Quote of the day—THE Red-Headed libertarian™ @TRHLofficial

The left are throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks before they lose their stranglehold in November. Their behavior is reactionary and it’s going to get more insane, more sinister, and more hysterical.

THE Red-Headed libertarian™ @TRHLofficial
Tweeted on June 6, 2022
[This is my expectation too.—Joe]

Share

9 thoughts on “Quote of the day—THE Red-Headed libertarian™ @TRHLofficial

  1. Absolutely. It’s called desperation. What satan didn’t tell them was that in winning political power. They kill themselves with their own ignorance. (Good plan if your satan.)
    Like Lukas Botkin is fond of saying. “IYSYS”. If You Suck, You Suck.
    Meaning you just aren’t capable of doing the job.
    When that is applied to politics. Those in power suffering from some form of IYSYS, can only get more desperate, dangerous, and shrill. And almost never “better”.
    But hay. That’s why we live in a democracy right? So we can have cunning ignorance to lord over us with absolutism.
    May we say of this generations version, with the divine right of clowns?

  2. TRHL has the right idea, but the paradigm is a bit off. One party does not panic, or even get concerned, over the prospect of the other party winning in the next election. That’s only theatre. It’s the “good cop, bad cop” ruse in action. The Dialectic Method. Which ever party “wins”, we lose, and the global authoritarian system wins. What they do care about is generating enough false concern (anger, fear, panic, et al) within the public that additional authoritarian measures can be passed in the moment, without too much opposition.

    Among the politicos, it long ago ceased to be about what we want. Now it’s about what we will tolerate. It’s about how much liberty they can steal from us at a given moment and get away with it. The answer to that of course is, A lot, and more and more all the time.

  3. And it is not just liberty that has slipped away. Individual responsibility, obligations, roles, and respect have faded into a distant past. I’d even argue that it is the lack of these latter attributes that has led us to our current state and that only with these attributes can we have liberty. We now live in a world that is greed based with no sense of responsibility, obligations, roles, and respect. It is all about me, me, and me.

    So, who’s responsible for these losses? Is it them or is it us?

    • As you say. It is us. And we and the next generations will pay for our sloth.
      We might end up like France, and never get true freedom back.
      Something tells me were stronger than that. But none the less it is always the lower public that ends up paying the butcher’s bill.
      This time were much better armed. Maybe the golden billion (Putin term for the elites), will have to pay their fair share this time?

  4. There is zero doubt that the criminals in power will try to ram through every abusive illegal unconstitutional assault on freedom they can between now and next January when the new Congress is sworn in . They will of course cheat as much as they can to insure they remain in power but they’d be foolish to count on succeeding.
    They would rather destroy everything rather than relinquish control over it.

  5. Or it is all a head fake. The Progs and the Corruptocrats have very different ideologies. The Corruptocrats and their pet RINOs may be letting the “Commissars” get way over their skies so they take the fall and the blame for the inevitable crash. The Commissars have no friends in the game and the Old Pols may think that it is a good time to cut the traces. They will have to rebuild anyway. Maybe the RINOs need a new home. Nancy’s Corruptocrats, the RINOs, and the Swamp are in it for thr power and the cash. The Commissars will just screw that up.

  6. So…..given that a substantial percentage of the population is comprised of Willing Accomplices – people who either “see nothing wrong” with the current state of affairs; people who believe “this is better than strong deviseness between leaders/leadership coalitions (‘because they have been told ‘it may prevent getting things done’)”; people who simply have no interest in anything outside their daily routines; people who object to X because they believe in Y – how does this get addressed?

    Empirically, and historically, it’s a given that capitalistic free markets, open and honest elections, and full permission to operate independently within the minimal constraints imposed by Constitutional and statutory structure create the best possible human environment; specifically not a perfect environment, but the best that is reasonably attainable by humans.

    And, given that such an environment will be, by necessity, hierarchical to some degree, there will always be individuals who seek power, for whatever reason(s), and groups of those individuals will form around that goal to facilitate such power seeking, and once procured, resist relinquishing it. In a fully rational and open environment discussion of such activity will promote intelligent decisions regarding it, at which point Lord Acton must be acknowledged and given consideration.

    So how do we get there? Or, is that such an unattainable goal that we’re doomed to eternal incomplete solutions that perpetually require some degree of periodic correction?

    • Your last paragraph. BINGO!!!!! Were humans. Perfection is not attainable.
      As Ben Franklin said, and many of our forefathers alluded to. “You have a republic, if you can keep it” Big on the “IF”, part.
      And thus the reason for 2A being an amendment. It controlled everything else that was proposed as the structure of government for just that propose. Human imperfection. And the fact that we will always be corrupt, and corrupted.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.