The smashing of windows, burning of cars and trash barrels in the streets is not what I would call peaceful. Yes, the power was transferred from a Democrat in the White House to a Republican, but so far it has been anything but peaceful.
Also witness the unhinged lunacy on the part of the folks that lost the election. That pinch-faced liberal hag on the Alaskan Airlines flight who completely lost her composure, got kicked off the plane after she berated her fellow passenger simply because he suggested that he did not adhere to her extreme liberal views of how things should be run in our country. Peaceful transfer of power? Hardly.
A woman was being interviewed at the Washington D.C. women's rally on Saturday and said (I paraphrase here) "if women continue to march in the streets, it will lead to action." I would be curious to know just what kind of 'action' this cretin is talking about. Does she think that Donald Trump, when seeing protests against him will simply abdicate his office, and swear Hillary Clinton to the presidency? I believe she just might think this will happen. And of course most people with half a brain understand that this will never happen.
Or maybe she really doesn't know what kind of 'action' she wants, she just knows that things didn't go her way, and she truly believes in her teensy brain that she should get what she wants when she wants it. And that stomping her feet, setting things on fire and smashing windows will achieve these goals. Much like a 4-year old in K-Mart, who throws a wild tantrum when mommie doesn't buy him that box of Fruit Loops.
What she is talking about, all of this 'action' rhetoric, is something that everybody else except unthinking dolts like her and her movement understands: she is talking about violent revolution.
This is how people have transferred power in every other society on earth since man crawled out of the ooze: not until our Founding Fathers wrote up how things could peacefully change with the results of peaceful elections, social change was handled by the most people with the biggest guns and the angriest voices leading the largest mobs, leading to lots of blood in the streets. This was how it was done back in the good ol' days.
By the looks of this past week, this is going to be how the Left wants things to return to; gunfire and bloodshed. Unfortunately, the Left has never really been keen on gun ownership, and they have not thought this revolution thing all the way through: the only way revolutions work is with an armed movement, and the only side in this upcoming skirmish that is openly and proudly armed is the other side (that would be me and my ilk). Sure, they are familiar with Molotov cocktails, crow bars, sticks and stones, but guns? Uh uh.
I don't see this working out for the liberal commie pinkos in the end. This revolution business requires fire power, something they are still a bit squeamish about. And until that changes, they will be resigned to setting garbage cans on fire, and getting arrested.
Some revolution. But they will eventually get it figured out, and once that happens, the notion of 'peaceful transfer of power' would be a quaint memory.
.jpg)
19 comments:
They're already running out of steam because they have no real cause. Womyn's rights? Ah, no. The only thing they're concerned about is being able to have us pay for their abortions. That's it. In another week they'll have gone the way of the dodo bird.
Most women are repelled by them and their behavior.
Adrienne: the ink has hardly even dried on this post and you are commenting. You are probably right, this 'flash mob' is here today, gone tomorrow. But they are still irked. We'll see what kind of gumption this 'movement' has in the coming weeks and months.
Hard to say what 'most women' would say about these vulgar harridans (your word). I am not sure The Donald got the majority of the fairer sex's vote. I would certainly hope that most women are repelled by them and their behavior, but this last national election has me wondering.
Spoiled brats who never grew up. Maybe if they play with matches and gasoline enough they'll all self-immolate, and we'll be rid of them!
Now, drjim, that would play into their violence theme. We could certainly get by just peachy with less of them, I'm not disputing that.
I've read that Trump got 53% or so of the white woman's vote. I follow what is going on by my commie brother's ex-girlfriend posts on Facecrap, who is a screaming liberal. She has become completely unhinged to point of thinking that a sign at the St. Paul march that said we should grab Trump by his nutsacks was really cool. At an event with lots of kids present? I call that unhinged. So - anyhoo - other than incoherent rantings, nothing much is being done. Supposedly, the organizers is wanting all those women to send postcards to their representatives. Yeah - that'll make a big difference.
Some of these morons are dangerous Fredd, but I do think these cockroaches will just fade back into the woodwork when they realize they had no idea why they were protesting, marching, wasting their time.
Soros is the focus. Dude needs to move on to the next life by God's hand.
DJT's new Law and Order America will deal with this pond scum.
Now the media, that's another story. They'll never stop. And unfortunately, people will never stop clicking on their links or switching to their channels, keeping their ad revenue alive and well.
Kid: the dangerous crowd is extremely small, and they are the professionals among the idiots.
That damn Nazi Soros needs to move on to the next life, for sure. He's messing up this one.
Adrienne, post cards to reps in congress. How quaint. When has that ever worked? For anybody?
The march cost Soros $90 million. And he's not running out of money anytime soon. I'm not saying that all of the women who showed up were hirelings, but it took $90 million to organize it.
The Dems want a Tea Party, but that isn't how the Tea Party formed or how it worked. Naturally, they don't understand it.
LL: sure, who wouldn't want a Tea Party? Those guys kicked butt, and put the gavels back into Republican hands. The Dems saw that, and they want some, too.
But all they saw was the peripheral manifestation of the Tea Party, the crowds and such. What they don't get is that those Tea Party folk are acting on their cultural beliefs that have been passed down over the last 230 years. You know, from the Founding Fathers.
The Dems are trying to look like the Tea Party, but they have no soul. Much like little kids seeing the real Ft. Ticonderoga, going home and building a make believe Ft. Ticonderoga using sofa cushions, kitchen chairs and blankets: there you go - a fort!
Yet they wonder why they don't get the electoral results that the Tea Party did. And they never will. These idiots only beliefs are free stuff for everybody, and no rules: money for nothing and your chicks for free.
I am of the mind that it will simply blow up in their faces................just a gut feeling you understand.
Glenn: I hope you're gut feeling is right, Chief. And even when it does blow up in their faces, the media coverage that this failure will get will be negligible. And if nobody sees that it blew up in their face, did it really blow up in their face?
Excellent post, Fredd...So true; if America could count on anything, and countries could use as examples for their own elections, peaceful transition was it. But the Left can't have THAT! Maybe that's just another thing they screwed up so they can keep proving we're NOT GREAT?!
My Ethiopian friend said "Z, in Ethiopia, governments don't change without knives out.."
He's here about 10 years, from a VERY influential family in Ethiopia....and is now an American citizen; a Republican.
Z: I, too, recall a the-recent immigrant from Ethiopia laughing at me for my angst in 2000, when Al Gore and the left were doing their level best to steal the election from George W. Bush. This guy just took it all in stride, telling me that this fooling around with hanging chads, recounts and more recounts until the right outcome is achieved, that's how it was in most of Africa, where newly independent countries were feeling their growing pains with democracy.
He told me not to lose sleep over it, as he said that most everyone else on the planet put up with these kinds of shenanigans all the time. It was relatively new to us here in the U.S.
Well, Freddo, you and LL were right about Ex Machina. Masterpiece.
Grunt: yes, a gem of Sci Fi. Did you find it within yourself to overlook some of the phony baloney tech stuff? Like perhaps Ava's interchangeable arm scene at the end?
Fredd- You know, I found it surprisingly easy to overlook stuff like the snap-on arm and the self-healing, peel-on, peel-off skin.
These guys were fairly low-budget, so it's understandable that the shop where the robots were made was sparsely outfitted, and so forth. Somehow, they pulled this off with a fraction of the costs of a typical Sci-Fi drama of its kind. Impressive, really.
But most important: they did their homework. The script was very intelligent and didn't insult to audience. I loved the philosophical/analytical details. The Promethian liver torture of Nathan's character. They realistically revealed some of the complexities and problems of AI. Loved the ending twist. Gruntessa hated it, but it worked, I thought.
Just watched "Requiem for Methuselah" from Season 3 of the Trek series back in '68, which was apparently the primary inspiration for "Ex Machina." In the "robot morgue" scene towards the end, when Kirk pulls back the sheet from "Rayna #13" or whatever, the face is the spitting image of Alicia Vikander. Crazy.
Grunt: I remember that episode, as I was addicted to Star Trek back in the day, and I was 13 when this episode premiered.
Post a Comment