Infidel Dog

No. What I'm pointing out is you target the one side of the building where instigators were causing havoc as if that's the only story of what was happening. It isn't. There were open doors at other entrances with guards fist pumping protestors and having reasoned conversations with them. There were reasoned protestors and even some who fought back against the antifa-ish cabal that instigated the problems.

And here's some video at a different entrance that shows the crowd walking through an open door as security waves them through: https://beckernews.com/watch-jan-6-video-that-was-suppressed-shows-capitol-police-officer-waving-protesters-into-building-42597/ And here's guards at a different gate opening the gates for the crowd to enter: And here's video they didn't show you of how once they were inside they were told they were allowed in there if they were peaceful and one guy relays that to the crowd: https://tv.gab.com/channel/a/view/new-video-from-january-6th-destroys-60a27feb172642ad680eb8f7 Then there's this:

Come to think of it... Can I call my best bud, "My Niggah," if I identify as black? Not really relevant but that just popped into my head when I read the last line of Nationalist's post above.

The first paragraph of your article: Not sure what you're trumpeting about. The 2 tier justice, lawfare Witchhunters of New York managed to give the Trump organization a slap on the wrist for something they all do. Hoorah. Big fat, so what, if you ask me.

I can answer that for you? It's pretty obvious. I think that's why it's being missed. The current culture trains us to ignore the obvious. The answer is: Because they aren't Liberals. They're Progressives. Woke hypocrisy is just what they do. Half point to West though.

I use the library. I wait until it comes out on DVD and put it on hold. I don't know if everybody's library is as good as the one I use though. I can get pretty much anything I want to see. I just have to wait awhile. I just got Top Gun a couple days ago. Haven't watched it yet though. I also got Nope.

No. What Democrats love to hear is the sound of no pushback when they sneak in things like early voting, ballot drop-off boxes and mail-out (meaning unregistered mail-out as opposed to mail-in request ballots) voting. You know...exploitable adjustments to voting regulations. I bet they were grinning and rubbing their hands together in Arizona when the two McConnellite, Republican voter counters, Gates and Richer were making moves to see America First candidates lost. They must have fallen asleep chuckling when they saw their Candidate for governor was the one managing the election. And the Republican elite did nothing more than deny their Arizona candidates campaign funding for not being their kind of Republicans. That's what Democrats really want to hear. I'm sure they're chuckling in Arizona and thinking to themselves, "Keep it up, Dummies."

I imagine you heard about this one from the local news or what I call the 5 O'clock liars. 6-Year-Old Canadian Child Dies Suddenly After Suffering “Massive Stroke” – Doctor Diagnosed her with “Myocarditis due to the Flu” But here's the part of the story the local news doesn't seem interested in investigating:

Every once in awhile there's hope the Republican party might return to the sanity of the Pre-Bush years though. For instance: Seven More Republicans Vow to Oppose Kevin McCarthy

No it hasn't. The rest of the world has simply become more left wing. Even just 20 years ago much of what you're calling radical would be called common sense. The Republican elite that took over the party during the Bush years are the only problem. Take your Mitch McConnells and your Lindsey Grahams and your Thom Tillis's and start your "New Republican Party" then. You'll be missed less than you think. This below is the sort of thing that's wrong with the current Republican Party. Thom Tillis Is Why That Red Wave Didn’t Materialize

You appear to be saying that while everybody else is operating at the net generation, wind and solar is operating at maximum capacity. If that is what you're saying do you have evidence of it? If that's not what you're saying, clarify.

Not sure your 50% claim is accurate. Explain this from the dashboard at your AESO link. It appears to contradict your 50% claim.

Here's a digested version of the top complaints:

Hope MTG can get some support on this one: " Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA-14) wants a federal investigation in Arizona where Kari Lake is disputing results of the gubernatorial election against Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, whose office reports preliminary results that Hobbs has won 50.3 percent to 49.6 percent. Greene’s call was also a reaction to a post of emails showing that Hobbs’ office reported misinformation tweets to Twitter on January 7, 2021. “The SOS of AZ and Gov candidate, Katie Hobbs, used the power of the AZ SOS to collude w/ Twitter to unconstitutionally violate 1st Amendment rights of Americans for her own political gain. This is communism and Hobbs can not be governor. I’m calling for a Federal investigation,” Greene tweeted Sunday morning." https://georgiastarnews.com/2022/12/05/georgia-u-s-marjorie-taylor-greene-calls-for-federal-investigation-over-emails-from-arizona-sec-state-hobbs-to-twitter/

At least we know now why she didn't think she had to debate. In fact, isn't curious how Biden-like it was that she didn't seem to think she needed to campaign much (hardly at all) in general.

Curiously enough I was just reading this one: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/12/twitter-still-disabling-kari-lake-republicans-like-retweet-feature-rigged-2022-election-tweets-leaked-twitter-files-reveal-katie-hobbs-behind/ It recounts the whole story from the beginning to now in tweets. There's a lot there.

And again the term, "Indian" in reference to the geographical area beyond the Indus River started getting popular post Columbus. Was that term or something like it already being used because of this claimed in the OP: You nor I nor the OP actually know for certain. Stop pretending you do.

Let's look at the first governor of BC then to see if at least one of us can get a clue to what you're talking about. Richard Blanshard 1849-1851. " Blanshard's short tenure proved unhappy from the start, largely because of the enormous power and influence wielded by the Hudson's Bay Company and its autocratic Chief Factor, James Douglas. Indeed, prior to Blanshard's appointment, there had been serious consideration given by the colonial office to appointing Douglas governor, but concerns over conflict of interest prevented it. Blanshard arrived to a colony in which the land had been given as a ten-year lease to the Hudson's Bay Company, with Douglas given a mandate to attract settlement. Almost the entire non-First Nations population were Company employees, answerable to Douglas, and Blanshard was prevented from setting up a colonial assembly by the fact that so few of them met the qualifications of electors, i.e., land ownership. Inevitable jurisdictional conflicts arose between Douglas and Blanshard, and the colonial office, too, took Blanshard to task for indiscriminate retributions taken against the First Nations population near present-day Port Hardy. The absence of any real power, combined with health concerns and the enormous cost of living drove Blanshard to resign; he abandoned the colony in September, 1851 after just one and a half years there." And Blanshard was succeeded by the Hudson Bay Company's James Douglas. So who exactly are you claiming your moral superiority over? Blanshard? The British Government? Douglas? The Hudson's Bay company? Personally I explain that section of our history this way: Things happened. And now every time I turn on a Vancouver Canucks game some chubby, smiley, claimed ancestor dressed in pointy straw hats and blankets is welcoming me to the "unceded land of the Musqueam/Salish nations. And I still don't get your point.

Here's the problem with the idea the west represents the inherent possessors of some special evil because they failed to live up to the goals of their religion. It implies only a European is guilty of this sort of hypocrisy and you are some special sort of Westerner for noticing. But they're not and you're not. Do you really want a fist pump because some unknown relative of yours was raped in the past? Let's have them all around then. Who can't go into their past to find one of those? You want us to be impressed when you dis Europeans for connecting to an Asian religion that might speak against colonization with a few tweaks to its code. Very well, communists are all the time railing against colonizers. Yet they want to colonize Taiwan. Russia is trying to colonize Ukraine again as we speak. Why are you expecting some sort of badge of superior morality for noticing how 7 hundred years ago largely Christian nations were colonizers as every nation or ideology of greater strength to another was. In fact the only difference between them and these Europeans you want to point down at is many of them are still doing it. Or trying.

Yeah already said that. In better detail though. Thanks for the wiki quote. Sounds like they got one right. More or less. As I also pointed out though the 'People of God' explanation in the OP has also been around for awhile. And people who use the Indian referred to India one sometimes forget that started post Columbus. That might matter.

Interesting thing about "Do unto others"...turns out pretty much all religions have some version of that. The exception might be Islam. They have something but it goes more like "Do unto other Muslims as you would have them do unto you. Anybody else...don't worry about it. Enjoy their grief and horror." Also Judaism, Christianity and even Islam are Asian. Still, nothing about that one would make Europeans as opposed to all others evil hypocrites for conquer and rule. Pretty much happening all around the world in the 16th century to everybody and anybody who had the bad luck to be weaker. If you want to feel superior for dissing your own well...I never understood that one but feel free to be honest about what you're really saying first.

I think I'd understand you argument better if you told us what specific "foundations for the system of laws that govern us today" you're talking about from the 15th century that should have prevented Europeans exclusively from conquering and colonizing weaker nations?

Projection.

Did they? What are you basing that on? Surely not the fact that that's the way it had been done since the beginning of time.

Now as to the transference of the term Indian into the term Native that's something I do know a little bit about without doing a search. Because I remember giving it attention when it started to happen. It confused me at the time. There didn't seem to be any need for it. It only seemed important to this new type of Humanities clique coming out of the Universities. Actual Indians didn't care about the term one way or the other. But these new wannabe modelers of a new culture appeared to see the term "Indian" as a pejorative. They were relentless in working to see the old term expunged and replaced with something more sanitary in feel to this new intellectual elite they liked to posture as. Because they cared, you see. Always seemed kind of racist to me. It was the first time I saw racism dressed up like anti-racism. I didn't know the term for these effete, faux-intellectual posers at the time but since then I've come to know them by the term they self-identify as. Progressives. I prefer Progs myself.