Avatar of Gwynbleidd
  • Last Seen: 4 yrs ago
  • Joined: 10 yrs ago
  • Posts: 1247 (0.33 / day)
  • VMs: 3
  • Username history
    1. Gwynbleidd 6 yrs ago
    2. █████████ 10 yrs ago

Status

User has no status, yet

Bio

User has no bio, yet

Most Recent Posts

RE2. Doom Eternal. Sekiro? Cyberpunk 2077? Literally New Year's Eve is the anticipated release date. I see what you're doing CDPR. Cyberpunk 2020. Nice. Never got enough into Kingdom Hearts to look forward for numero tres, maybe I should go back and try that out again. That's all I've got at the top of the head atm.
100 pages into Don Quixote rn. This shit is hilarious.
War is the continuation of politics by other means.

- Clausewitz
<Snipped quote by Gwynbleidd>

And Justice League has an audience of 74% so clearly audiences are stupid.


So you say. Granted, I haven't watched that or any other super hero movies in several months now. Kind of tired of the same old same old. The Marvel films aren't that great once you watch them a second time, but that's just me.
Venom's got an audience 88%, though, so, probs take dem critics with a tiny pinch of salt. Or a full pitcher. Or an ocean. Whatever floats le boat.
I hate to butt in, but the wording of 'conservative' and 'liberal'— rather, the way they've been misconstrued in American politics— is always something that ticked me off. On a traditional political scale, conservative means authoritarian and liberal means libertarian: i.e., conservative referring to traditional group-oriented politics, while liberal refers to progressive individualism. Oddly enough, in politics, it's noted that the scale got flipped 90 degrees, to which the authoritarian right is 'conservative' and the whole left is 'liberal', with no proper words left standing for the libertarian right.


At some point we decided words can change in meaning and usage, which is fair... to an extent. To my mind, the concept of conservatism being authoritarian is structurally unsound historically. Conservatism is based in small government and the individual rights of man, which is the ideological opposite of authoritarianism. Libertarianism (as it stands today), arguably, is the true original form of conservatism which would also make it closest to the vision of the founding fathers. You're not alone in the irritation of shifting definitions. Liberal no longer means what it was meant to mean anymore, and the same could be said of conservatism. Both of these shifts are responsible by far left individuals outright changing what the parties stand for, and this goes for the Mitt Romney's, McCain's, and the Bush's who significantly expanded government power. I'd also add that Obama did the same thing: see the NDAA.

This is why I'm particularly glad that Trump is in office, we can now see who is ACTUALLY conservative and who is not. And, he's also getting politicians to reveal how left of center they truly are.
<Snipped quote by Gwynbleidd>

There's a lot of SCOTUS drama this week which is making me raise eyebrows. There was a ruling against federal employee union dues (basically allowing people to opt out) and the left (or rather, the left on Reddit) lost their absolute SHIT over "the backbone of their funding" being struck down.... meanwhile I'm like, "how is there a law on the books that funds the democrat party?" But I'm union-dumb, if anyone has the inside track on what's up with that, I'm interested in a take.

Trump getting a second SCOTUS nominee is better than Clinton getting a SCOTUS nominee, so I say we're all winning. Once again, the Reddit left is imploding with catastrophic terror -- over (I think?) a judge who's going to, like, enforce the law. I'm, uh.... yeah. I think that's.... what a judge is... supposed to, um.... do.... Anyway Trump is Trump so the nominee could be anyone from a Neil Gorsuch lookalike (win) to Peppa Pig, I guess I'll reserve judgment until I see who we actually get, but so far the track record pleases me. 1/1 on picks to date. I like this.

Remember if Clinton won, there would be no more second amendment the minute Kennedy stepped down (unless Hillary was able to sell the seat to a higher bidder).


If Clinton won, America would be headed towards a catastrophic war with Russia. Thank the Lord this did not happen. There's a lot to be thankful for regarding her not claiming the presidency.

I've been hearing some about Ted Cruz, which is highly doubtful. One, why repeat the mistake of Alabama. Don't fuck with a senate seat that the incumbent has massive popularity with.

Then, there's Jeanine Pirro which would be... a complete troll move. As much as I enjoy the thought, I don't think it's the right pick. There's a lot of talk about Britt Grant or Amy Coney Barrett. I'm going to predict it'll be one of these two, especially because it seems to fit a recent trend of Trump appointing women into high positions within our government.

If I had MY choice: Thomas Rex Lee would be the selection. Although, I do really like Britt Grant.
Anthony Kennedy is retiring. I suspect Trump will select a "conservative" judge as the Democrats seem to point out, and the funny thing is is that the Constitution of the United States is a conservative document by its nature and by the nature of those who wrote it. After the travel ban ruling, which I find Constitutionally legal and absolutely necessary, this is another great step forward to ending the regression our country has had and hopefully prevents us from making the same mistake with irresponsible mass refugee admissions or illegal alien amnesties that have plagued the EU.

It should be noted I'm unaware of whether the EU has granted amnesties to illegal border crossers or not, I'm more connecting the refugees and illegals as similar problems EU countries and the United States currently confront.
@River Goblin something something broken clocks
<Snipped quote by Gwynbleidd>

spoken like a true American


Yessiree! I'm just out 'ere a try'n to spread y'all the good word. God Bless.
© 2007-2024
BBCode Cheatsheet