Federal Judge issues injunction against WH, govt "Ministry of Truth"

[jerryskids 6,564]

29 minutes ago, dogcows said:

That list is a distraction from the ultimate question in this case: Were social media companies threatened or coerced into publishing or taking down posts? If the answer to that is no, then none of the rest matters. If it is yes, a takedown was compelled, then one must answer the question: was the speech protected or not?

There is no DIRECT evidence of threats or coercion so far. But the trial will be to make that determination. This injunction was a bad move by the judge, if you think about it. Now, if he rules for the plaintiff, there will be grounds of bias for the appeal. There is no emergency, so the judge would have been wise to wait. Wisdom, a trait formerly associated with judges, seems to be in very short supply among them these days.

I addressed the question of coercion in the OP:

Quote

The Defendants further argue they only made requests to the social-media companies, and that the decision to modify or suppress content was each social-media company’s independent decision. However, when a state has so involved itself in the private party’s conduct, it cannot claim the conduct occurred as a result of private choice, even if the private party would have acted independently. Peterson v. City of Greenville, 373 U.S. 244, 247–248 (1963).  

Therefore, the question is not what decision the social-media company would have made, but whether the Government “so involved itself in the private party’s conduct” that the decision is essentially that of the Government. As exhaustedly listed above, Defendants “significantly encouraged” the social-media companies to such extent that the decision should be deemed to be the decisions of the Government. The White House Defendants and the Surgeon General Defendants additionally engaged in coercion of social-media companies to such extent that the decisions of the social-media companies should be deemed that of the Government. It simply makes no difference what decision the social-media companies would have made independently of government involvement, where the evidence demonstrates the wide-scale involvement seen here. 

We know you know more about constitutional law than judges, but this guy cites precedents and everything.  

[5-Points 3,387]

1 hour ago, dogcows said:

You said you want a peaceful secession, but would resort to civil war if that didn’t work, right? Neither are anywhere near reality. So eat your cheerios.

No, I want idiots who vote for stoopid sh!t to stick around and suffer the consequences of their choices, instead of running away and metastisizing their idiocy to other states. 

Also, you seem to be the one who wants another civil war. You won't allow a peaceful secession. You would force everyone to live by your rules rather than allow them to peacefully go their own way. 

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. 

 

[dogcows 1,030]

1 hour ago, jerryskids said:

I addressed the question of coercion in the OP:

We know you know more about constitutional law than judges, but this guy cites precedents and everything.  

No doubt this judge knows more about it than you or I do. But one of the claims of “coercion” he lists is Dr. Fauci telling people, on TV, that hydroxychloroquine doesn’t cure COVID-19. Really? You don’t need to be a judge or even a lawyer to know calling that coercion is silly. (Pages 52-53 of the ruling)

And this judge is hardly an impartial arbiter, at least based on his past rulings. As the appeal already filed points out: the injunction contradicts itself and is overly vague and broad.

I predict that this injunction will be overturned soon, and that the case will eventually be lost by the plaintiffs. But if it makes it to SCOTUS, who knows? It’s still early in the summer and there are a lot of all-expense-paid vacations yet to be enjoyed before their next term starts.

More analysis of the ruling here:

https://www.justsecurity.org/87155/restricting-the-government-from-speaking-to-tech-companies-will-spread-disinformation-and-harm-democracy/

[dogcows 1,030]

18 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

No, I want idiots who vote for stoopid sh!t to stick around and suffer the consequences of their choices, instead of running away and metastisizing their idiocy to other states. 

Also, you seem to be the one who wants another civil war. You won't allow a peaceful secession. You would force everyone to live by your rules rather than allow them to peacefully go their own way. 

Arguing for secession is crazy. Not gonna happen, period. As far-fetched as all the “nuclear war starts tomorrow” and civil war talk on this board.

[5-Points 3,387]

6 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Arguing for secession is crazy. Not gonna happen, period. As far-fetched as all the “nuclear war starts tomorrow” and civil war talk on this board.

I'm arguing for leftists to stay in the states they destroy and allow the rest of us to live in peace, free from their idiotic ideas. 

One side is willing to let that happen. One side isn't. 

History can and does repeat itself. 

[dogcows 1,030]

25 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

I'm arguing for leftists to stay in the states they destroy and allow the rest of us to live in peace, free from their idiotic ideas. 

One side is willing to let that happen. One side isn't. 

History can and does repeat itself. 

Please explain exactly how you want this to play out. Do you think some states should secede from the union? If so, how will that work?

Without details, this is just you ranting that there are people who don’t agree with you. Welcome to reality.

[jerryskids 6,564]

52 minutes ago, dogcows said:

No doubt this judge knows more about it than you or I do. But one of the claims of “coercion” he lists is Dr. Fauci telling people, on TV, that hydroxychloroquine doesn’t cure COVID-19. Really? You don’t need to be a judge or even a lawyer to know calling that coercion is silly. (Pages 52-53 of the ruling)

And this judge is hardly an impartial arbiter, at least based on his past rulings. As the appeal already filed points out: the injunction contradicts itself and is overly vague and broad.

I predict that this injunction will be overturned soon, and that the case will eventually be lost by the plaintiffs. But if it makes it to SCOTUS, who knows? It’s still early in the summer and there are a lot of all-expense-paid vacations yet to be enjoyed before their next term starts.

More analysis of the ruling here:

https://www.justsecurity.org/87155/restricting-the-government-from-speaking-to-tech-companies-will-spread-disinformation-and-harm-democracy/

First paragraph from your link:

On July 4, federal Judge Terry A. Doughty in the Western District of Louisiana issued a preliminary injunction in Missouri v. Biden, a case that basically turns some elected Republicans’ fixation on social media censorship into legal reality. The impetus behind the case is the now thoroughly debunked conspiracy theory that the government is somehow strong-arming Big Tech into censoring conservative speech and speakers in violation of the First Amendment.

You couldn't find something less biased, maybe Huff Po or Daily Kos?

[5-Points 3,387]

50 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Please explain exactly how you want this to play out. Do you think some states should secede from the union? If so, how will that work?

Without details, this is just you ranting that there are people who don’t agree with you. Welcome to reality.

I've already explained how I want this to play out. You vote for it, you live with it. No running away when your choices fock everything up. Unfortunately, too many leftists are focking poosays and can't deal with the fall out of their voting history. 

And any state that wishes to secede should be allowed to do so. It's a founding principle of this nation. We're united by choice, not by force. 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,833]

1 minute ago, 5-Points said:

I've already explained how I want this to play out. You vote for it, you live with it. No running away when your choices fock everything up. Unfortunately, too many leftists are focking poosays and can't deal with the fall out of their voting history. 

And any state that wishes to secede should be allowed to do so. It's a founding principle of this nation. We're united by choice, not by force. 

Yep.  Liberals are like vermin - they infect one area and ruin it and then move to another, only to ruin the new place they move to.

I say no more - they stay where they voted and enjoy the "rewards" of their vote.

[Blue Horseshoe 348]

2 hours ago, 5-Points said:

Also, you seem to be the one who wants another civil war. You won't allow a peaceful secession. You would force everyone to live by your rules rather than allow them to peacefully go their own way. 

 

I'd be OK if Texas and Florida ( and all the states in-between in the southern region ) wanted to engage in full secession if there was a peaceful way to do it. However to practically achieve it, they would need to be both a nuclear power and have it's own navy. To do that wouldn't, by default, be "peaceful" by any measure. 

So, in the end, it would mean some kind of new civil war no matter what. A new alliance would need half of America's current carrier and sub fleet to defect to pull this off. 

But some form of worldwide economic collapse could force America to split into different factions. Not sure there would be much of a world left after that though. That seems like, grimly, the more likely form of "divorce" 

[5-Points 3,387]

9 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Yep.  Liberals are like vermin - they infect one area and ruin it and then move to another, only to ruin the new place they move to.

I say no more - they stay where they voted and enjoy the "rewards" of their vote.

Exactly. If they would do that, and stop with the never ending new federal law buIIshit, we could probably live in peace. 

[dogcows 1,030]

25 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

First paragraph from your link:

On July 4, federal Judge Terry A. Doughty in the Western District of Louisiana issued a preliminary injunction in Missouri v. Biden, a case that basically turns some elected Republicans’ fixation on social media censorship into legal reality. The impetus behind the case is the now thoroughly debunked conspiracy theory that the government is somehow strong-arming Big Tech into censoring conservative speech and speakers in violation of the First Amendment.

You couldn't find something less biased, maybe Huff Po or Daily Kos?

Oh no they expressed an opinion, then supported it with facts in subsequent paragraphs. It’s called making an argument. I looked through other articles on Just Security and they aren’t a far left publication, I don’t think. Heck, they have an article warning about the dangers of prosecuting Trump.

It’s just this ruling is off the rails.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.189520/gov.uscourts.lawd.189520.293.0_1.pdf

Please tell me what page(s) in there show anything even resembling coercion or threats from the government to a social media company. I read through the COVID-19 section and although the plaintiffs are quite upset that their claims about ivermectin et al were blocked, there’s no evidence of government even being involved with any requests other than somebody from NIAID asking for some fake Fauci accounts to be policed. His entire argument is that Fauci’s TV appearances telling people not to take ivermectin amounted to coercion of social media companies. That’s just outlandish.

As for bias, this judge put “Ministry of Truth” right in the ruling. 

[dogcows 1,030]

19 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

I've already explained how I want this to play out. You vote for it, you live with it. No running away when your choices fock everything up. Unfortunately, too many leftists are focking poosays and can't deal with the fall out of their voting history. 

And any state that wishes to secede should be allowed to do so. It's a founding principle of this nation. We're united by choice, not by force. 

I don’t understand what you mean by “vote for it, live with it.” Has there been a mass exodus out of America right after elections or something?

[seafoam1 2,799]

Just now, dogcows said:

I don’t understand what you mean by “vote for it, live with it.” Has there been a mass exodus out of America right after elections or something?

California exodus dumb ass. That state has turned to shlt because of people like you.

[Patented Phil 1,469]

1 hour ago, dogcows said:

Arguing for secession is crazy. Not gonna happen, period. As far-fetched as all the “nuclear war starts tomorrow” and civil war talk on this board.

There’s no co-existing with you lunatics.  The politicization of the FBI and DOJ was the final straw.  There ain’t no coming back from that.  

[Patented Phil 1,469]

8 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

California exodus dumb ass. That state has turned to shlt because of people like you.

In 2021 California’s population declined for the first time in history.  And in 2022 it declined even more.  LA County alone saw a decline of 90,000 people - the largest such decline in the country.  Overall, California’s population declined by 500,000 the last 2 years.  That’s about the population of Wyoming.  And the exodus seems to be picking up steam.  Last week a poll was released showing that 40% of all Californians are considering leaving the state.

And for the first time, it is wealthy people leading the exodus out of California.  And that spells big trouble for the state’s economy, where the top 10% of wage earners pay 80% of the state’s income taxes.  Socialism breaks down when you run out of other people’s money to spend.

The double-whammy for Leftists is that these people are moving into Republican states like Texas and Nevada (no income tax).  Houston and  Dallas alone built more housing last year than all of California.

It’s a staggering fall from grace.  Entering the 21st century, California was perfectly positioned to be the financial and population growth engine for the next 50 years.  It was projected that in 2020 California’s population would be 45 million.  It came in at 39 million, and has been declining each year since then.  Meanwhile, Texas and Florida are growing like gangbusters, with some experts predicting that Texas could surpass California as early as 2045.

[Patented Phil 1,469]

After we split it up, it’s gonna be a beautiful thing watching the Red States implement an actual immigration policy that restricts immigration from the BlueTard States.  Let them sit in their own shitt and figure it out.  

[dogcows 1,030]

I am seeing a lot of advocacy for “red” states to secede. Some things to consider. In Kentucky for example, the average citizen receives $14,000 more in benefits from the nation than what they pay into it. They received $63 billion from the federal government in 2019. That accounts for 30% of the state’s GDP! Meanwhile, NY pays much more into America than it gets back. For some reason they are ok with that. 

If you want to bail on America, goodbye to the best military in the world. They will close the bases in your state and take back soldiers and equipment. No social security or Medicare. No trade relationships with foreign countries, including the U.S. I also imagine millions of people won’t want to be part of the newly created nation of nitwits, so there will be a mass exodus, further destroying your economy.

There’s a reason no state is serious about seceding: because it’s idiotic.

See also: Brexit.

[seafoam1 2,799]

2 minutes ago, dogcows said:

I am seeing a lot of advocacy for “red” states to secede. Some things to consider. In Kentucky for example, the average citizen receives $14,000 more in benefits from the nation than what they pay into it. They received $63 billion from the federal government in 2019. That accounts for 30% of the state’s GDP! Meanwhile, NY pays much more into America than it gets back. For some reason they are ok with that. 

If you want to bail on America, goodbye to the best military in the world. They will close the bases in your state and take back soldiers and equipment. No social security or Medicare. No trade relationships with foreign countries, including the U.S. I also imagine millions of people won’t want to be part of the newly created nation of nitwits, so there will be a mass exodus, further destroying your economy.

There’s a reason no state is serious about seceding: because it’s idiotic.

See also: Brexit.

Just worry about your own liberal shltholes. Keep your red state opinions to yourself dooshbag.

[dogcows 1,030]

3 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

Just worry about your own liberal shltholes. Keep your red state opinions to yourself dooshbag.

No.

Are you gonna do something about it?  Maybe try crying more.

[5-Points 3,387]

18 minutes ago, Blue Horseshoe said:

 

I'd be OK if Texas and Florida ( and all the states in-between in the southern region ) wanted to engage in full secession if there was a peaceful way to do it. However to practically achieve it, they would need to be both a nuclear power and have it's own navy. To do that wouldn't, by default, be "peaceful" by any measure. 

So, in the end, it would mean some kind of new civil war no matter what. A new alliance would need half of America's current carrier and sub fleet to defect to pull this off. 

But some form of worldwide economic collapse could force America to split into different factions. Not sure there would be much of a world left after that though. That seems like, grimly, the more likely form of "divorce" 

If that were to happen, those states could build both.  It wouldn't happen overnight but they have the ability and the wherewithal to do so. Not to mention, most of NASA is located there. So, satellites could be shutdown almost immediately. 

I don't see why any of that would be needed, though. Secession should be allowed on principle. 

[5-Points 3,387]

29 minutes ago, dogcows said:

I don’t understand what you mean by “vote for it, live with it.” Has there been a mass exodus out of America right after elections or something?

You voted for it, you live with it. What's not to understand?

Yes, there has been mass exodus of liberal voters from states like California and New York because they don't like the results of their political choices. That's buIIshit. You shouldn't get to fock up sh!t for everybody then leave and continue the practice. 

 

[Blue Horseshoe 348]

Just now, 5-Points said:

If that were to happen, those states could build both.  It wouldn't happen overnight but they have the ability and the wherewithal to do so. Not to mention, most of NASA is located there. So, satellites could be shutdown almost immediately. 

I don't see why any of that would be needed, though. Secession should be allowed on principle. 

 

I see your point. But here's a consideration. Conservatives in general, not all but most, rely on process and logistics. It's not enough to want something, you need a practical plan to achieve it. Leftists ( I won't include all Liberals here, I believe there is a large difference between a traditional liberal and the assembly line woke shock trooper from the radical left) 

Liberals and Leftists will eventually want to move into Red strongholds, because they will be more prosperous. Since Team Red won't want to do that, Team Blue will declare war. Think about the radical leftists here  - tim, squistion, Sho Nuff, dogcows, Wade Garrett, Gutter Boy, and others. Can you imagine types like those trying to create functional public policy or even understand the basics of day to day ground level public administration? No, they'd all die in their woke utopia. Imagine a city with no police, but "social workers" showing up to deal with criminals with politically correct language and flash cards. 

The fastest pathway is for a segment of the US military to break off and plant itself in the new Texas/Florida Alliance. Of course Team Blue would call it treason and sedition and declare war. 

What I'm saying is even with the hypothetical of a "peaceful secession" to start would still end in mass violence because that's all the radical left understands. They don't create anything themselves. They only attempt to tear down the good things that other people have built. Did Black Lives Matter spend all those millions into starting blacked owned businesses in impoverished black communities? No, because they are straight up Marxists. They don't know how to build jack sh!t. They only know how to complain while living under the benefits of a system they demonize and will somehow tolerate their stupidity. 

I agree with you that America is just too large and has too many split interests to operate under one federal government anymore. I also agree that I'd want a peaceful type of secession, where people can choose to live in the states and areas that fit their viewpoints and convictions. I just don't trust Team Blue to honor any agreement and not default to their same chaos and pure insanity pathway. 

I don't agree with @seafoam1 when he says all liberals are stupid.

But I will say that all radical leftists however want to set the world on fire, but end up lighting themselves up first in the process. The only thing anyone can rely on from the radical left is that they will find a way to destroy anything good around them. 

Let's just be honest. Can you imagine living in a big city where someone like Tim was in charge? Your children and the children of everyone here would tragically perish in quick order under that kind of failed "leadership" 

In general, a split would best be achieved by a large actual physical barrier. An ocean. A mountain range. A desert. Etc, etc. Unfortunately there is nothing really like that separating Florida and Texas and the southern region from the rest of the US. 

[seafoam1 2,799]

20 minutes ago, dogcows said:

No.

Are you gonna do something about it?  Maybe try crying more.

Pull out the "crying" word. Focking idiot liberal. Your opinion is shlt. 

And I don't seek out you liberal retards. If you get in my way in real life though, I'll push your fat liberal ass into the mud.

[seafoam1 2,799]

13 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

You voted for it, you live with it. What's not to understand?

Yes, there has been mass exodus of liberal voters from states like California and New York because they don't like the results of their political choices. That's buIIshit. You shouldn't get to fock up sh!t for everybody then leave and continue the practice. 

 

The fact he doesn't understand that is typical for a liberal bltch like himself.

[5-Points 3,387]

10 minutes ago, Blue Horseshoe said:

 

I see your point. But here's a consideration. Conservatives in general, not all but most, rely on process and logistics. It's not enough to want something, you need a practical plan to achieve it. Leftists ( I won't include all Liberals here, I believe there is a large difference between a traditional liberal and the assembly line woke shock trooper from the radical left) 

Liberals and Leftists will eventually want to move into Red strongholds, because they will be more prosperous. Since Team Red won't want to do that, Team Blue will declare war. Think about the radical leftists here  - tim, squistion, Sho Nuff, dogcows, Wade Garrett, Gutter Boy, and others. Can you imagine types like those trying to create functional public policy or even understand the basics of day to day ground level public administration? No, they'd all die in their woke utopia. Imagine a city with no police, but "social workers" showing up to deal with criminals with politically correct language and flash cards. 

The fastest pathway is for a segment of the US military to break off and plant itself in the new Texas/Florida Alliance. Of course Team Blue would call it treason and sedition and declare war. 

What I'm saying is even with the hypothetical of a "peaceful secession" to start would still end in mass violence because that's all the radical left understands. They don't create anything themselves. They only attempt to tear down the good things that other people have built. Did Black Lives Matter spend all those millions into starting blacked owned businesses in impoverished black communities? No, because they are straight up Marxists. They don't know how to build jack sh!t. They only know how to complain while living under the benefits of a system they demonize and will somehow tolerate their stupidity. 

I agree with you that America is just too large and has too many split interests to operate under one federal government anymore. I also agree that I'd want a peaceful type of secession, where people can choose to live in the states and areas that fit their viewpoints and convictions. I just don't trust Team Blue to honor any agreement and not default to their same chaos and pure insanity pathway. 

I don't agree with @seafoam1 when he says all liberals are stupid.

But I will say that all radical leftists however want to set the world on fire, but end up lighting themselves up first in the process. The only thing anyone can rely on from the radical left is that they will find a way to destroy anything good around them. 

Let's just be honest. Can you imagine living in a big city where someone like Tim was in charge? Your children and the children of everyone here would tragically perish in quick order under that kind of failed "leadership" 

In general, a split would best be achieved by a large actual physical barrier. An ocean. A mountain range. A desert. Etc, etc. Unfortunately there is nothing really like that separating Florida and Texas and the southern region from the rest of the US. 

I completely agree. If "Team Red" were to take their ball and go home, it would mean the end of the game for "Team Blue." Whereas, Team Red would simply design a new game and thrive. 

Which is why Team Blue can't allow Team Red to quit their rigged game. Hence the opposition to an amicable split by guys like Sho. 

Also, those states all have National Guard units that could serve as a temporary defensive force while millions of sympathetic others flooded in to assist and take up residence. 

It would definitely be interesting to see play out. Of course, the left could just stop with the anti-American stance they've adopted and save us all the trouble, but I'm not going to hold my breath. 

[5-Points 3,387]

22 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

The fact he doesn't understand that is typical for a liberal bltch like himself.

I didn't think it was the least bit confusing. You voted for it, you live with it. You bought it, you got it. 

It's pretty self explanatory. 

[seafoam1 2,799]

Just now, 5-Points said:

I didn't think it was the least bit confusing. You voted for it, you live with it. You bought it, you got it. 

It's pretty self explanatory. 

Straight to the point dude. 

[jonmx 2,424]

5 hours ago, dogcows said:

That list is a distraction from the ultimate question in this case: Were social media companies threatened or coerced into publishing or taking down posts? If the answer to that is no, then none of the rest matters. If it is yes, a takedown was compelled, then one must answer the question: was the speech protected or not?

There is no DIRECT evidence of threats or coercion so far. But the trial will be to make that determination. This injunction was a bad move by the judge, if you think about it. Now, if he rules for the plaintiff, there will be grounds of bias for the appeal. There is no emergency, so the judge would have been wise to wait. Wisdom, a trait formerly associated with judges, seems to be in very short supply among them these days.

You are really bad at this law stuff.  I really hope you are not an actual lawyer, but if you are, you are contributing to taking this country to the shitter.  I thank God for a judge like this who stands up to government tyranny, versus idiots like you embrace it. 

[Patented Phil 1,469]

8 minutes ago, jonmx said:

You are really bad at this law stuff.  I really hope you are not an actual lawyer, but if you are, you are contributing to taking this country to the shitter.  I thank God for a judge like this who stands up to government tyranny, versus idiots like you embrace it. 

Dogshitt is definitely NOT a lawyer, I can guarantee you that.  On the spectrum- undiagnosed.

[dogcows 1,030]

1 hour ago, 5-Points said:

You voted for it, you live with it. What's not to understand?

Yes, there has been mass exodus of liberal voters from states like California and New York because they don't like the results of their political choices.

 

No there hasn’t. So your premise makes zero sense.

[dogcows 1,030]

1 hour ago, Blue Horseshoe said:

 

I see your point. But here's a consideration. Conservatives in general, not all but most, rely on process and logistics. It's not enough to want something, you need a practical plan to achieve it. Leftists ( I won't include all Liberals here, I believe there is a large difference between a traditional liberal and the assembly line woke shock trooper from the radical left) 

Liberals and Leftists will eventually want to move into Red strongholds, because they will be more prosperous. Since Team Red won't want to do that, Team Blue will declare war. Think about the radical leftists here  - tim, squistion, Sho Nuff, dogcows, Wade Garrett, Gutter Boy, and others. Can you imagine types like those trying to create functional public policy or even understand the basics of day to day ground level public administration? No, they'd all die in their woke utopia. Imagine a city with no police, but "social workers" showing up to deal with criminals with politically correct language and flash cards. 

The fastest pathway is for a segment of the US military to break off and plant itself in the new Texas/Florida Alliance. Of course Team Blue would call it treason and sedition and declare war. 

What I'm saying is even with the hypothetical of a "peaceful secession" to start would still end in mass violence because that's all the radical left understands. They don't create anything themselves. They only attempt to tear down the good things that other people have built. Did Black Lives Matter spend all those millions into starting blacked owned businesses in impoverished black communities? No, because they are straight up Marxists. They don't know how to build jack sh!t. They only know how to complain while living under the benefits of a system they demonize and will somehow tolerate their stupidity. 

I agree with you that America is just too large and has too many split interests to operate under one federal government anymore. I also agree that I'd want a peaceful type of secession, where people can choose to live in the states and areas that fit their viewpoints and convictions. I just don't trust Team Blue to honor any agreement and not default to their same chaos and pure insanity pathway. 

I don't agree with @seafoam1 when he says all liberals are stupid.

But I will say that all radical leftists however want to set the world on fire, but end up lighting themselves up first in the process. The only thing anyone can rely on from the radical left is that they will find a way to destroy anything good around them. 

Let's just be honest. Can you imagine living in a big city where someone like Tim was in charge? Your children and the children of everyone here would tragically perish in quick order under that kind of failed "leadership" 

In general, a split would best be achieved by a large actual physical barrier. An ocean. A mountain range. A desert. Etc, etc. Unfortunately there is nothing really like that separating Florida and Texas and the southern region from the rest of the US. 

How can one write so much and say so little? Same exact dumb ideas as peefoam but at least he says it in 2 sentences. 

[seafoam1 2,799]

15 minutes ago, dogcows said:

How can one write so much and say so little? Same exact dumb ideas as peefoam but at least he says it in 2 sentences. 

All liberals are stupid. That includes you dumbass. Wake up dogshlt and face what I posted earlier.

[weepaws 3,155]

25 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

All liberals are stupid. That includes you dumbass. Wake up dogshlt and face what I posted earlier.

You are a liberal, just trying to hide it, Hypocrite.  

[jonmx 2,424]

29 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

All liberals are stupid. That includes you dumbass. Wake up dogshlt and face what I posted earlier.

Pretty much none of them are liberal anymore, they are authoritarian leftists.  The followers are the dumb ones who don't understand what they really stand for.  Some of their leaders are smart, they know what they spew is to manipulate their idiot followers. They gain wealth and power through authoritarian corruption.  

Only absolute idiots would promote censorship or locking up whistleblowers of government corruption or people for protesting or people who defend themselves.  

[Blue Horseshoe 348]

14 minutes ago, jonmx said:

Pretty much none of them are liberal anymore, they are authoritarian leftists. 

 

There's quite a bit of truth in this statement. But I'd isolate it out to the most vocal and most aggressive of Team Blue. 

I believe there is a large cross section of working class minorities that might have leaned left before, but will shift more to the center or slightly center right. The more the country falls into chaos, the more there is a huge disincentive to a low information voter. Think about the Clinton regime. The economy was pretty good, this was Pre-9/11, the Internet age was upon us, there was no hard identity politics and cancel culture and society didn't seem headed down this horrible path now. Lots of low information voters back then. There was no instant speed of information all the time. No influencers. Nothing of that nature. 

But now it's hard for someone as idiotic as Kamala Harris to hide. I'm sure there were other VPOTUS who were also idiots, but the time and place hid them better. 

I believe there are still many traditional liberals out there, but they've been slowly converted to quasi-libertarians. 

But I will always believe that high information voters will always tend to lean Conservative in nature. The more information that can be presented, the more, as jon says, the "authoritarian" nature of the radical left and establishment Democrats becomes clear. 

There are note worthy Democrats in office. Katie Porter is a very respectable elected official. She's not perfect, but she sounds like a real person trying to enact real practical policy. But since she can't be controlled and she can't do the "Heels Up Harris" routine, she is ignored. It's tragic that the general public will hear more from some blithering idiot like Cori Bush compared to someone with a lot of interesting things to say like Porter. 

jon, I've always believed the "tipping point" to expose the authoritarian nature of the establishment wing of Team Blue is to fully expose Obama. Once Obama's legacy is dragged into sunlight, then it's going to be too hard to hide the toxicity any longer. I do not believe history will be kind to Obama down the road. 

[Blue Horseshoe 348]

2 hours ago, 5-Points said:

I completely agree. If "Team Red" were to take their ball and go home, it would mean the end of the game for "Team Blue." Whereas, Team Red would simply design a new game and thrive. 

Which is why Team Blue can't allow Team Red to quit their rigged game. Hence the opposition to an amicable split by guys like Sho. 

Also, those states all have National Guard units that could serve as a temporary defensive force while millions of sympathetic others flooded in to assist and take up residence. 

It would definitely be interesting to see play out. Of course, the left could just stop with the anti-American stance they've adopted and save us all the trouble, but I'm not going to hold my breath. 

 

There are a large number of Republicans in California. But CA, Texas and Florida from a geographic standpoint is too easy to split apart and keep separate in a war time scenario. Also a functioning secession needs half of America's carrier fleet and the logistical needs won't be able to be supported by just Red safe zones. Also I'm pointing out states with major ports. Team Blue will not peacefully allow critical ports to end up in the control of the Conservative base completely. 
 

Here's one point we might completely agree on - The radical left have no boundaries whatsoever. They have no respect for basic social lines where it's long been established that no one should cross. So any "treaty" will be considered free toilet paper for the establishment Democrats. 

Any breakaway that functions will need to be a true nuclear power on it's own. 

Someone like Sho Nuff has no desire to engage in real conversation. His point is to try to bait people to react so he can try to get them banned. His routine is pretty clear. Just put him on ignore. That's my suggestion. 

But I agree with you in that most liberals and leftists don't seem to understand that it's probably Conservatives in their cities who are keeping things from completely falling apart. So again, Sho Nuff and his ilk don't have real opinions, only new angles to try to get you to be enraged so he can be a snitch. I'm "new" to this forum, but I'm not completely new to how Sho Nuff operates on other forums. 

I have no quarrel with traditional liberals. But radical leftists, my take has always been to observe them, then ignore them, then just plain feel sorry for their children. 

[jonmx 2,424]

5 hours ago, Blue Horseshoe said:

 

There's quite a bit of truth in this statement. But I'd isolate it out to the most vocal and most aggressive of Team Blue. 

I believe there is a large cross section of working class minorities that might have leaned left before, but will shift more to the center or slightly center right. The more the country falls into chaos, the more there is a huge disincentive to a low information voter. Think about the Clinton regime. The economy was pretty good, this was Pre-9/11, the Internet age was upon us, there was no hard identity politics and cancel culture and society didn't seem headed down this horrible path now. Lots of low information voters back then. There was no instant speed of information all the time. No influencers. Nothing of that nature. 

But now it's hard for someone as idiotic as Kamala Harris to hide. I'm sure there were other VPOTUS who were also idiots, but the time and place hid them better. 

I believe there are still many traditional liberals out there, but they've been slowly converted to quasi-libertarians. 

But I will always believe that high information voters will always tend to lean Conservative in nature. The more information that can be presented, the more, as jon says, the "authoritarian" nature of the radical left and establishment Democrats becomes clear. 

There are note worthy Democrats in office. Katie Porter is a very respectable elected official. She's not perfect, but she sounds like a real person trying to enact real practical policy. But since she can't be controlled and she can't do the "Heels Up Harris" routine, she is ignored. It's tragic that the general public will hear more from some blithering idiot like Cori Bush compared to someone with a lot of interesting things to say like Porter. 

jon, I've always believed the "tipping point" to expose the authoritarian nature of the establishment wing of Team Blue is to fully expose Obama. Once Obama's legacy is dragged into sunlight, then it's going to be too hard to hide the toxicity any longer. I do not believe history will be kind to Obama down the road. 

IMHO, the it started with the creation of the CIA and their recruitment of actual Nazi's to help them develop propaganda campaigns and taking over universities and the mainstream news sources.   The tipping point was when they started to influence elections starting with getting LBJ on JFKs ticket and eventually playing the lead role in his assassination and coverup.  Our elected government since that time has played a secondary role to bureaucracies and corporations. 

Most people know something is wrong with our system, but don't really have a grasp on how the corruption is organized and operates, they just know the two party system does not represent them.  Most people think what I type is crazy, but it is the absolute reality and is an accurate diagnosis of the problem. 

[dogcows 1,030]

5 hours ago, Blue Horseshoe said:

But I will always believe that high information voters will always tend to lean Conservative in nature.

You can believe it, but the facts tell a different story. Biden won 60% of college-educated voters in 2020.

[Dizkneelande 1,085]

7 hours ago, Blue Horseshoe said:

 

There's quite a bit of truth in this statement. But I'd isolate it out to the most vocal and most aggressive of Team Blue. 

I believe there is a large cross section of working class minorities that might have leaned left before, but will shift more to the center or slightly center right. The more the country falls into chaos, the more there is a huge disincentive to a low information voter. Think about the Clinton regime. The economy was pretty good, this was Pre-9/11, the Internet age was upon us, there was no hard identity politics and cancel culture and society didn't seem headed down this horrible path now. Lots of low information voters back then. There was no instant speed of information all the time. No influencers. Nothing of that nature. 

But now it's hard for someone as idiotic as Kamala Harris to hide. I'm sure there were other VPOTUS who were also idiots, but the time and place hid them better. 

I believe there are still many traditional liberals out there, but they've been slowly converted to quasi-libertarians. 

But I will always believe that high information voters will always tend to lean Conservative in nature. The more information that can be presented, the more, as jon says, the "authoritarian" nature of the radical left and establishment Democrats becomes clear. 

There are note worthy Democrats in office. Katie Porter is a very respectable elected official. She's not perfect, but she sounds like a real person trying to enact real practical policy. But since she can't be controlled and she can't do the "Heels Up Harris" routine, she is ignored. It's tragic that the general public will hear more from some blithering idiot like Cori Bush compared to someone with a lot of interesting things to say like Porter. 

jon, I've always believed the "tipping point" to expose the authoritarian nature of the establishment wing of Team Blue is to fully expose Obama. Once Obama's legacy is dragged into sunlight, then it's going to be too hard to hide the toxicity any longer. I do not believe history will be kind to Obama down the road. 

Smith Mundt modernization act 2012. Obama Made Using Propaganda On U.S. Citizens Legal.