Quote of the day—Basedgreaser

Cancer does tend to spread if untreated. Growing into every nook in our society to impose their world view because their success in politics falls short of their over ambitious and impatient expectations. What’s the treatment for people like that?

Two can’t play their game as doing so would not align with many of our principles

Seeing the state of many states gun laws in the US, our “game” isn’t working either.

Basedgreaser
Comment posted in Northwest Firearms on the topic Gun Control: An Issue for Policymakers or Investors?
September 27, 2018
[I don’t have any good answers beyond voting for the best candidates, contacting your political representatives, and taking new shooters to the range.

My best hope lies with an originalist majority on SCOTUS. And I’m only moderately hopeful of that working.—Joe]

5 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Basedgreaser

  1. The “cancer” comes from most of us. How many times have you said, “There should be a law against >insert pet peeve here< ". It is exactly that thought process that the anti-gunners use to deny us our rights.

    If we were to stop relying on the government to solve all of our problems, we wouldn't face these incessant attacks on individual freedom.

    I have never hurt anyone with my guns. There is no valid reason why my gun-related choices should be restricted by law, based solely upon what others have done, or upon what I MIGHT do.

    • Correct; it is purely a matter of one mindset verses the other. If we go all the way back to the beginning of recorded history, we see it there too, plain as day, as the mind of Cain verses the mind of Able.

      Since “both sides” (in our false dichotomy that encompasses education, politics, religion, entertainment and media) tend to describe the POTUS, for example, as “running the country” we clearly have only the authoritarian mindset (the mind of Cain, or of Herod if you prefer) represented within U.S. government and popular culture.

  2. “I don’t have any good answers beyond voting for the best candidates, contacting your political representatives, and taking new shooters to the range.

    My best hope lies with an originalist majority on SCOTUS. And I’m only moderately hopeful of that working.—Joe”

    Exposing the shenanigans of the authoritarians, and defining the clear demarcation between authoritarianism and the Perfect Law of Liberty would be at the top of my list.

    Voting and such? You clearly have some faith (in the corrupt political system) that I do not share.

    I see that system as thoroughly and utterly corrupt, such that participating in it is akin to asking Al Capone to investigate the crime situation in Chicago. He’s going to a) laugh up his sleeve at you, b) realize through your behavior that he has you sufficiently under his control, and c) uphold your actions toward him as proof of your acknowledgement of his authority— You’re uplifting him while indicting yourself.

    Keep in mind that his marks of authority are extremely important to the authoritarian– He is hyper-sensitive to this sort of thing, even if you and I don’t see it and wouldn’t place much value on it if we did see it. We think of reason, problem-solving, creativity, accomplishment, advancing the state of the art, and free trade as the centers of our professional lives, but the authoritarian desires only mainly, trappings, symbology, rank, exultation, and the acknowledgement of his authority over others, by others.

    “Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.” Ephesians 5:11

    Also; if you’re not taking flack, you’re probably not over the target. If they’re not actively plotting to kills us, it means we pose no significant threat to the authoritarian system; we’re probably not doing our jobs.

    • Exposing the shenanigans to who with the expectation of what sort of action? That they don’t vote either?

      Please explain to us how your plan plays out to our advantage.

  3. Origionalist majority on SCOTUS will save this culture? Nazzofast! In that system, there are three layers of Federal Courts BELOW SCOTUS: Federal District, Federal Circuit & Federal Appeals. They are almost 80% liberal and NON-originalist, & only a tiny percentage of their decisions ever makes it up to SCOTUS where reversal to an originalist interpretation of the Constitution is even possible.

    The Chief Justice COULD issue opinions that ALL interpretations of ALL Courts MUST involve Strict Scrutiny, and back his muscle up by having majority-originalist Justices available 24/7 to issue stays against rulings which stray from Strict Scrutiny reasoning. This would remove the lower Courts from their present unconstitutional role of running the country by judicial fiat. It also would likely cripple SCOTUS with an overload of work.

    Strict Scrutiny at ALL levels of Federal Courts can probably save our Constitution, but the political reality is that John Roberts would never order it used.

Comments are closed.