How'd that work out there, Robert?

Thank you for your service, Waffler.  Please do forgive my hard headedness and ill formed and ill conceived opinions. ;-)

Right on, Logan!

Hey, Robert, I'd like to read your book!

Nails it.

Hear, hear!  That's what we thought journalists were doing, but it has been fake news for a long time now.

I don't hate liberals, and I certainly don't hate Robert -- I love Robert!  I am merely trying to understand him.

Faith in government comes to mind ...

I like "A sovereign is BORN in adversity."  You're right!

This is the justification of the-powers-that-should-not-be everywhere — to conceal the truth from the people for their own good.  Forget about the fact that the bureaucrats are just people as well.  It is the lust for POWER that tramples all — by any means necessary. 

Who would have thought that social-media would end up with the power that is has?  Propaganda has become a staple to the world's cultures now.  The Thought Police are privateers that profit from the party line.  Gossip is testimony.  Innuendo is truth.  Like Madonna, constantly reinventing themselves into dependent blamers.  Identity politics so disturbing, that Americans do not even know who they are any more!  The truth is not broadcast — and if it is, it is soon shut down.

GUTS!  It takes guts to face one's fears.  Otherwise, we are easily manipulated by ginned up Chicken Little's.  One cannot face hard and ugly truths without guts.  It takes guts to truly express oneself.  It takes guts to put up a fight against overwhelming odds.  It takes guts to take a stand — to stand for what you know is right even in the face of an ignorant mob.  Sometimes enough is enough.

The fear of war is a powerful weapon for controlling the masses — no actual war necessary.  That's literally terrorism.

Even Ron?  ;-)

"[E]very time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all."  That's the key line.  The difference between being dictated to by authorities and choosing one's own way is the issue, not the 'good' intentions.  The means do not justify the end.  The socialists are known for the phrase "by any means necessary."  This is the simple distinction from a republican form of government and an authoritarian government — respect for the rights and freedom of the people themselves.

Cancel culture is the epitome of socialism — ban this, ban that, shut these people up, take away their voice, lock 'em up, ban them from the public square.  The thought police are more empowered than ever — and they see it as their duty to silence any opposition to 'the Party' line.  It's one party rule — classic communism.

It's a corruption of the Christian way.  Being content to work for the general welfare and sharing one's wealth is truly noble — as long as it is voluntary.  As soon as it is compelled by law (i.e. socialism), it is servitude — and it has never been implemented equally among the people — the leaders live an elitist life of graft and collusion.  If the people themselves maintain the spirit of 'my cup runneth over' the work takes care of itself.

Interesting take.

Or else reap what you sow ...

It's literally insane.

No matter the argument, the opposition will refuse an understanding.

The Trump impeachment sham comes to mind ... watching the dominoes fall.

It only took 233 years for Hamilton's warning to come true.  It was the US Constitution that prevented the partisan coup d'etat by the Congress.  The efforts to fundamentally transform the US government into a Politburo should be as clear as day to Americans.  Face it, the goal is one party rule — you are either a member of the Democratic Party or you are a political criminal to be mobbed, robbed, bound, gagged, and dragged in bloodthirsty rage.

Since Congress makes the laws, I suppose Mad Maxine believes they can make it up as they go along — which they do!  Except now the House can't wait for the fix to be in the Senate.  Drunk with power — socialism on steroids.  A failed political coup that has been culminating for 3 years.  Deranged and delusional. 

'There can be no crime without a law' but can a law be written or unwritten, express or implied?  The interpretation of the supposed law is still required — that is to say, written, not merely implied.

I thought there could be no crime without mens rea, a malicious intent.  First there has to be an injury to life, liberty, property.  A jury may judge whether the injury was intentional, if so, it is criminal according to the Common Law.  If unintentional, then no crime, but still amends are due if the injured party does not  forgive the violation.