All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. D, It's a mistake to get lost in trying to define jargon. Soak up this new stuff and let it bounce around in your head for awhile. Magic happens later... Confucius say: Teach others only what you know. Michael EDIT: btw - The guy with the sword is a story with very clear plot beats. Man is living life. Bad guys attack. Man gets weapon and goes out to meet attackers. The bad guys beat him up and almost kill him. The bad guys run off and man goes to hospital. Zoom out. The press reacts (goes ape shit) as the press people attack each other. The politicians drone on... fade out... The end.
  3. Ellen, This is the issue: I am 1000% sure of his reelection. I didn't think it possible, but we are witnessing a fake news mainstream media assault against Trump and Trump supporters that dwarfs the 3+ years of the "Muh Russians" hoax. The problem for these ruling class elitist idiots is they are few. They make themselves look like many, but they are few. Pay attention to the news from one aspect. When they show riots, notice that they show the same goddam clips over and over and over. The clips are shock clips of fires, angry crowds, police looking like they are getting their jackboots on, and so on. But they are the same goddam clips from station to station and they are on loops. Also, the clips are never out in the suburbs, only in specific neighborhoods of cities. As to Trump's handling of the virus, I won't give him an A+, but I think he did just fine if you take into account the Deep State's influence surrounding Fauci & Co. when the problem happened. As time went on, I look at certain results and just don't see incompetence. For the most obvious stat, I see very few deaths compared to what was spread all over the place by the Deep State propaganda machine. Millions and millions of Americans were supposed to have died. I also see President Trump got hydroxychloroquine into general acceptance the world over despite a massive campaign to falsely discredit it and make way for far more expensive treatments. How did he do that? He took it himself. There is no way the machine could have fought that and won, although, even so, they tried. Now their efforts are all disintegrating into dust. The main report they used against hydroxychloroquine is now shown to be a fake. And I see a brilliant use of the event to stop the Chinese Communist Party cold in its tracks. Before the disease, the USA had a massive China problem due to its infiltration in America. Now the USA no longer has a China problem, or let's say the threat went from a 10 down to about a 1. If Hillary Clinton had been president, we would have had mandatory vaccines by now and contact tracers galore worrying the shit out of everybody. And probably a serious eruption of infections with a high number of deaths. That's how I say she would have handled this situation. And she would have laughed about it in her famous "We came, We saw, He died, yuk yuk yuk" manner. Frankly, I think the rioting would have been worse like it was during the Obama years, with one after another going on year after year. And nonstop nationwide movements like Occupy Wall Street, all paid for by her crony buds like Soros. If your main information about Trump is coming from the fake news mainstream media, I understand why you think as you do about his chances of reelection. But here is a stat you won't see advertised. According to Rush, who uses his own models, his weekly audience is now over 50 million, with recent jumps by leaps and bounds. This is happening despite his absences due to cancer treatment. And his audience keeps growing every day. Did you see that Drudge has come out looking like CNN these days? Well look at the backlash. Check these new Drudge-like sites out. Bongino Report Rantingly (which I like a lot for quick headlines) News Ammo What Finger News The Liberty Daily (my least favorite of these new Trump-friendly aggregator sites with high audiences) National File Thee are probably many more by now. I just haven't looked for new ones in the last few weeks. This is not to mention the standard conservative news sites like The Daily Caller, RedState, Breitbart, The Gateway Pundit and so on, or opinion sites like American Greatness. There are oodles and oodles of these things. Once you get a feel for this, you will not be able to stand looking at the mainstream news anymore, not out of hope that Trump wins. But out of disgust of the sheer amount of lying, misinformation and propaganda on them. I could go on, and I want to, after all I want to calm your fears , but as of today, the fury against the mainstream media and Deep State is hotter than I have ever seen it. Fury is not a term I ever used for Trump supporters. After the lockdown and riot scams, which is how many are now perceiving all this, I am beginning to see one pissed off massive populace that the mainstream does not want to include in its news coverage. Wait until the Trump rallies start again and you will see what I mean. Michael
  4. Yesterday
  5. Mayor Bowser is attempting to evict the National Guard that’s protecting Washington, DC, from the hotels they stay in at night. Trump says if she keeps up with her shit then they will be replaced by police of the various Executive Branch agencies such as the Justice and State Departments and military, under his direct command. The fascists are planning to overrun the White House. Don’t get too upset if it happens. It is not real. If it happens it will only be because he allowed it to happen — they can’t really overrun him or anything of his, but they may be allowed to. Such an event would wake up more people to the danger we are in. A necessary scare event, like if it were to say, burn down. It would sharpen focus and help people understand why President Trump is going to have use all the powers of the Executive to protect the People and the Republic.
  6. I suppose you mean the January 22, 2016, edition of National Review. Stuff from that came up (along with other stuff) when I searched Glenn Beck National Review. There was a "symposium" called "Conservatives against Trump": Also a piece by Beck titled "When Conservatives Needed Allies, Donald Trump Sided with Obama": (I haven't read either yet, but I will read them and some other things I found. I've gotten curious.) Beck's behavior does sound geared to "power and influence," but agreed that he could be helpful toward Trump's reelection. I think that Trump can use some help over the virus issue. I'm not so sure as you seem to be that Trump will be reelected. In an awful way, I think that this rioting is restoring some lost confidence amongst Trump fans. Trump knows how to handle rioters. What to do in fighting a disease isn't his métier. Ellen
  7. Maybe this is the key? "This" being reading the other person. Not being able to tell what they know, but being able to tell when they are being honest and when they are covering up an inconvenient gap.
  8. Thank you for the thorough reply, Michael. I read it and watched the videos and it has got me thinking. One problem I'm having trouble getting over is the imprecision in the term/concept of a "story." The story arc as a definition uses imprecise language also. "Rising action," etc. This is fine to use as a guide in creating a story, but as a crucial concept in explaining how people's minds are changed I just don't like it. What is the difference between a "story" and a situation? You could say that a story has a beginning, middle and end. But why can't you say that of a situation? And what's more, could you not argue that the beginning of the story isn't really the beginning and the end is not really the end? Doesn't the beginning and end both exist in the listener/reader's mind? The beginning is the person's preconceived view of reality. The end takes what happened in the story and combines it with that view of reality to take it farther (a woman might think a romantic story ends with the couple living happily ever after where a man might wonder when certain things the woman does start to become annoying). You could say the beginning of the story is the listener/reader's entire life leading up to this story, and the end will play out for the rest of their life--my point being that there is no way to prevent someone's lived experiences and beliefs from seeping into the story. For example, take the recent video of the man with the sword defending a local bar from a mob of rioters. This is a situation, not a story, but it definitely gets people hormones going. And yet some people react to it callously. I read one girl's response: "Looks like self-defense to me." Then consider the criticisms of Atlas Shrugged. They argue that Rand is a bad author; that the STORY is bad. Perhaps the impressive effects stories have on the mind depend on what I said above, that you can only build on top of someone's existing beliefs. I love the example in the Ted Talk of the James Bond movie, though. It ties in to my other thread about persuasion. It has NOTHING to do with the watch, and everything to do with the man/person. But the story did not convince the viewer that James Bond is a cool guy, it created a story around the already existing idea of "coolness" and fleshed it out. So as much as story-telling influences what we think is true, perhaps a good story must be rooted in truth to begin with. What I think stories and situations do, by raising hormones, is they create stakes in real-time. Now we do not just have theories floating around that we can think about at our leisure, but a specific set of circumstances in which to put those theories to the test. The story may make us think, "Oh, I'm wrong about that," or, "That's SO true." But the ultimate goal of HONEST persuasion must be to get the person to THINK. The only way people are going to be skeptical of what they hear and see is if they have competing theories in their head. If they have one theory, like it seems a lot of people do right now, they get crazy.
  9. Nice sarcasm there... it's good to see your pointing out to us that racism (to quote one of my betters) "negates two aspects of man’s life: reason and choice, or mind and morality, replacing them with chemical predestination" and is an error of the highest order and of the lowest most crudely primitive form.
  10. It’s daydreaming time again. The Mega Millions lottery is at 378 million dollars if you get the payout over time. The next drawing is today Friday June 5, at 11pm. Tickets cost 2 dollars each. The immediate cash payment is 297.6 million, but the after taxes take home amount is only 55 percent of that so . . . If you win tonight you walk away with 163.68 million dollars after taxes!!! Gamble responsibly. I am going to buy two tickets at Goose Creek gas station near Fenwick Island, Delaware. Next week, after depositing my check I may hire a financial advisor but I think I could make some good investment choices myself. From Downton Abbey. "That chap Ponzi has some excellent investment for us!" Where would you invest the money? Peter
  11. The DOW at 1:21 pm Friday, June 5, 2020: at 27,234.33, up 955 or so, may be around the pre-coronavirus highs if I remember correctly. edit. I was wrong. From “The Balance:” “The highest closing record is 29,551.42 set on Feb. 12, 2020.” So we still have a ways to go to get to the highs before the coronavirus turned us into hermits.
  12. Siri Plus? You have heard both our explanations. Which is correct? Well Dave, you made two logical and one factual error, and James was always right except for the conclusion he reached. So, I would say both of you are wrong.
  13. I'm posting this before reading your reply. I'm going to read it soon and before posting again. I just was thinking and reading about a priori reasoning and I think I have my answer to why some stories attract one audience over another: bias. Simple answer, yes, but the root of that bias is THEORY. That is to say that they don't look for a story they agree with, they accept the stories that agree with them. That's not to say that empiricism is not the final arbiter of what is true and false, BUT we do not look for evidence unless we have already made up some sort of theory. It gives value to what would be neutral information. You cannot break down someone's beliefs, but only build on a competing belief and let them break down the false belief on their own. For someone to believe anything they must first believe that they are capable of knowing the truth. That means the most important appeal is an appeal to someone's intellect. For example I might start a discussion with a leftist by asking, "Do you believe we should be allowed to own property at all? Should I be allowed to walk into your house and use your possessions?" More libertarian leaning people are relatively more tolerant (less authoritarian) of other people's choices and lifestyles, and I think the defining theory they hold is that their own ability to know is not as reliable as it seems: they are skeptical of their own theories. This is to say that although the ultimate belief is someone's belief in their own capacity to know, there is also the belief that simply feeling like you know something is not enough. This is such a big difference in the two sides.
  14. Darn I bet you have the luck of the Irish in your blood. Is your hair blond or dyed? With that red hair you must be from Scotland. My, you are so pale. Are your people from Sweden or Iceland? I don’t think it is racist to say, I am sure everyone has noticed how “African” Floyd looked. I looked up different tribes and areas and I thought the image of a person from Ghana on the African coast looked similar to him. The African continent is diverse, and some of the people look SO different from others, that you would not think they were from the same continent. For instance not all Africans have what anthropologists call the flatter, “tropical nose.” Some are dark hued and almost black, but some could pass for Hispanic in coloring. I saw a woman from what may have been Ethiopia and she had very, light blue eyes.
  15. This morning I saw some of the store camera video filming the arrest of Floyd. He was speaking but did not appear to be violent. When the cop approached the car he was driving, Floyd had his hands on the wheel. In hand cuffs when told to ease himself down onto the ground using the store front wall, he did. But he was talking the whole time but did not seem to be ranting. He did have synthetic opiates and meth in his system and we can't hear what he is saying. That minute of video is in Floyd's favor but does not show the police doing anything wrong either. Let the truth be told but using Floyd as an example of anything may not be so smart. edit. I am no "lip reader" but it seemed that Floyd was saying, "Ah man, I didn't do anything wrong."
  16. My Maryland county Worcester, is up to 230 cases which is still low. Next door Sussex county in Delaware has 20 times that number. Isolation can be a life saver even if it is state wide. I saw an ad to visit or live on an island with zero cases but I didn't click on it. I imagine you must be tested before you can go there.
  17. D, This is a long topic and it is interspersed all over the forum. I tried to look up some of my previous discussion and something weird is happening with the search function. (IPB integrates with Google at some point, so this is probably Google mucking around and playing political games.) So I will give you some things off the top of my head for you to look up on your own if you so desire. 1. DARPA. About eight years ago, DARPA did a project on storytelling (called Narrative Networks). It was trying to develop story weapons for soldiers landing in environments where the culture was vastly different (like Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.). It did not use the term propaganda, but this was obviously a huge interest. If you can influence the enemy with predictable results through story, you don't have to use as many bullets. I have gathered some of this research, but most of it is hellishly difficult to obtain as a layman. At least it was when I was doing a deep dive for it. Two excellent published books came from this research by two of the scientists DARPA hired, though. Paul Zak: The Moral Molecule: How Trust Works. An introduction (a very brief and superficial one) to Zak's DARPA work on story can be seen seen in the following video. Another excellent work that came out of DARPA's project is: Kendall Haven: Story Smart: Using the Science of Story to Persuade, Influence, Inspire, and Teach. 2. I am merely going to embed part of a post (with video) on the work of David JP Phillips. 3. In terms of evolutionary biology and story (and some more neuroscience and psychology), here are some excellent resources: Jonathan Gottschall: The Storytelling Animal: How Stories Make Us Human. A bestseller that kicked it all off in the mainstream. Brian Boyd: On the Origin of Stories: Evolution, Cognition, and Fiction. A modern classic. William Flesch: Comeuppance: Costly Signaling, Altruistic Punishment, and Other Biological Components of Fiction. This one is hellishly difficult to read since it is written in one of the worst academic styles I have ever encountered. But the information is great once you understand it. But, goddamit, the cost in effort just to read a friggin' page! It make you want to throw the damn thing agaisnt the wall. This book is where I became aware of the fundamental cognitive function of tracking and how this runs through stories. Also, why comeuppance is so important to social cohesion and story. Alex Rosenberg: How History Gets Things Wrong: The Neuroscience of Our Addiction to Stories. This one is somewhat flawed, but there is lots of fascinating and solid information you don't get at one place anywhere else. I highly recommend it, flaws and all. (Rosenberg sometimes gets too infatuated with his own brilliance and tries to make something that is specific and restricted universal just because he is so awesome. ) Will Storr: The Science of Storytelling: Why Stories Make Us Human and How to Tell Them Better. This is lighter and less complete in its scope, but still has a lot of solid information in it. Paul Joseph Gulino and Connie Shears: The Science of Screenwriting: The Neuroscience Behind Storytelling Strategies. This has important information about schemas in it, whereas most of the other works I am giving here don't cover this. Gulino is a screenwriting guru in Hollywood and Shears is a neuroscientist. Hugh Crago: Entranced by Story: Brain, Tale and Teller, from Infancy to Old Age. This made me aware of how age was super-important for the kind of story that can generate a story trance. As a bonus, I became aware of why poetry is with us and is so powerful (it stems from the way babies start learning language). Jonah Sachs: Winning the Story Wars: Why Those Who Tell (and Live) the Best Stories Will Rule the Future. This is lighter fare than the others, and is horribly progressive politically, but it is still a kick-ass book. I read this when it first came out in 2012. I was already doing a lot of research into story, but when I read this book, I ramped up my approach to focus on story and epistemology, that is, story as a manner of thinking, processing information, recording information in memory, making the narrative the base of neural pathways and networks, influencing others with story on a broad scale through mirror neurons (although I don't believe Sachs covers mirror neurons--if I remember correctly, this was a connection I started making at the same time I was reading this), etc. I believe this is enough to get you started. It only scratches the surface of what I have studied so far. And there is still so much more I need to get through--for example, the work of Uri Hasson, a neuroscientist who studies the brain and story through fMRI scans. I didn't even get to right and left brain stuff. If you ever want to get you mind blown, look up neuroscientist, Michael Gazzaniga, and his identification of the left-brain interpreter. This is the part of the brain where almost all stories come from. Gazzaniga discovered this working with people who had literally had their corpus callosum severed by surgery to help with epileptic seizures. The corpus callosum is a thick set of nerves that connect the left and right hemispheres of the brain. And speaking of left-right brain, each manages to see and interpret the world from vastly different worldviews, which is probably what gave rise to the need for the left-brain interpreter, thus the need for story. I have started a cinder-block of a book about this, The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World by Iain McGilchrist. (Holy crap! Looking up this book to provide a link, I just saw that there is an Audible version of the second edition that just came out. I have an Audible credit I haven't used, so now I will have none. I use audiobooks a lot along with my reading. They are great to keep me from being bored when I want to get familiar with something.) Also, there's the animal and neurochemical stuff of Robert Sapolsky, who is thorough, long and interesting (more cinder-block books), but always looks like he came in from a Woodstock rock concert in the 60's--on a rainy day at that. Check out a video of his on YouTube and you will see what I mean. There are several. This stuff is the foundation of story epistemology. OK, no more. There is still a ton of stuff I haven't mentioned. Good luck and I hope you go down this path. Man, will it straighten out a lot of your thinking. I mean that in a good sense, not as a put-down. (I used to think a lot like you do now, so I am saying this from that perspective.) I suggest you take it slow, though. Shifting gears like this can be disorienting until the pieces start falling in place. But once you see how easily things can be replicated from story to human behavior, a strange hunger for knowledge rises up. Here's how it felt to me when it installed: Finally! Things make sense! And I can know them with certainty without fudging! I don't have to guess anymore if a person is bullshitting... Michael
  18. I think the "story" is a POSSIBILITY. It's not that the story convinces the person of anything, but that it is MEMORABLE and therefore the truth behind the story will make its way into the person's life. They may not identify with the story at all, but over time they may see correlations between the story and their own experiences. Before the story they have only had one explanation for why things happen, now they have another option (possibility) which gives them something to think about and potentially change their mind. Truth reveals itself in all sorts of ways, but saying something memorable creates more circumstances for that truth to be verified.
  19. You will also find that people on different sides on political debates will almost always have conflicting versions of history. This is to raise the question that I asked previously: are certain people more drawn to some stories while certain people are drawn to others (does the ultimate story, the story of one's own life--one's experience) precede everything else? Or is it about how much they are exposed to one story over another that makes them choose the story they have chosen?
  20. I've read you talking about stories probably several years ago. Can you point me to the thread or part of the thread (if it's very long) where you talk about the theory of why this is the case--perhaps evolutionary reasons why we are attached to stories?
  21. Ive run across the same information she reels off but in other forums. She's not unlike my plumber who said, "I don't know what to believe anymore." Insert, its all crazy gibberish and bs. And his helper, "Its all political." The Mighty Oz spoke and people aren't listening like they did to authorities. In rounds of my local area there are slightly more masks than non masks. Phase 2 is in effect just today. Few seem to be questioning the need except as an internal dialogue. No confrontations either. Someone pointed out, Ive not yet verified, that the HIPAA penalty for businesses is $70k while in Virginia not wearing a mask is a misdemeanor carrying a $2500 fine. The Governor then adds a contradiction that further demasks his authority saying he wont enforce it with police but with health workers. Most stores post a letter indicating a hands off approach, not asking why no mask instead assuming under HIPAA the non wearer has a medical reason for non adherence. The messaging surrounding Floyd registers as weird, incomplete, fishy and questionable. You're right, it adds up to turn off the boob tube, there's nothing here of merit. There are too many holes in reporting from MMS and the actions of leaders pushing pandemic and racism for the average nincompoop. Everyone's sniffer is on full alert and questioning it all from different angles non stop. Thats what I see. Everyone has encountered this as a youngster. Upon hearing one message that exposes the speaker as hypocritical and confused the adolescent learns that Mom and Pop aren't omniscient, not even close more like not with it resulting in being "turned off." It usually starts when you meet a friend who wonders what the hell is going on in your home.
  22. The following video is fantastic. It's on BitChute, so click on the image below and the video will open in a new window. I have to use the BitChute version because this video is being deleted and banned by Big Tech (Facebook, YouTube, etc.) I don't know how factual it is (I see it as malarkey mixed with fact ), but man does it stomp all over the mainstream narrative much in the same manner the video by Candace Owens did (which was completely factual). Remember, at this point, it doesn't matter whether the video is mostly false or mostly true. Didn't the mainstream news turn into a nonstop public lying machine over the last few years? They are the ones who made it OK to delete facts from news and just keep to made-up stories. They are the ones who set these new rules. So there is no point in judging this video above by one standard and the mainstream news by another. Truth doesn't matter any more in that arena. What matters is if this video will help dilute and counteract the ruling class establishment fake news narrative with normal people. And it does. Which is pissing off mightily the ruling class elitist establishment. We already know Big Tech thinks this video is dangerous. If they didn't, if they thought it is nothing but inconsequential nonsense, they would not have banned it and run the risk of the Streisand Effect kicking in. What's worse for them, the Streisand Effect did kick in and this video is spreading virally all over the Internet, even where it is banned. People keep putting up new copies as fast as the old ones are taken down. What's more, the lady, Winnie Heartstrong, does have bonafide credentials that sound awfully good to the lay person. For those who study propaganda, you probably know that the purpose of this video is not to debunk the mainstream narrative. On the surface it claims to be, but that is the story for show. Underneath, the water runs deep. Is George Floyd alive or dead? Who cares? The purpose of that video to make people laugh at the mainstream narrative and puppetmasters, to get people to not take any of it seriously. The authoritarians really hate this stuff when it is effective. That's why this video is fantastic. I will be keeping an eye on Ms. Winnie Heartstrong. I have a feeling she is not going to go away anytime soon. From this first contact I have had with her, I say she is not a stupid woman, that she knows full well how the game is played and is playing it like a virtuoso. She hit all the flash points in this George Floyd story, one right after another, without a pause. In my experience, that is not an accident. And I love it. Michael
  23. D, You don't read carefully. That's not what I said. I said that's how wars happen. But even so, I'll take it. That is how wars are started. No core story. No war starts. The following remark is for the reader in case this sparked anyone's interest. The difference between "start" and "happen" when talking about war is huge. This is not just hair-splitting. We can start something one way, continue it another, and end it another. When we say "happen," we are including the beginning, middle and end. A war needs a core story in place in the society of each side to start, to continue and to end. This is a long discussion and those who have read me for a while know basically what I mean. Let's just say, Ayn Rand understood this. That's why she wrote Atlas Shrugged in mythological form and not, say, using Lenin or Stalin in her story along with historical events. Atlas Shrugged might be modern in its setting, but it is still mythological. That's one of the reasons it persists in the mainstream whereas many good books have fallen into the footnotes of history. It is also why she wrote about Howard Roark and reverence, worship and other religious emotions, using the story of Roark to elicit those emotions in the reading public. (See the Introduction to the Twenty-fifth Anniversary Edition of The Fountainhead for her discussion of this--you can read it online here.) She is providing a core story for people to use to guide the decades of their very lives in their professions. On the story wars level, a core myth that is used as a widespread frame for social organization and action cannot be destroyed. It can only be replaced by another core myth. There is no way to eliminate storytelling--especially this kind of storytelling--from human nature. A story is the only way to access the future and make it seem like the present so it can be examined. Stories bring the past, present and future into a form of awareness that humans can use to exchange ideas and share knowledge. Storytelling is what allows humans to think long-term. Horses and chickens don't think long term. Why? They can't tell stories. Michael
  24. Some of the violence is subsiding for now but are these crimes, in the name of racial justice going to lead to more acts of insurrection and domestic terrorism? Was this a trial run and training? I looked up mass murderers and the top domestic terrorist was listed as Timothy McVeigh. Notes. TIMOTHY McVEIGH: In arguably one of the first known acts of domestic terrorism, McVeigh detonated a bomb in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. The explosion killed 168 people and injured hundreds more. McVeigh was executed by lethal injection. TED BUNDY: Another infamous American mass murderer, Bundy kidnapped, raped and decapitated at least 30 people between 1974 and 1978. He was executed in 1989. AILEEN WUORNOS: Immortalized by Charlize Theron in the 2003 film “Monster,” Wuornos was arrested for killing seven men that she claimed had tried to rape her. She was executed by lethal injection in Florida in 2002. Photo: Florida Department of Corrections, Wikipedia Commons, Public Domain CARLTON GARY: Gary was executed March 15, 2018, for murdering three elderly women in Columbus in the late 1970s. Known as the “Stocking Strangler,” seven deaths were attributed to Gary even though he was ultimately tried for the murders of only three women. For seven months in 1977 and 1978, the murders paralyzed Columbus and terrorized older women living in the community. JOHN WAYNE GACY: One of the nation’s most chilling mass murderers, Gacy was famous for dressing like a clown for children’s events and fundraisers. He sexually assaulted and killed 33 young men between 1972 and 1978. He was sentenced to death for 12 of his murders and spent 14 years on Death Row. He was executed by lethal injection in 1994.
  25. I remember how political authors and Rand herself rethought the left / right political map that used to have the communists on the far left and the fascists on the far right. Instead, ALL totalitarian systems are parked next to each other. Brant wrote, "that left is intellectually and morally dead RIGHT NOW." A zombi doesn't know it's dead, does it? Our country, our families and our lives need four more years of civilization with President Trump. Declaring Antifa a terrorist organization was just and just brilliant. I hope there are trials like Abby Hoffman and other leftists who were tried years ago. Maybe there will be the busting down of doors and shootouts? Death to totalitarians!
  26. This country is in a state of fulmination. --Brant I expect to see beautiful things before I die--the secondary death of the now zombie left that left is intellectually and morally dead RIGHT NOW Ayn Rand didn't know half of what she was up against, but she still had the left by the balls
  27. Michael Malice always has some nuanced and interesting opinions/takes on what's going on. He has been early on multiple scandals before the public was aware, he talks to some interesting people and is quite familiar with Rand. Here's his most recent video with the author of The Cave and the Light, Arthur Herman.
  1. Load more activity