love until the summer of love showed up at her house. Then it was Whoa - not in my back yard... prosecute.

Same goes for 95% of these other "non-condemners". It is easy sit there and watch it on TV hundreds and thousands of miles away.... You can bet your arse that all these black business owners were fine with the message until the messengers started breaking those people's windows in the name of "the message"........


You want to see a backpedal.... send these protesters to Pelosi or Schumer's neighborhood and see how quickly the message changes from "Antifa is a myth and this is peaceful"...... to "Call the National Guard - Pronto".....

After rereading what I just posted I need to qualify the previous sentence with one exception - send these people to anyone's back yard EXCEPT Deblasio.... He would spark up the grill and treat these f-kin people to a BBQ if they showed up..... Probably help them paint BLM on his front door of Gracie Mansion too.

(08-19-2020 07:40 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-19-2020 07:22 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  The problem that you have is that there is an uprising of unrest with a relatively small portion of the country. But with our media acting the way it has (and still is), the squeaky wheel is getting ALL of the grease and it gives the appearance that the entire country is in upheaval.

Frankly, if this was as big as it is portrayed to be, there would many more clashes with the masses. Portland and Seattle (unfortunately) are overrun by these petulant children and incompetent leadership.... Leadership is in a no-win situation now that they created, they cannot just carpet bomb all these people and wipe them out - the asthetics would be bad, the message would be totalitarian and Hitler-like, and it would be fundamentally opposite of what our free society is supposed to be in the USA.

Where these officials have dropped the ball is that they have NOT enforced the law.... Some dumb kid throws a Malatov cocktail at police, they "arrest" him, then release him in 20 minutes.... That is not even a slap on the wrist.... you think some kid who is willing to do that, can be trusted to show up to court in 45 days for his hearing?

I am all for protesting for or against something you believe in, but as soon as you break the law, you should pay the penalty for doing that. These people are tearing down an entire city with no repercussions whatsoever.

If you don't want to deal with that, then build a wall around the northwest cut off all their services and treat them like a separate country - they can fend for themselves.

In 2 years - we can tear down the wall and let them back in and they will be more than happy to rejoin the USA.

I think there is a flaw in your premise. I agree that the radical left is a smaller percentage, BUT...about half the country is endorsing their actions by not condemning them.

Why? Because they want power back. So yeah, it's half the country vs. the other half.

Sorry but sitting behind a keyboard talking about how awful they are...

is not condemning them.

Once you are willing to put in the effort and risk, that those making all the noise. Then you can say you are doing something. It's not that 50% of the country agrees with these protest or refunding the police. Or all the special interest causes being pushed down our throats.

A very large percentage of that 50% are like those on twitter, this board and the thousands of others across the internet. They are too comfortable in their life, to risk it. That is the problem.....

people talk and talk and talk but till a problem actually comes into their front door and they are then forced to deal with it. Thats all they will do....talk and talk and talk.

The republicans and I'm not talking the President, but republicans as a party are not showing how they are going to address the real problems in the life of a good portion of that 50%.

Then you have the media, 24/7, every day, every night, since 2016 attacking the President. So you cant blame 50% that think a change is needed. But not all of those 50% are in line with what we see in some of these cities....

very small percentage makes up that group...mostly those under 30. So I agree with Eldonabe on that. Worse case Trump loses, you will not see the far left swing you thing you will.

Its easy to shout about problems when you want people to vote against something. Its another whole ball game when you are in charge of putting those ideals and the cost with them, on the American people.

So no we are not anywhere close to a civil war or breaking up as a country...

its this internet thing that allows people from coast to coast to be connected in real time that's blowing what we think is going on. Way out of proportion.

(08-19-2020 07:54 AM)banker Wrote:  That would be a logistical nightmare and not financially viable. Most major metro areas are not self sufficient in any way. They import their food, water, power, and even labor to an extent. Importing all that from a foreign country makes it a non starter if you want any chance of survival.

Exactly the way we fight a civil war. We cut the cities off and starve them to death.

Most cities have three days of food or less on the shelves. Once the food runs out things will get interesting.

We may not be close, but maybe we should be. The internet has served to show us just how opposed the coastal and interior states are on basic, fundamental, building block ideals. Neither side is going to compromise and I don’t see how you operate long term when you have such diverse, uncompromising views.

Well, there is one way, but that involves states rights and the limiting of federal control, but again, that’s a core difference between the sides. They want national control and the imposition of their view on everyone.

(08-19-2020 07:21 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 10:34 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 09:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 09:48 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Because of the 2nd amendment. But it won’t be pretty.

The difference between your post and Triple A's is that one has given up before the event and the other is making plans. We owe it to our grandchildren to fight this out to preserve the Constitution and our personal liberty. Once we are gone there is no United States to help us out of our shackles. This one is to the death. Our alternative is to turn everyone out we possibly can to win at the polls and to be ever vigilant at the polls to make sure we aren't cheated out of a victory the way we lost a handful of house seats in the last one with delayed counts and late found absentee ballots that all went one way. Those we oppose have been schooling the American people on just how dirty and how illegal and how criminal they are in their tactics. Shame on us if we aren't prepared. Win this election and then move to vouchers for people to educate their children anywhere and break the Public Education hold and the tide can be turned.

You obviously don't know me well. I didn't say I wouldn't fight. I just said I don't think it will work out, b/c the Dems want power at all costs.

I don't want to kill them. I just want them to leave, lol. If they don't and they try to make me live by their rules, well, then I fight.

Well then you have one local ally.

he'll have more than one...

I've seriously been thinking about looking into a militia to join so count me in. I'm old but can still shoot better than some and as good as most.

(08-19-2020 08:57 AM)banker Wrote:  We may not be close, but maybe we should be. The internet has served to show us just how opposed the coastal and interior states are on basic, fundamental, building block ideals. Neither side is going to compromise and I don’t see how you operate long term when you have such diverse, uncompromising views.

Well, there is one way, but that involves states rights and the limiting of federal control, but again, that’s a core difference between the sides. They want national control and the imposition of their view on everyone.

And they want Federalism so they can nationally tax us for their debts which were accrued by more of their fantasy living. No Federal aid for these people should be forthcoming simply because they have to learn to live in reality. They need us far more than we need them and until they learn that lesson no compromise between our world views exists.

(08-19-2020 10:08 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-19-2020 08:57 AM)banker Wrote:  We may not be close, but maybe we should be. The internet has served to show us just how opposed the coastal and interior states are on basic, fundamental, building block ideals. Neither side is going to compromise and I don’t see how you operate long term when you have such diverse, uncompromising views.

Well, there is one way, but that involves states rights and the limiting of federal control, but again, that’s a core difference between the sides. They want national control and the imposition of their view on everyone.

And they want Federalism so they can nationally tax us for their debts which were accrued by more of their fantasy living. No Federal aid for these people should be forthcoming simply because they have to learn to live in reality. They need us far more than we need them and until they learn that lesson no compromise between our world views exists.

Also the national division is no better in each state. Limiting Federal controls are not going to help anything except give you 50 variations of dealing with left/right imposition.

My state is perfect example. Massachusetts is a deeeeep blue state by representation in government. But there are a lot of red pockets - enough to disrupt the blue wave if pushed, but it is simply not bad enough to make a fuss. Life is OK in Mass despite the steep left slant of government.

Giving Mass government more authority would create (in my otherwise mostly peaceful state) significantly more volatility among its residents.