Husband. Father. Attorney. Engineer. Woodworker. Auto Mechanic. Gardener. Patriot.
Elevating human consciousness through the careful study of absurdity.
The fillibuster operates as an unconstitutional transfer of power from the American People to Senators, individually and collectively, and the special interests who own them.
With the current cloture rules, a 60 seat majority is required to pass any meaningful legislation.
The result is that voters from BOTH parties are disenfranchised.
If Republican voters want to make changes they need to win 7 more seats; and Democrat voters need to add 13!
Effectively, there is a 20 seat bar that has to be cleared for parties to switch control.
The Constitution only requires a simple majority, and even addresses a likely tie (unlikely tie with 60 vote fillibuster) by giving the VP the tie-breaking vote.
The Senate has no power to usurp the inalienable rights of the American People to shape their government as they see fit.
The fillibuster doesn't defend freedom, it actively works against it.
We should take it. Boots on the ground was never the issue. The issue was, and is, having a clear objective.
Holding Kharg island isn't much different than having any other base in the Middle East. We will have to deal with the missile threat for both.
It also increases negotiating leverage. Iran would be destroying their own oil infrastructure if they attack. The only way they would even get it back is by cutting a deal and turning over the enriched uranium.
We should take it.
1. Iran has no ability to hold or retake since we have control of the water and air.
2. Oil revenue can be redirected to support the resistance and our own military efforts in the region.
3. Permanently denying this resource by occupation is better than destroying the capability in the long term.
@BasedMikeLee In light of the Cornyn primary, the Senate is waking up to the reality that they don't have the votes to remain IN the Senate and obstruct the Save Act.
@2000STOCKMASTER@BoSnerdley Okay, assuming that's true, do election integrity groups have access to that information to independently audit?
No. They do not.
FOIA requests are routinely denied, delayed, or selectively complied with: resulting in no effective independent voter audits before certification.
There's a difference between something being legal and something being honest.
There's also a difference between impropriety and the appearance thereof.
Receiving and counting mail in ballots for a week after election day, may be legal in Cali, but it enables cheating and erodes public trust.
@SuitablePolitic 12. Commandeer all oil tankers in the Gulf, and place a Marine platoon on each one. Sail them through the Straight of Hormuz, laughing all the way.
That's a false dichotomy.
Many options remain:
1. Continue shipping embargo.
2. Sink every small vessel in the Persian Gulf.
3. Systematically eliminate every IRGC and Basij asset.
4. Make Caspian Sea ports unrecognizable.
5. Eliminate all railroad bridges
6. Eliminate all road bridges
7. Turn out the lights permanently
8. Oil infrastructure
9. Desalination plants
10. Give them first hand experience of why nuclear enrichment should be avoided.
11. Iran learns the hard way.
@ColonelTowner No. What we need is for 6.5% of Hilton voters to vote for Bianco. That way the runoff will be between two Rs.
Alternatively, Tom Steyer could drop out and endorse Bianco.
The House passed a bill to end this funding, but the Senate refuses to bring it to a floor vote.
"The No Tax Dollars for Terrorists Act (H.R. 260) passed the House in 2025 and cleared Senate committee in early 2026 (with Paul's involvement), but it has not yet received a full Senate floor vote. Paul and Rep. Tim Burchett are using the "$40M/week" line to pressure leadership for a vote and to claw back remaining funds."