quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
I think the funniest part is that after all this time, one side doesn't see their new authority being used against them when the other side return power and has that new authority.

It's a guarantee that the liberals will go after pro gun groups, conservatives Christian groups and other with the same zeal that MAGA feels and is using today.

You wait, gun owners will be Domestic Terrorists and Enemy Combatants and firearms will be GOD'S in our lifetimes and it'll because what we did.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

I think I don't fully understand your post, especially the part "firearms will be GOD'S". That apostrophe and S is possessive.

Also I see that fear mongering has worked on you.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
I meant to say guns will be labeled WMD's.
The point is quite simple I think. In this case MAGA takes new authority and power that they don't seem to be able to imagine will be used against them when the liberals are running the show.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Scott, pardon me please while I pick on you some more.

Your opinion posts still bothers me. I pick on you because I think your opinion is representative on a larger scale.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
I think the funniest part is that after all this time, one side doesn't see their new authority being used against them when the other side return power and has that new authority.

It's a guarantee that the liberals will go after pro gun groups, conservatives Christian groups and other with the same zeal that MAGA feels and is using today.

You wait, gun owners will be Domestic Terrorists and Enemy Combatants and firearms will be GOD'S in our lifetimes and it'll because what we did.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

I think I don't fully understand your post, especially the part "firearms will be GOD'S". That apostrophe and S is possessive.

Also I see that fear mongering has worked on you.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
I meant to say guns will be labeled WMD's.
The point is quite simple I think. In this case MAGA takes new authority and power that they don't seem to be able to imagine will be used against them when the liberals are running the show.

I know you corrected your statement from GOD's to WMD's, but initially I thought you meant:

https://youtu.be/0zbrHRdr6C8?si=MgAKlhcE4hwhEIza

Now, I think maybe there is no difference in what you meant. I don't think that was a typo.

==============================================================

As to the rest of your post which you doubled-down on with subsequent posts, that's the part that bothers me the most.

You say:

"Anyone here thinking rationally that is aware of my opinions posted here would agree when I say I have squarely opposed Trump. That's really all there is to it."

I don't think that is all there is to it.

You also say:

"My side, The Right, continues to seek additional power and authority that when out of authority will be used against us by the liberals. We, The Right are setting precedence without any consideration for the future."

I've argued that already, see my previous posts.

But I don't think I've argued it sufficiently.

You ID as a republican, a conservative, saying "my side, the Right" and "We the Right are setting precedence".

What I think you are doing with those opinions or attitudes is showing a distinction between RINOs and RIMOs - Republican In Name Only vs Republicans Intentionally Malevolent Obviously.

You seem to not recognize such distinction, which IMO makes you complicit with the RIMOs.

Here's a relevant article:

https://open.substack.com/pub/...=post&utm_medium=web

The Cruelty Is The Point, But What’s The Goal?
The Trump administration isn’t cruel just for cruelty’s sake. There’s a deeper, darker purpose.
The Big Picture and Jay Kuo
May 20, 2025

Summary:

AI Overview

The phrase "the cruelty is the point" suggests that the deliberate infliction of suffering is not a means to an end, but rather the primary objective itself.

Cruelty as a Political Strategy:

Solidifying Support: The logic behind this approach is that it resonates strongly with a particular segment of the population that desires a display of strength and toughness, even if it comes at the expense of others.

Activating the Base: Cruelty can be a powerful tool to energize and unify a political base by portraying opponents or marginalized groups as deserving of harsh treatment.

Demoralizing Opponents: The spectacle of cruelty can intimidate and demoralize political opponents and others who might challenge the status quo.

Historical and Contemporary Examples:

The Trump Administration's Immigration Policies: Critics have argued that some of the Trump administration's immigration policies, like family separations at the border, were designed to inflict cruelty as a means of deterring immigration and demonstrating a firm stance.

Authoritarian Regimes: History is rife with examples of authoritarian regimes that utilize cruelty and violence as a means of maintaining control and suppressing dissent.

Rhetoric and Dehumanization: Dehumanizing language can lay the groundwork for cruelty by making it easier to justify harsh treatment of targeted groups.

Consequences of Cruelty as a Political Tool:

Erosion of Empathy:
Repeated exposure to cruelty can desensitize individuals and make them less empathetic to the suffering of others.

Normalization of Violence:
The normalization of cruelty can create a climate where violence becomes more readily accepted and even expected.

Damage to Democratic Norms:
Cruelty and dehumanization can undermine democratic principles like respect for human rights and the rule of law.

In Conclusion:

While the claim "the cruelty is the point" is a critical perspective, it highlights the potential for cruelty to be used as a tactic in politics, serving to energize a base, demoralize opponents, and assert dominance, according to The Big Picture | Substack. It's crucial to be aware of this dynamic and its potential consequences for individuals and society.