testtest

How to make the United States united again?

benstt said:
One thing I will say about people like Fauci and every other medical doctor in this situation, the science changes over time as we learn more. They aren't so much contradicting themselves as they are updating their understanding of the subject matter. That's the nature of science and it would be a dangerous thing if they all just stuck to their guns even as new facts and information were discovered. People cite to the mask guidance as some kind of evidence the doctors don't know what they're talking about but the changes are exactly what should happen. We learned more about how COVID spreads through aerosols. We can have questions but we also need to know that we probably don't have the knowledge to even know what the right questions are. Dunning-Kruger and all that. People don't know what they don't know, so they assume they actually know something. Of course, there was also the issue of having a serious lack of PPE so they wanted it to go to hospitals, which only makes sense. The ones doing the work should get the tools.

I think there is a problem in the United States with we as lay people thinking we can render an opinion that carries the same weight as those from people who've spent decades on education and practical experience to become experts on a subject. It's just not true and I don't know how that became a thing. People 'doing their own research" on Facebook or whatever thinking they actually know something and the people who do it for a living do not. It's crazy and it's dangerous. Or taking the word of their uncle or a guy at work as more true than someone with a doctorate. It's like if you needed a transmission in a race car rebuilt: the high school kid at Napa can give you his opinion, but does it stack up to the guys who do it for real on a F1 team? Not a chance. But people in the U.S. take the word of the the high school kid over people who actually know something about complex subjects all the time. It's how we get people in the ICU telling a MD to give them veterinary medications because Joe Rogan says so. My own dad pulled that on me when my grandpa died. I'm a lawyer so he asked how to deal with my grandpa's will and I explained it to him. The day he went to the courthouse the guy watching the metal detectors at the front door because he wasn't qualified to be a jail guard told him something different. Guess who my dad went with? Hint: not the guy with a law degree and years of experience.
Click to expand...
I understand your point, but this is the same Fauci who lied about gain of function research and then when cornered about it, tried to weasel his way out of it.

All credibility instantly gone.
 
C. Sumpin said:
This thread has proven to me once again that (most) folks believe what they believe with little regard for the Holy Scriptures or the Constitution (or logic or common sense or history) and what those guides offer. And, that the majority in that group have left tilting tendencies that they love to cling to against all evidence.

I suppose a person does not have to be a "bad person" to be citizen that goes against what is traditionally American.
Some folks, good in many ways, are terrible for the preservation of the rights of others. To what degree that is may define good or bad. There are some good people in jail. There are rotten people to be found in every level/place in society.

And this right here: "In any case the rights of a female citizen outweigh those of a potential one"; if you are referring to an unborn child, goes against the Declaration which declares "all men (persons) are created equal".

Suffice to say that even in a group where 2A is common ground many divisions reside.
Click to expand...
Pretty much.
Some thoughts of others in disagreement may be caused by others from other areas, states, cities, scenarios and countries not familiar with new surroundings in other areas? Am thinking some people may need to possibly realize "This ain't Kansas Anymore" as depicted / stated in one movie? - Wizard of Oz? Some people may also think just because one area or place may look like another area at first, it still is? All the while, it isn't for various reasons?

One thing that may help to remember reasoning is a very old saying "When in Rome, do as the Romans do" may be helpful? Object? Places can be different because of different reasons and purposes, some is due to climate, political or other reasons. There's likely many people in this country or another that may think things elsewhere also apply or should apply to them, new or old place as well. Some people may move or relocate physically to a new place, but likely don't mentally? ....Basically, they brought more than just the typical baggage with them?

Was just talking with someone elsewhere earlier today about very same thing. Many foreign people and companies to somewhere else relocate elsewhere to another place and may think they can just uproot and change the new world to the old world sometimes? Likely causes conflict and confusion, usually does? Another thing is, beliefs and customs and other things are there in place usually for good and important reasons. Just brush them all aside for someone new to an area - for what good purpose? Just because someone else new says so?

If really thought about on a much smaller scale in other areas, would be like a local neighbor coming over and dictating what someone else does in their own home? Right / wrong? Am thinking likely not? Some overzealous homeowners associations being like that may come to mind? IE: Flags, USA or not, are sometimes not permitted on someone else's yard or premises?
 
BobM said:
Pretty much.
Some thoughts of others in disagreement may be caused by others from other areas, states, cities, scenarios and countries not familiar with new surroundings in other areas? Am thinking some people may need to possibly realize "This ain't Kansas Anymore" as depicted / stated in one movie? - Wizard of Oz? Some people may also think just because one area or place may look like another area at first, it still is? All the while, it isn't for various reasons?

One thing that may help to remember reasoning is a very old saying "When in Rome, do as the Romans do" may be helpful? Object? Places can be different because of different reasons and purposes, some is due to climate, political or other reasons. There's likely many people in this country or another that may think things elsewhere also apply or should apply to them, new or old place as well. Some people may move or relocate physically to a new place, but likely don't mentally? ....Basically, they brought more than just the typical baggage with them?

Was just talking with someone elsewhere earlier today about very same thing. Many foreign people and companies to somewhere else relocate elsewhere to another place and may think they can just uproot and change the new world to the old world sometimes? Likely causes conflict and confusion, usually does? Another thing is, beliefs and customs and other things are there in place usually for good and important reasons. Just brush them all aside for someone new to an area - for what good purpose? Just because someone else new says so?

If really thought about on a much smaller scale in other areas, would be like a local neighbor coming over and dictating what someone else does in their own home? Right / wrong? Am thinking likely not? Some overzealous homeowners associations being like that may come to mind? IE: Flags, USA or not, are sometimes not permitted on someone else's yard or premises?
Click to expand...
That's a fantastic point. I think I've written about this before, but the divide in Minnesota is so very clear to me when I find myself walking along a road just outside town with a gun. In the Bigfork, MN area, people driving by give me a wave and go about their business. If I did that just outside town in the metro they'd be giving me nasty looks or giving a call to the cops. Same state, entirely different cultures. I try to respect both since they are the ways things are in those areas. I think the lack of respect in that area is stronger in the metro than the rural. People in Minneapolis often don't understand how normal guns are outstate as tools or for recreation.
 
Last edited:
How long will it be before our country splits into 4-5 different smaller separate countries? I saw a poll a few days ago that indicates a substantial number of Americans favored succession and forming new countries.
 
RFSOD48 said:
How long will it be before our country splits into 4-5 different smaller separate countries? I saw a poll a few days ago that indicates a substantial number of Americans favored succession and forming new countries.
Click to expand...
Many of my ancestors tried succession without much success. I guess the same then would still apply today: If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand. Unlike the European countries of the 1860's there are countries out there today that would gladly lend military support to quell any insurrection. War would follow and we would probably live in sheer anarchy for years to come.
 
Makes no difference where you are from, where you have been or where you are going or what the culture in your area is; if you are an American citizen living in the US then the Constitution and it's rights apply to you.

Ross Perot had a great idea to divide the nation into at least six geographical areas for accounting purposes. If there were an area (state) where the Feds were held at bay and the Constitution honored as it should be, it would be delightful to live among like minded souls; I'd relocate in an instant. Perhaps it would not be so bad also if those more liberal types could avail themselves of a similar community. Problem that will arise is the Feds and the Coms would not be content to allow others to live in peace as they choose but would want to impose their will upon everyone.

Succession may not be a bad idea and could be doable. New York and Cally are their own countries now, at least in ideology, having ignored/removed so much of our rights they seem like a foreign country to me. Tell you one thing, the Lefties would become believers of the 2nd Amendment and militias themselves when they try to "mess with the Texas" crowd! They would get an earful of 1A freedom of speech too! And, when they seen how few perps wanted to tangle with the Constitutionalists and crime went sky high in their area with so many easy victims they would see the light. Yeah, I'm lik'en the idea just fine.
 
I agree with you that it would be difficult for our country to split up but we summer in Michigan and winter in Texas and succession is certainly a topic there. I think if we keep going down our current path someday we may not have any other options.
 
benstt said:
One thing I will say about people like Fauci and every other medical doctor in this situation, the science changes over time as we learn more. They aren't so much contradicting themselves as they are updating their understanding of the subject matter. That's the nature of science and it would be a dangerous thing if they all just stuck to their guns even as new facts and information were discovered. People cite to the mask guidance as some kind of evidence the doctors don't know what they're talking about but the changes are exactly what should happen. We learned more about how COVID spreads through aerosols. We can have questions but we also need to know that we probably don't have the knowledge to even know what the right questions are. Dunning-Kruger and all that. People don't know what they don't know, so they assume they actually know something. Of course, there was also the issue of having a serious lack of PPE so they wanted it to go to hospitals, which only makes sense. The ones doing the work should get the tools.

I think there is a problem in the United States with we as lay people thinking we can render an opinion that carries the same weight as those from people who've spent decades on education and practical experience to become experts on a subject. It's just not true and I don't know how that became a thing. People 'doing their own research" on Facebook or whatever thinking they actually know something and the people who do it for a living do not. It's crazy and it's dangerous. Or taking the word of their uncle or a guy at work as more true than someone with a doctorate. It's like if you needed a transmission in a race car rebuilt: the high school kid at Napa can give you his opinion, but does it stack up to the guys who do it for real on a F1 team? Not a chance. But people in the U.S. take the word of the the high school kid over people who actually know something about complex subjects all the time. It's how we get people in the ICU telling a MD to give them veterinary medications because Joe Rogan says so. My own dad pulled that on me when my grandpa died. I'm a lawyer so he asked how to deal with my grandpa's will and I explained it to him. The day he went to the courthouse the guy watching the metal detectors at the front door because he wasn't qualified to be a jail guard told him something different. Guess who my dad went with? Hint: not the guy with a law degree and years of experience.
Click to expand...

Agree to a point. Some supposed experts may need to clarify their intentions and thoughts more clearly and that sometimes their thoughts aren't to believed as gospel or actual truth? There can be differences in this country as far as to beliefs, meanings and realities too. What is said isn't always the reality of whatever sometimes?

Many things some people are lead to believe and by some so called experts believed to be true are in fact based on only theory and fallacies. What does that lead to or what may it lead to? Some fallacies misrepresented are by supposed experts in many fields including architecture, science and other fields.

Some ideas are proclaimed as being theory or unproven thoughts. Some ideas are not. That the fact of theory should be explained more thoroughly as being only thoughts and not as based in actuality? - As just a guesstimate, not real or authority?

For example: Ancient statues and buildings were rarely plain. Most more indepth information discovered later on by paint pigmentation testing of the structures showed them to be ornately decorated and displayed, most to all statues were lifelike in color as well as form. Yet later on, many other experts wanting to display their skill, intelligence, strength, justice or other attributes displayed and built plain stone architecture and statuary? Effects, results? - Not sure where to start, stop or going? Guessing maybe the White House and other DC buildings should be painted to more represent truths they're supposedly based on to represent? Maybe, maybe not? So, what's based on experts and truth? Truth or sometimes not, experts are usually considered to be commingled as the truth, the same as fact to be believed in? Guess not sometimes? Where does that lead us to? Just speculation or something more concrete?

Something else to contemplate on supposed experts? People, beliefs and things can evolve over time through discovery, does that mean "experts" should be completely absolved of their poor past actions? Sure or not too sure? As far as all doctors being experts? Inept doctors in some other countries have had their hands removed because of their beliefs and mistakes. If that was current practice in this country, am thinking there may be many more experts in healthcare here with artificial devices instead of hands? Yes, know of some other remedies such as revocation and some other penalties. But, sometimes there's no remedy to undo the damage done by those individuals, unless the falsely accused are somehow but never enough justly compensated, the dead and dying are miraculously cured and resurrected?

Other "expert" people and places may have odd results?

WWW, World Wide Wrestling? - When was the 1st time all people of the world competed?

Mr. or Ms. Universe? - Has anyone ever seen someone not native to this planet compete?

Fallacy of Washington chopping down a cherry tree and admitting truth to father to promote honesty - is a lie?

Those are examples of lighter sided, sometimes less serious examples of common distortions many consider to be truths. True experts, if there are any, should clarify fact and theory more thoroughly as being one or the other.

More serious examples?
The world is flat until known to be otherwise had many serious complications on peoples lives, actions and beliefs because of some supposed experts? Some people were persecuted, tortured and killed because they believed advice of supposed experts of the Earth as being flat or not. ....Experts there? Did it matter?

Spanish Inquisition, Spain and Catholicism dealt a similar blow and was initiated by? - Experts of different fields?

Middle East Conflict? - Solutions? Has been going on historically for thousands of years? - Peace by various experts?

Professional athletes, Olympics, supposed experts in their field? - Did arrival and tragedy of Jim Thorpe prove otherwise?

Supposed justice by experts? - How much is based on actual justice, acting ability, pace, finance, malice or revenge?

Fortunately and unfortunately, there are exceptions.
Some people may be more well versed in something or another, but always better in all cases? In all judgements, even in and outside of their realm? Likely not often enough from too many past, present history and in many current observations. Buy a product just because an expert actor or expert whatever endorses it? Maybe, maybe not?

Titles of supposed experts and professionals mean little to nothing, but letters and words unless backed up by good solid provable actions and deeds. Whether good or bad, those experts effects are shown in reflections of any society? Is society better or worse because of them? Where and why? Conditions of society and backyards are sometimes the same? - Look at some conditions of major cities now? Are those the effects of experts - in what field?

Sometimes, the real unproclaimed experts and truth in the room are the children? IE: Sometimes, those simple children are considered the citizens, peons and subjects too? There's another old saying that sometimes holds many truths...."Out of the mouths of babes" - the "children" that sometimes say and show things more clearly without all the biases, BS, trickery and bureaucracy? Did TV's Sgt. Schultz of "Hogan's Heroes" have it right all along?
 
SubChaser said:
Vaccination is an example of sacrificing a very tiny bit of freedom for the good of a whole country's population. It has nothing to do with respecting women's rights.
I don't know who talked about sending political fanatics to re-education camps. It wasn't me. However, those convicted of violent crimes should be granted long vacations at a Federal gated community.
One more thing. Blaming poverty on the (disproportionately non-white) poor is a part of systemic racism.
Click to expand...
I know lots of people who have gotten the vaccine and lots of people who have not gotten the vaccine. Of those who have not gotten the vaccine, precisely zero that I personally know made their decision for the sole purpose of exercising liberty. Everyone that I know who is hesitant to get the vaccine has done so for one or more of the following reasons: 1) they already had COVID before the vaccines were widely available and by all available data actually have better protection against re-infection than the vaccines provide; 2) they are in a low risk age / health group and see the vaccine as having greater risk to them than COVID, this is true particularly of children, teenagers, and young healthy twenty-somethings; 3) they have concerns about the safety of the vaccines, particularly over a longitudinal basis for which there are no studies to substantiate whether there are long term health risks; and 4) they have concerns or ethical objections to the process used in development, production, and/or testing of the vaccines given all the available options used human cell lines tied to aborted fetal tissue at some phase of the process to bring them to market. You may not agree with one or more, or even all of the categories mentioned above, and that's fine, but it is disingenuous to assume they don't have valid objections and feel like being intransigent just because they can. The bottom line is that they are the ones who assume the risk of their personal decisions. This forum thread is on making the united states more united. Step one of that process is allowing for good faith disagreement rather than assuming the worst in our neighbor.
 
SubChaser said:
If you decry those measures, then you fail to understand the application of that over-two-centuries-old amendment to a completely different social context than what existed when it was written.
Click to expand...

Ridiculous. And this is why you could never pass yourself off as a second amendment supporter to anyone other than a fool or an ardent anti-gunner. The constitution is not a living document. It says what it says and doesn't say what it doesn't say. There is not and should not be any provision for " Changing with the times".

I will give you props for having the cajones to admit it on a gun forum though. ;-)
 
RFSOD48 said:
I agree with you that it would be difficult for our country to split up but we summer in Michigan and winter in Texas and succession is certainly a topic there. I think if we keep going down our current path someday we may not have any other options.
Click to expand...
As far as remembered, Texas either is or was only state allowed to legally succeed from Union at one time. And, that may have changed? Likely did?

Basically on traveling from one state to another here, it isn't much different in much of Europe, except the states are country's pertaining to size. Have relatives in other countries, they travel frequently between them for work and recreation. Something to think of and realize about the comparison is most other countries are much smaller there than they are around here. - Some countries are also not as large as a few of this country's states. Both Texas and Alaska and some others may come to mind? Feudal states, the states were sometimes in other countries. Was a common occurrence in Older Europe from about the 9th to 15th century. The laws sometimes varied widely.

Many people in this country also live in one state and work in another even though the laws and other things are sometimes different. Same as with other countries laws and customs are different in Europe. Basically, if succession happened here, which doubtfully would, things would likely be little different in some ways than now. Many things are granted to some degree by one neighboring country to another while in other country's they aren't. Canada, USA and Mexico have certain laws pertaining to neighboring countries whereas some laws and rules concerning distant countries are included, excluded or completely different. Being careful and considerate of them is part of traveling most anywhere.
 
RFSOD48 said:
I agree Bob M that succession is not the likely choice at this moment but in the future Texas and the Deep South may say audios. If so I will be moving south.
Click to expand...
Like I said earlier our Southern ancestors already tried that and it didn't work out well. Why would anyone think it would be any different a second time around?
 
Recusant said:
Like I said earlier our Southern ancestors already tried that and it didn't work out well. Why would anyone think it would be any different a second time around?
Click to expand...
No way of knowing whether it would turn out better or worse, but it would be different since it would be for entirely different reasons, and with entirely different numbers of participants. Just somethin' to ponder y'all.
 
Our founding fathers set this constitutional republic up specifically so states wouldn’t be subjected to the will of a strong centralized government. To them, secession wasn’t a dirty word or illegal and civil war was not inherently evil or racist. The entire government was carefully organized with safeguards against federal tyranny. They wouldn’t recognize this place today.
 
BobM said:
As far as remembered, Texas either is or was only state allowed to legally succeed from Union at one time. And, that may have changed? Likely did?

Basically on traveling from one state to another here, it isn't much different in much of Europe, except the states are country's pertaining to size. Have relatives in other countries, they travel frequently between them for work and recreation. Something to think of and realize about the comparison is most other countries are much smaller there than they are around here. - Some countries are also not as large as a few of this country's states. Both Texas and Alaska and some others may come to mind? Feudal states, the states were sometimes in other countries. Was a common occurrence in Older Europe from about the 9th to 15th century. The laws sometimes varied widely.

Many people in this country also live in one state and work in another even though the laws and other things are sometimes different. Same as with other countries laws and customs are different in Europe. Basically, if succession happened here, which doubtfully would, things would likely be little different in some ways than now. Many things are granted to some degree by one neighboring country to another while in other country's they aren't. Canada, USA and Mexico have certain laws pertaining to neighboring countries whereas some laws and rules concerning distant countries are included, excluded or completely different. Being careful and considerate of them is part of traveling most anywhere.
Click to expand...
BobM, I'm not absolutely certain but I believe even with Texas, secession would be unconstitutional as SCOTUS has ruled (can't quote the case off hand). However there is some quirk somewhere, in the Texas state charter I think, that still allows for the state to break itself up into 4 smaller, individual and defined states.

Don't mean to be so vague, just can't recall the actual details. (y) (y)(y)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top