Re: Re: For the Californians
By: MRO to Dumas Walker on Sun Nov 02 2025 15:38:56

I don't question that the entire government is corrupt, but having
one person in charge of everything, including deciding who the "bad
ones" are, is dangerous and wrong. Other countries that tried

you dont know because it has never truly been done.
there hasnt been a good guy in charge of everything and everybody.

There is not one now. Again, this is proof that you, like all the others you accuse of not doing so, don't know much about how our government works/is supposed to work.

As for being run by corporations and big pharma, you are suggesting that we narrow it down to only one person to be controlled by these interests. Do you see the problem there?

At least in my state, we have at least two congresspeople who are at least trying to buck the system. Get rid of them, and ones like them, and there is one person left who likes attention and is very much not above giving favors away for it.
---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: Re: For the Californians
By: Dumas Walker to MRO on Mon Nov 03 2025 09:01 am

There is not one now. Again, this is proof that you, like all the
others you accuse of not doing so, don't know much about how our
government works/is supposed to work.

you're probably confusing it with how i said it should be in regards to what it is. i actually studied this junk for 4 years in school. it's still in there but it's not quickly accessable.

the most important thing is to understand the different branches and what
they can do. then you're almost all the way there with understanding how govt works. anybody can do that.

As for being run by corporations and big pharma, you are suggesting
that we narrow it down to only one person to be controlled
by these interests. Do you see the problem there?

i think you mistyped there. we need to stop allowing politicians from being bought out. we need to have term limits. we need a lot of things . they shouldnt be able to play the stocks on what they vote on.

At least in my state, we have at least two congresspeople who are at
least trying to buck the system. Get rid of them, and ones like
them, and there is one person left who likes attention and is very
much not above giving favors away for it.

death sentence or life in prison for treason.
that might stop it.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Gamgee wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-

Yeah that's true, but it's not really an accurate portrayal of what's actually happening. The proposition was created by the CA legislature (hugely dominated by Democrats), championed and pushed by the
Democratic governor (and other national-level Democrats), and will be voted on state-wide, which of course leans dramatically to the left.
The result will likely be the loss of 5 Republican house seats in the
very small number of GOP districts.

I'm not so sure about that - the metropolitan areas are strongly
democrat, but you don't need to go too far out to see TRUMP 2028 flags
in the back of pickup trucks.

I've seen more "No on 50" signs than Yes, but the yes TV campaigns are
more pervasive.

Tell me that's not gerrymandering, just as it's being done in Texas.
Can you do that with a clear conscience? Be honest.

Are you accusing California lawmakers of fighting unfairly in an
already unfair fight?

IMHO, those law makers are in the same "bully/dictator/abusive/don't
give a crap" boat that you see Trump in. "They did it first" wasn't a valid excuse when you were a kid and it isn't one for Politicians now, either.

Ethics for thee, but not for me.

That is the central plank in the Kalifornia Democrat political
platform.

... "I'm a lawyer." "Honest?" "No, the regular kind."
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
Synchronet Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
þ Synchronet þ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Gamgee <=-

Yeah that's true, but it's not really an accurate portrayal of what's actually happening. The proposition was created by the CA legislature (hugely dominated by Democrats), championed and pushed by the
Democratic governor (and other national-level Democrats), and will be voted on state-wide, which of course leans dramatically to the left.
The result will likely be the loss of 5 Republican house seats in the
very small number of GOP districts.

I'm not so sure about that - the metropolitan areas are strongly
democrat, but you don't need to go too far out to see TRUMP 2028 flags
in the back of pickup trucks.

Come on man. Are you just playing dumb, or do you really not understand
how these things work?

Here's some info that you apparently don't know. California has 52
House seats. 43 of them are Democrats. FOURTY-THREE. What does that
mean? It means that almost ALL of California chooses Democrats to
represent them, and therefor Proposition 50 is GUARANTEED to pass. Do
you really not understand that?

Tell me that's not gerrymandering, just as it's being done in Texas.
Can you do that with a clear conscience? Be honest.

Are you accusing California lawmakers of fighting unfairly in an
already unfair fight?

You didn't answer the question. You dodged it.

As I said in the top paragraph, this whole Prop 50 business is authored, championed, promoted, and forced, by Democrats. Please try again to
answer me regarding whether or not this is gerrymandering by California Democrats. A 3rd-grader "they started it" answer is not an answer.



... Apathy Error: Strike any key...or none, for that matter.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: For the Californians
By: MRO to Dumas Walker on Mon Nov 03 2025 14:02:07

As for being run by corporations and big pharma, you are suggesting
that we narrow it down to only one person to be controlled
by these interests. Do you see the problem there?

i think you mistyped there. we need to stop allowing politicians from bein > bought out. we need to have term limits. we need a lot of things . they
shouldnt be able to play the stocks on what they vote on.

No, I didn't mistype. I was pointing out that, with a dictator, there is only one person for these special interests to target vs. many. With many, they have a more difficult road -- obviously not an impossible one -- in order to get what they want. With a single person in charge, once you have them bribed,that is it.

You are spot on about the stock trading. This, IMHO, is a form of insider trading and should be treated as such by our legal system.
---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: Re: For the Californians
By: Dumas Walker to MRO on Tue Nov 04 2025 08:41 am

i think you mistyped there. we need to stop allowing politicians
from bein > bought out. we need to have term limits. we need a lot
of things . they shouldnt be able to play the stocks on what they
vote on.

No, I didn't mistype. I was pointing out that, with a dictator,
there is only one person for these special interests to target
vs. many. With many, they have a more difficult road -- obviously

okay, do you think trump could be swayed by the pharm companies. people call him a dictator and i dont see him being swayed by them.

vs. many. With many, they have a more difficult road -- obviously
not an impossible one -- in order to get what they want. With a
single person in charge, once you have them bribed,that is it.

the thing is, all these people are being bought and it could be that right
now there's only a handful of people that truly control the world. those people that have that meeting every year in germany and decided who the next us president is going to be.

You are spot on about the stock trading. This, IMHO, is a form of
insider trading and should be treated as such by our legal system.

look at what nancy pelosi has been doing. it's criminal.

here's a site that tracks politician stock trading. https://www.capitoltrades.com/politicians
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: For the Californians
By: MRO to Dumas Walker on Wed Nov 05 2025 12:53 am

look at what nancy pelosi has been doing. it's criminal.

https://www.capitoltrades.com/politicians/P000197


just invest in what she invests in.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

You are spot on about the stock trading. This, IMHO, is a form of
insider trading and should be treated as such by our legal system.

look at what nancy pelosi has been doing. it's criminal.

here's a site that tracks politician stock trading. https://www.capitoltrades.com/politicians

No doubt. I have been thinking that it would be good to keep track of what they trade and try to buy what they buy. One would have to keep on top of
it, though, in order to get the cue to sell before things go bad!


* SLMR 2.1a * The best way to accelerate a Mac is at -32.2 ft/s­.
---
­ Synchronet ­ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: Re: For the Californians
By: Dumas Walker to MRO on Sun Nov 02 2025 10:11 am

I don't question that the entire government is corrupt, but having one person in charge of everything, including deciding who the "bad ones" are, is dangerous and wrong. Other countries that tried that... Nazi Germany, Stalinist USSR, several Latin American dictatorships... fail pretty quick. None of them managed to last ~250 years like our country.

I agree having a single person in charge is most often awful than good. Spanish Fascism was benign compared to most Fascism in the world at the time and it still sucked big time until the 60s - afterwards it improved because it tried to act less as a Fascism.

Wanting to destroy his enemies is also not a good long-run trait, especially ifan "enemy" is someone who simply disagrees with you on a single policy decision. Being surrounded by "yes-men" who are either opportunists or just scared of you leads to more harm than good.

The problem these days is that there is a big chunk of the opposing side that literally wants YOU to die if you are not 100% on their side. It is fucking crazy, and I am not dramatizing.

I mean, I ran into a video of somebody criticising a Youtuber for displaying conservative traits. So far, so good. You run down the comments in the video and everybody is calling the Youtuber Nazi and Fascist and whatever. ANd, within this context, you find beautiful pearls such as "People who say violence is not the answer always forgets what it took to get rid of Nazies in WWII" and the like. You get the picture.

I go check some videos of the "Nazi" Youtuber. She is just a gal who talks about games and movies and prefers asian games over American ones because American ones don't foster traditional values and aesthetics anymore. Bonus points because she is a Christian, that makes her extra Nazi and marks her for priority termination.

So yeah, if you don't like American games nowadays you are a Nazi and have to be killed.

If I saw this sort of movement in my country I would AUTOMATICALLY switch to voting for the most sadistic genocidal bullshit nazi motherfucker who promised to destroy this people, because at certain point it is a matter of self-preservation. In that regard I would consider a politician pledged to defend my demographic group via agressive means a *necessity*.


--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
þ Synchronet þ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: For the Californians
By: MRO to Dumas Walker on Sun Nov 02 2025 03:38 pm

you dont know because it has never truly been done.
there hasnt been a good guy in charge of everything and everybody.

Tyrannical governments in many shapes and forms have existed since ancient times. Also, the definition of a "good guy" is a bit flexible.

I personally think General Francisco Franco saw himself as a Patriot and a "good guy", and his regime was a bit of a disaster until very late stages... it is very clear to me he purposedly eased the transition back to Democracy on purpose because Fascism would not be sustainable after he was gone. This claim is a bit controversial, but you get the picture.

You go back in time, you can find lots of Absolute Monarchs who tried their best as opposed to Absolute Monarchs whose goal was to milk as much value from vassals as possible.

The main problem with benevolent dictatorships is they are always personalist in nature, so even if the dictator is benevolent (which is usually not the case) and competent (same), once he is gone the system crashes hard for a reason or another. Meanwhile, non benevolent dictatorships are extremely stable and hard to rid of because when Fidel Castro dies, there is another Castro in line to replace him.


--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
þ Synchronet þ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

I don't question that the entire government is corrupt, but having one
person in charge of everything, including deciding who the "bad ones" are, >> is dangerous and wrong. Other countries that tried that... Nazi Germany,
Stalinist USSR, several Latin American dictatorships... fail pretty quick. >> None of them managed to last ~250 years like our country.

I agree having a single person in charge is most often awful than good. Spanis
Fascism was benign compared to most Fascism in the world at the time and it still sucked big time until the 60s - afterwards it improved because it tried to act less as a Fascism.

Yes, Spain is a very good example.

Wanting to destroy his enemies is also not a good long-run trait, especially >> ifan "enemy" is someone who simply disagrees with you on a single policy
decision. Being surrounded by "yes-men" who are either opportunists or just >> scared of you leads to more harm than good.

The problem these days is that there is a big chunk of the opposing side that literally wants YOU to die if you are not 100% on their side. It is fucking crazy, and I am not dramatizing.

I am aware and agree you are not dramatizing. My issue is not with his
dislike of those people, and those people now exist on both sides.

My issue is as stated above... if you disagree on a single policy decision,
you could be labeled as "the enemy." So currently our leader is surrounded
by "yes-people" and no one around to check bad ideas.

I mean, I ran into a video of somebody criticising a Youtuber for displaying conservative traits. So far, so good. You run down the comments in the video and everybody is calling the Youtuber Nazi and Fascist and whatever. ANd, within this context, you find beautiful pearls such as "People who say violenc
is not the answer always forgets what it took to get rid of Nazies in WWII" an
the like. You get the picture.

I go check some videos of the "Nazi" Youtuber. She is just a gal who talks about games and movies and prefers asian games over American ones because American ones don't foster traditional values and aesthetics anymore. Bonus points because she is a Christian, that makes her extra Nazi and marks her for
priority termination.

It is sad that there is a decent sized segment of the population that
equates Christian with "Nazi" and has no clue what a "Nazi" really was.
OTOH, I also wonder how many of those commenters are real people in the US,
and how many are fake accounts intentionally trying to stir the US pot from abroad.

If I saw this sort of movement in my country I would AUTOMATICALLY switch to voting for the most sadistic genocidal bullshit nazi motherfucker who promised
to destroy this people, because at certain point it is a matter of self-preservation.

I would not, but I also would not be drawn to voting for the side that
fosters the BS described above. Both sides have got so deep into the BS I cannot support either of them.


* SLMR 2.1a * Tagline dispenser temporarily out of order.
---
þ Synchronet þ Capitol City Test System