Tree in Mirror
I’m curious: How are you prepared for the swamp to win?
If the swamp wins our savings are worthless, the boarder is no more, voting is the same here as in North Korea, energy costs will skyrocket, medical care will be rationed, lawlessness rules the land.
Other than building a bunker, how do you prepare for that?
You prepare for the results. In this case the DC swamp is similar in nearly all aspects to fascism.
The swamp has disdain for the recognition of human rights. Because the swamp’s fear of enemies, the need for its own security is primary, so the regime will persuade that human rights can be ignored in certain situations because of this need. Most of the sheep will look the other way, or even approve of torture, executions, assassinations and long incarcerations of political dissidents. Change your party registration to Democrat as a safety measure as there is no longer a “real” vote anyway.
The swamp will then begin identifying the enemies of the America that they rule. They will attempt to rally a patriotic frenzy over a need to eliminate the common foe: MAGA in this case. Limit discussions with those around you to those you trust, show yourself as a blank screen to all others. Do not proselytize. The result of Martyrdom is still death. Guerrilla games are played in the shadows and are more effective.
The swamp already controls mass media, either by government regulation or the sympathetic media spokesman. Censorship will begin in earnest, even more so than today. Find other safe outlets for voice, start with secure VPN on the internet, use search engines that do not track. Find the dark web, much useful information to be found there. Don’t go to the hedonistic or hack sites, as more than likely these sites will either attempt to defraud or gain leverage over you.
The Swamp is obsessed with its own security. How many times was it said that MAGA is a threat to “our democracy”? The game plan is obvious: The Swamp is “democracy” and MAGA is the “threat.” If the DC Swamp wins, MAGA is going down. The so-called “Patriot Act” allows the government in charge of DC to monitor every aspect of the American citizen, from geolocation on your phone, your “smart” car, even the little light that indicates one of your tires is low comes from a device inside the rim of the tire that emits a signal. Drive and maintain a pre-smart car, leave your phone at home when travelling locally. Leave as little in the open as possible.
Corporate power is protected by the swamp. The industrial and business aristocracy of the fascist swamp often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite. Think WEF and G20. Do not bend to foreign control of your government.
The swamp is rife with rampant cronyism and corruption. The swamp regime is governed by groups of friends and associations who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders. I see this as where the swamp finally overplays its hand. A destitute population (armed at that) either goes full revolution or anarchy, either way the writing will be on the wall.
This is where the tide changes, this is what will lead to the new America.
“Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose”.
So yes, I am prepared if in fact the DC swamp is victorious. I am also prepared if we are able to overcome the swamp in the next election only in a far different direction than what I stated above.
“What do you think? Agree or disagree? Some other point to make?”
First, an observation of “Trump Tactics” …
It seems that Trump had to learn the ropes of the New York business climate in order to make any headway for his business. What he learned allowed him to move his company forward. It seems that for the most part, these tactics include using the pre-existing NY power structure to obtain results that he needed to survive and prosper. Being a “democrat” was a requirement. Donations to the right candidate at the
right time was also necessary. In doing so, Trump built a knowledge base of what worked, whether the actions were moral or not.
“What do you think?”
Once elected, I think that Trump was over-whelmed with the power structures built into the DC swamp. While his focus was on improving what he knew to be wrong with the way America was heading, he was less focused on the DC swamp as it began machinations that would protect itself from anything Trump could do to lessen its power. Make no mistake, the majority of elected congress at the time was “Republican”, but the real majority was the DC swamp. Trump kept his foot on the pedal to set America on the right path, but did not have a reliable team to protect him from the what the swamp was able to array. Trump was in charge, but his team consisted of who he was left to default to after the swamp removed the team members that he could rely on. From that point on, he had a two-front battle. I was left impressed by his ability to wage offensive tactics and still maintain his popularity with the American voters. He also produced three conservative supreme court justices, in spite of the DC swamp. I think at this point, even Trump knew that despite his popularity and the most weak candidate the DC swamp could muster against him for the re-election campaign, he would need to rely on individual states to protect the sanctity of the vote. When that did not happen, he relied on the individual citizen to rally against the fraud. DC swamp was not only prepared for this, but also had plans to attack Trump yet again. It would be a mistake to believe that Trump did not learn from this.
“Agree or Disagree?”
I do agree that Trump has the advantage to become the nominee for the Republican party. I also believe that the media is desperate to drive a wedge between Trump and any other MAGA popular republicans. This is probably to keep the vice-presidential nominee someone other than a one of these. Not that the media won’t turn on those same MAGA republicans in a New York minute. While Trump is assembling what he knows he will need during this next election, he is also more secretive than ever. I think this is defensive. The swamp won’t be blindsided, but what they can’t know is what Trump is preparing, only what he allows them to know. I think this makes it exciting.
“Some other point to make?”
I do not think there are many Americans that believe that the results of the last round of mid-terms was not stolen. The fact that the DC swamp critters on the red team are not raising any issues regarding this, just points out who is not for the US citizen. The border is wide open, the treasury is printing money, inflating away the savings Americans had been able to make. Now that they are running short of options, they will attempt to control everyone’s retirement accounts. I guess my point to make is that no matter what happens, one side is going to emerge victorious, either the DC swamp or the individual US citizen. I am prepared for either.
In 2003, Sandra Day O’Conner (Herself, a beneficiary of affirmative action) cast the deciding vote in Grutter vs Bollinger and cemented racial discrimination as the law of the land.
In her ruling, she said “We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary.”
That is a mind-blowing statement coming from a Supreme Court Justice. To paraphrase: “This thing is constitutional now but won’t be in the future.” Talk about your living documents! Are there any other rights that fade in and out like that?
Now there is another case before the SCOTUS regarding AA.
Some of the back and forth looks really interesting:
Justice Thomas asked Ryan Park to describe the actual benefit of a diverse classroom.
Park responded that in studies involving stock trading results, “racially diverse groups of people … perform at a higher level.”
“The mechanism there is that it reduces groupthink and that people have longer and more sustained disagreement, and that leads to a more efficient outcome,” Park said.
Thomas responded, “I guess I don’t put much stock in that because I’ve heard similar arguments in favor of segregation, too.”
And then there was this exchange between Waxman and Roberts: (Waxman is the lawyer defending Harvard’s racial discrimination policies.)
- WAXMAN: No, I know. I’m –I’m attempting to answer your question.
There is no doubt that for –as the testimony showed, that for applicants who are essentially so strong on multiple dimensions, so extraordinarily strong on multiple dimensions that they are sort of on the bubble, that they might –they have a real candidate for admission, African American –being African American or being Hispanic or in some instances being Asian American can provide one of many, many tips that will put you in.
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Well, people say that, yes, but you will have to concede, if it provides one of many, that in some cases it will be determinative.
- WAXMAN: I do. I do concede that.
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Okay. So we’re talking about race as a determining factor in admission to Harvard.
Waxman tried to recover and said that “Race, for some highly qualified applicants can be the determinative factor, just as being, you know, an oboe player in a year in which the Harvard-Radcliffe orchestra needs an oboe player will be the tip,”
“We did not fight a Civil War about oboe players,” Roberts replied. “We did fight a Civil War to eliminate racial discrimination, and that’s why it’s a matter of considerable concern.”
It would seem that the 25 years Justice O’Conner was speaking of was not until society matured past the need for affirmative action (That will never happen as long as one group benefits at the expense of another.) but that it would take 25 years before we got a conservative majority on the Supreme Court.
It looks like it will be 19 years and not Sandy’s full 25.
Trump can mean tweet all he wants in return for this Supreme Court.
It’s now been very close to a year since we ditched our Sony A7III’s and procured Sony A7IV camera.
As a now pushing 2 decade user of Sony Cameras, starting with the A100 in 2005, I was used to each subsequent camera generation being a huge improvement over the preceding in at least several important aspects. That is until the A7III to A7IV jump. Other than the sensor resolution change from 24 to 33 megapixels, the rest of the differences seem that they were closer to a firmware update than a generational change. And, frankly, I’m not at all certain that my image quality has changed much at all over the last several generations.
I’m now hearing rumors of the Sony A7V but I’m pretty sure I won’t be an early adopter.
I think the Sony that I liked the most was the small APS-C Sony A-6300. It was so small that I could carry it anywhere and you would have had to study long and hard to tell the difference between than camera’s images and the images from it’s much larger brothers. It did give up a LOT in low light though.
In 45 years of semi-serious photography starting with a early 70’s Nikon F1, I’ve come to a couple of conclusions about the order of importance of the various elements to the system that, combined, make a good photograph:
1: The photographer (at least 80% right there)
3: Camera body
3: (tie) The rest of the equipment, filters, tripods, etc.
Though this is hard to admit for an engineer, I question the extent that technical merit even plays in a good photo. Below is a shot that I took 15 years ago standing at my Fathers grave at Arlington National the day after my mother’s body was added.