Samuels 1st MRB

February 24, 2022

Well known as the suicide nade. Prime, pocket, run into building and swap back to the grenade killing everyone in the room.

No way to fix. Only thing you can do is try to not pocket it

February 23, 2022

Name: ww3 week#1 (a/k/a The Migrating Coconut)

Steam I.D: STEAM_0:1:4693592

Duration of Ban: Permanent

Reasons for the Ban: Threatening Other players with bodily harm. You have taken things too far with making personal threats to other players. We have tried to reason with you and this other player, and neither of you have been able to behave in a reasonable or proper manner. Accordingly, you have escalated this to a point where we can no longer tolerate this behavior and you are no longer welcome to play on the server.

Demo Provided?: N/A

February 7, 2022

This ban will be increased to 1 week after AciDBurn took it upon himself to join Discord and verbally accosting Scinta, among other things.

Such behavior is not acceptable and should it happen again this will be upgraded to a permanent ban.

Edit: McGarr decided that it would help his case to begin letting his frustration out on myself. This has been upgraded to a permanent ban and a discord ban.

January 9, 2022

The competition is CLOSED!

Congrats to our winners:

Cpl. L. Kevinsen
Pvt. A. Cannon
CWO. E. Konig

We will get in touch with you all to award your prizes!

December 29, 2021

Faller (x2) - 8

Strickland (x1) - 2

Tator (x2) - 4

C. Logue (x1) - 6

Gougeon (x1) - 7

Goose (x3) - 6

York (x1) - 1

Konig (x1) - 11

Buck (x1) - 1

Larson (x1) - 20

Burke (x3) - 15

Sex Instructor (x1) - 2

Candy (x1) - 14

Crafton (x1) - 10

Vides (x1) - 4

--------------------------

Total :: 111

December 14, 2021

@McGarrSend me a PM either via Discord or the forums with what you would like your PW to be and I can reset it for you

November 30, 2021

REMINDER THAT THE CONTEST IS

OPEN

November 19, 2021

THE 1ST MRB HOLIDAY GIVEAWAY DOMINATION CONTEST RULES

The Rules for the Domination Contest are as follows:

- The contest is open to 1st MRB, Retired MRB, BAR and BAR Apps

- All screenshots must be from the period the contest starts until it ends. (November 30th at 12AM to Jan 8th at 11:59 PM EST)

- A maximum of three dominations per unit member will be counted. (You can dominate them more, but you will only receive points three times!)

- You must post a full screenshot of the domination in this thread to be counted. (Examples of screenshots can be found on the previous Contest HERE)

-The contest will start on November 30 at 12:00 AM EST

- The contest will end on January 8 at 11:59PM EST

- Anyone caught trying to cheat/falsify dominations will be disqualified IMMEDIATELY.

- Do not join spectators at the end of a round.

SCORING

The Point Values for each rank per domination are as follows:

Private & BAR Apps = 1 Point

Private First Class & BAR Members = 2 Points

Corporals = 3 points

Sergeants = 4 points

Staff Sergeant & Retired MRB = 5 points

Technical Sergeant = 6 points

Gunny Sergeant = 7 points

Master Sergeant = 8 points

First Sergeant = 9 points

Sergeant Major = 10 points

Warrant Officer = 11 points

Chief Warrant Officer = 12 points

2nd Lieutenant = 13 points

1st Lieutenant = 14 points

Captain = 15 points

Major = 20 points

THE PRIZES

1st Place Prize: Game or Games on steam up to a value of $50

2nd Place Prize: Game or Games on steam up to a value of $35

3rd Place Prize: Game or Games on steam up to a value of $15

LEADERBOARD

(Updated on 1/9/22 at 10:19AM EST)

Kevinsen - 334
Cannon - 310
Konig - 270
Samuels - 111
Strickland - 94
C. Logue - 64
Martinez - 60
Fielding - 50
Tator - 48
Faraj - 34
GooseGaggler - 42
S. Johnson - 30
Faller - 30
Weil - 25
Myers - 8
Ret. Smith - 8
Garcia* - 4
Richards - 2
B. McGarr - 2

November 19, 2021

We are offering steam game prizes to members of the 1st MRB and BAR who recruit the most people for the 1st MRB. The contest starts November 26 at 12AM EST, and will end the first week in January (January 8 at 11:59PM EST). If you win one of the following prizes, for 1st, 2nd or 3rd, you may choose a game or games of your choice up to the value. This is your chance to show us what you've got! Let's see how many we can get to make this unit even bigger and badder. What better way to do that then to offer up some cool steam game prizes to the biggest helpers? Plus, who doesn't like prizes?

THE RULES

Enlisted members must put your name on the enlistment where it asks who recruited them
Edited enlistment applications will not count!
Recruits DO NOT have to pass BCTs to count towards your total
Winners will be chosen based on total number of new recruits

THE PRIZES

1st Place Prize: Game or Games on steam up to a value of $50

2nd Place Prize: Game or Games on steam up to a value of $35

3rd Place Prize: Game or Games on steam up to a value of $15

GOOD LUCK TO EVERYONE, AND HAPPY HOLIDAYS!

(Disclaimer: Prizes have been donated by the Command Staff)

November 1, 2021

I believe Small is saying that all of the personal accounts of (for example) “well I heard that my counsin’s sister’s boyfriend’s friend who is “X” profession, knew someone who died of X and they marked the cause of death incorrectly as COVID related, isn’t really evidence of anything as it’s not verifiable in large numbers or fact checked/peer reviewed.

That doesn’t mean that it happens, or even if some places happens more frequently than others. But to say that it’s happening more than a minuscule amount is probably more of an exaggeration than saying the COVID death totals are exaggerated.

October 28, 2021

Big pharma is not trying to kill its customers. Essentially it’s the same (dark) argument as to why we treat cancer rather than curing it.

If the vaccine doesn’t work, or help keep people alive, big pharma loses customers, money, and reputation. From a business standpoint there is little reason to trick you into getting the vaccine other than for profit motive in the long term. IMO

October 28, 2021

Dude that's exactly what I'm saying by making false equivalencies. Comparing what the government is doing to promote (and now mandate) vaccination for a virus that has killed millions of people being compared to what Hitler did and the population of Germany participating/ignoring it until the world found out, is not the same.

Given that the world has acknowledged that the virus is dangerous and has killed millions of people, yet one country is seemingly having unknown difficulty in having its populous, and even politicians, acknowledge the danger and severity of the virus

October 28, 2021

5 minutes ago, Wright 1st MRB said:

But if the government can say “take this shot or else we’ll [insert punishment here],” then you can’t really say it’s a free country.

I agree on this end. However, until we see something like that happen, I think the people complaining are making false equivalencies and don't understand the issues.

My understanding was that the government was only saying, if you work in government, get the shot or be fired. And there's no right to be employed, so I see no problem with that punishment

October 28, 2021

Oh boy, I was always curious how long this topic would take before it was brought up in this section of the forums. Here's my 2 cents and I'll try to not make it a wall of text. And I want to say up front, that there is 100% an exception to my thoughts for people who have legitimate medical reasons and are not able to receive the vaccine.

I can understand the apprehension that some people may feel about the jab for a variety of reasons. I myself was someone who was initially unsure of it given my thoughts about how quickly it was developed. I did eventually get the shot and I was the last person in my family to do so for that reason (also because I did not qualify to receive it until ~May of this year). And I did so for 2 reasons. (1) I have alot of high risk people in my family, some of whom have passed away last month (non-COVID related) and (2) I believe the slight risks of the vaccine outweigh the possibility of the continued vaccine.

Generally, and this may sound harsh, I think those who reject getting the vaccine for non-medical complication reasons are selfish. This has not been the first time in human history where vaccinations to combat diseases have happened and it is not the first time where foolish people fight what is later shown in history and hindsight as being common sense (i.e. spanish flu, measles, rubella, mumps, polio, need I go on?).

This concept and has essentially been around since the start of the 20th century. I won't go into the Spanish Flu because thats the most commonly cited one that is compared to COVID and the idiocy of refusing to comply with government instructions. There are multiple vaccines that have been required and heavily recommended by the government to do various things (i.e., go to public school, serve in the military, etc). To just enroll in elementary through primary school (K-12) almost all states mandate that children receive the Hepatitis B and Meningococcal ACWY shots as well as some others. Moving onto colleges/universities, many have their own required vaccines as people mix with other people from around the world.

There is also this false equivalency that businesses refusing service to people who refuse to wear masks/show vaccine proof/etc. are being discriminated against. Well, this is both a true statement from a legal perspective but mainly wrong. Discrimination is generally defined as treating two groups of people differently. Yes, here we do have 2 groups receiving unequal treatment (mask wearers/vaccinates and non-mask wearers/non-vaccinated). What is the unequal treatment that is occurring? Being able to eat at a restaurant, hold certain employment, go into certain public/privately owned buildings. Now, I will go easy on the legalese here and try to simplify the reasoning for why these arguments are nothing more than people bitching and moaning. For anything other than (race, religion, nat'l origin) any unequal treatment of 2 groups of people must be rationally related to a legitimate government interest. And that is the key thing here. The safety, health, and wellbeing of US citizens, in the government's interest of protecting its citizenry, outweighs Karen's interest in going into Starbucks without a mask.

The test that is generally used for this consideration is whether the purpose of the laws/rules/government action (i.e, the vaccine mandate) is related to the purpose and reason that the government believes it serves (i.e., protecting the population from COVID, killing the virus, etc.). Because the legal test is the lowest bar to meet under the 14th Amendment, all the arguments you see online about unfair and discrimination against non-vaccinated people/non-mask wearers is just people blowing hot air.

Now on to my personal thoughts.

Personally, I believe going into private businesses, working where you choose, and all things generally enjoyed in society are the privileges that we get from being a part of the society. And privileges can be revoked as easily as they are given. Now, don't get me wrong, I believe that there are 100% certain rights that cannot be taken away from people (right to choose, free speech, free assembly, religion, etc), and I'll get to that point in a moment.

Now, generally, a private business can refuse service to anyone it chooses so long as it is not based on a protected class (race, religion, sex, national origin). Non-Vaccinated/Non-mask wearers, do not fall in this category, even if they are in one of those protected groups, because they are not being refused service/entry for those reasons, they are refused service/entry for the vaccine/masks. Thats what is important, the refusal to allow entry or restrict entry to a private place due to not wearing a mask/vaccine proof is no different from a restaurant or business saying "No shirt, no shoes, no service."

Now, I know this post is a wall of text but I want to just comment on the "my body my choice" argument that has been floating around. This is another false equivalency and strawman argument partially designed to jab at the abortion rights crowd. Now, I am 100% behind a woman's right to choose with respect to abortion. I'm 100% in favor of people's right to choose what they do with their own bodies.

You want to overeat and ballon to 500lbs, it's you right to do so
Want to drink booze every single day and destroy your liver, its your right to do so
Want to smoke 10 packs of cigarrettes and destroy your lungs? It's your right to do so

Now, this is again where controversy lies. Is your right to bodily autonomy more important than my right, or anyone else's right to continue living (lets not get into the abortion argument here, not the point of that statement). I would argue your right to be an idiot is not more important than the right of everyone else to not catch this disease. And this is where I think that businesses, the government, and citizens, are 100% correct in shaming and pushing out those who refuse to comply with the basic things to participate in a society.

Herd immunity is a proven thing and has helped destroy a lot of diseases, but they are slowly coming back with the anti-vax movement, etc. With COVID, yes, there are many other diseases and things that kill more people, but the conversation is not on those other topics, its on this one disease which has consumed the world in less than 2 years and changed or affected almost every person's life in some way.

This is where I think, people's right to be stupid ends. You get the jab, and participate in the society that you want to be apart of, or the society will push you out so those who do participate in it can continue to be safe and prosper.

Rant over <3

October 16, 2021

I might pick it up

August 9, 2021

Good afternoon,

The stated reason provided for you ban is in fact correct given the clear chat history that was recorded on the server. I am unsure what chat logs you are looking at if you do not find your comments to be not racist, bigoted and xenophobic. Given that you may not be looking at the correct GameMe logs I have taken the liberty to provide the except from your game session on August 7, 2021 since the evidence is pretty clear cut.

Now if you're thinking "but Samuels, I wasn't insulting any race, and not all of that could be considered racist or bigoted." From a technical definition you would be correct, there are certain statements that you made that are not inherently racist as all of those statements are not against any particular "race, religion or creed."

However, your comments were straight up textbook xenophobic. Here's the definition of xenophobia in case you are not aware what it means. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/xenophobia. If you don't want to read the definition, it is "a fear or hatred of strangers or foreigners or of anything that is strange or foreign." Now, if you happened to google or take a particular look under the Thesaurus at the synonym and near synonym section and you'll see that racism is equivalent to xenophobic. And even using a dictionary definition, I would still classify your statements as being racist based on the context in which your saying them.

There is a very fine line between what constitutes playful banter and what is harmful, racist, sexist, xenophobic, and otherwise generally harmful speech. If this was a single comment then I might feel more inclined to lessen or remove the ban, but as you can see from the time stamps, you went on like this for a full 20 minutes almost nonstop. There are not many rules on our server, all of which appear the instant you join the server and you ended up breaking one that should really be a no-brainer with following.

Your unban request is denied.

Capt. J. Samuels

Battalion Executive Officer

July 1, 2021

Always a great read guys!

May 31, 2021

Name: DA MAN!!!

Steam I.D: STEAM_0:1:596929093

I.P.: 68.235.43.77

Duration of Ban: Permanent

Reasons for the Ban: Aimbot

Demo Provided: No, MSgt. T. Booher, Cpl. Faller, Pfcs Landgren and Garcia all present. Conclusively found that some degree of aim assist was being utilized.

April 1, 2021

최고 Ban Hammer GIF들 | Gfycat

January 27, 2021

Congrats to our Winners

1st Place - Fielding - 408 points

2nd Place - Corney - 236 points

3rd Place Duckers - 118 points

January 9, 2021

By all means. Feel free to join us in Discord whenever you have time. This weekend is tough for me as I have work to deal with both IRL and for the MRB.

But generally you can find me in Discord any time past 8/9PM EST during the week.

January 9, 2021

42 minutes ago, Cubey said:

I do not think you are a "avid supporter of the 1st Amendment", every single person that I come across, tells me how much they support free speech, but when it comes to actual issues that happen in the real world, you see people cave and demand a censor. I think you are doing the same thin

That's your right to say even though you're incorrect. I love debate which is why I pursued the profession I'm in. Its always your right to tell me your opinion, and it's my right to tell you you're wrong. I've actually written an articles about Free Speech and an unpublished article about the same. They're not opinion articles and more legal in nature but I can send you those if you care for some light reading.

49 minutes ago, Cubey said:

from your tone it sounds like you are supporting the Twitter censorship that took place right now.

Until January 6, 2021 I did not support any censorship, even of the current President. But the fact that his acts and words were a direct cause of the events that took place I do believe in this case it was warranted. I understand that it does create a slippery slope as what could stop this from occurring to others, but there's plenty of other false and misleading information that is on the internet, even on Twitter, Facebook etc that is not subject to this.

51 minutes ago, Cubey said:

Trump is the president of the US, he is supposed to represent the views of his followers, and you do not get to censor that just because you do not like that.

As a candidate, yes. As a congressional or state representative or senator, yes. As the President of the United States, no. He represents ALL Americans, not just his followers. Yes, all politicians want to, and do cater to their political base, which Trump clearly has done as we all see. I believe the instant matter is different from that which he has done in the past. First, by looking at the past 4 years, he's said a myriad of things which people have found offensive, misleading, inflammatory, racist, sexist, and the list can go on. He called for fraud in the 2016 election as well, but he was not censored. When a person died in the Charlottesville Protests (for lack of a better term or whatever people will call it) and Trump said "bad people on both sides," there was outrage and the same calls as we see now, but he was not censored. The biggest difference between these instances is that here Trumps words and actions directly influenced this.

Trump explicitly told his supporters to walk to the Capitol to confront lawmakers, specifically the ones who would vote for ratifying the electoral vote. 5 People have died as a direct result of this "egging on." This has come after multiple months of pushing false information into the public. He sowed the seeds of distrust in the system. And yes, Freedom of Speech does allow for him to say these things. And yes, he, and others are allowed to say things which they may believe that others may not like. But not all speech is protected.

Legally, the following topics are not protected speech whatsoever and may be regulated and prohibited by the government.

Obscenity
Fighting words
Defamation (including libel and slander)
Child pornography
Perjury
Blackmail
Incitement to imminent lawless action
True threats
Solicitations to commit crimes
**It has also been debated whether verbal discussions as to treason fall within unprotected speech but this is not been explored by the legal community or the courts

Now here, Trump explicitly provoked his supports to engage in lawless action. Although some may say that this falls under some of the other prohibited speech topics this is the only one that legally is applicable. But I will not delve too far into the legalese as this is not the point.

1 hour ago, Cubey said:

I get the impression that you are also a Dem supporter, but sadly, like most Dem supporters I come across, you are not in favor of free speech, you want censorship.

Although I am a registered democrat I do not vote blindly down ticket and this is irrelevant to our discussion. Although you're correct that there are many democratic supporters that fall into that category, it is an unfortunate assumption to make for all. I'm not in favor of censorship, as I previously stated I enjoy the open debate, and I'm actually

frustrated at the current culture that has developed in the US and abroad that people become so easily offended by topics and issues that we could have discussed 5/6 years ago.

1 hour ago, Cubey said:

This will change. With the Dem Party, the one True Party, all dissidents will be targetted as hate speech speakers and sent to prison, as happened countless times in history. It is just a vague label that gets assigned to anyone against your party.

I still disagree with your statement here. Regardless of whether the Democratic Party is in power, the laws that exist, and the scores of Federal and State Judges who interpret these laws will not rule in favor of restrictions on speech in this manner. Speech, legally, can be restricted based upon the type of forum that it occurs in. See here if you want to read on the different types of forums and how speech can be restricted in them. I won't post any lectures here.

1 hour ago, Cubey said:

There are no hate speech laws in the US, at least not yet. Members of the KKK can rally together. There is no law against that. There are hate crimes laws that add extra sentencing for somebody already doing a crime but no hate speech laws by themselves.

Correct. But the simple fact that there is no laws against this does not negate that hate speech is morally and ethically wrong. Notwithstanding my opinion on this, as long as such speech does not fall within the unprotected types of speech that i listed above, anyone is free to use hate speech.

1 hour ago, Cubey said:

What you are doing, and this is what many more moderate Dems do, and you can correct me if I am mis-representing your views here, is coping. Coping with that their party is hardcore pro-Censorship. So what more moderate Dems is say something like, "Trump is a terrorist, he needs to be banned, he is calling for violence, that is messed up". Okay, even assuming that is true (it is not), what does his censorship have anything to do with the Censorship proposals against Fox, NewsMax, and OAN? What does his Censorship have anything to do with Google banning alternative media platforms from their services? What does his Censorship have anything to do with banning an intelligence scientist from various platforms?

Sorry, but you are misrepresenting my views. I'm strongly against the misrepresentation that those platforms and networks push out into the media. But I do not believe that stopping their stream of information will stop their ideas. I believe the opposite, it will only strengthen the push for those types of media. Like I said above, I'm a strong believer in debate and discussion. IMO the best way to change someone's opinion is through debate and discussion. But I do know that this does not always work as some people are just too rooted and stubborn in their beliefs.

1 hour ago, Cubey said:

Coping that the Dem party are the "good guys". The Dem party are not the good guys. Most individual members of the Dem party are good guys, but they sadly stuck in a cult and end up doing, or at least going along with, terrible things their Party does and are afraid to speak up (party because they are afraid to get censored themselves).

I agree. I am firmly against most of what the party leadership does. Most of what they say is simple rhetoric. I won't get too off topic because that's not the point of this thread, but I agree with this statement.

1 hour ago, Cubey said:

What ever happened to the idea: I may not agree with what you have to say but I will give up my life to defend your right to say it?

And I don't know. Informed debate is what this country was founded on, and its the root of why public news television was initially given its air-time back when TV was invented. Sadly, the informed debate that we need has been diluted and masked by the countless misinformation outlets that have popped up over the years. But even though it's misinformation, as long as it does not fall within non-protected speech, as outlined above, then they have a right to say it even though I personally disagree with it.

January 8, 2021

5 hours ago, Cubey said:

Here are the exact steps that will happen in the days that follow. First, Trump will be banned from twitter. Second, Dem party will call for the persecution of Trump and attempt to imprison him. Third, the Party will eliminate the Electoral College, eliminate the Supreme Court, and possibly eliminate the Senate (they all openly mentioned this many times). Fourth, the Party will possibly add new states to the US which will definitely vote in favor of their Party. Fifth, the Party will pass "hate speech laws" which, in actuality, will persecute anyone who speaks up against the party. Sixth, the Party will seek to pass laws controlling information on the internet and what people get to see. Seventh, the Party will pass "anti hate laws" which will put people in prison which are dissents of their cause. Eigth, the Party will entirely abolish the US Constitution under the pretense that it is a "racist document", the Bill of Rights will be removed, and they will install a "Social Constitution" which will only be filled with their Party values

I’ll briefly address some of your points Cubey because I feel like you started off on the right foot but kinda went all over the place with some points that are simple rhetoric and won’t actually happen.

1. Yes, Trump will likely be banned from Twitter. Propagating false, misleading, and inflammatory information by itself has shown to not be enough to be banned over the past several years. Only after doing it for so long and having it all culminate in what occurred on 1/6/21 will likely lead to the ban.

2. They can call for his imprisonment all they want, and personally I believe rightly so because IMO he’s committed multiple federal and state law crimes. But I believe we’ll probably see something similar to what happened with Nixon/Ford on the federal level. What New York and Georgia do with the State law crimes is going to be independent of what the political parties call for. I like to believe as an office of the Court (attorney) that most other people in my profession act on the law and not on political pressure. My belief on that is based on how we see a failure to bring charges against police for murder when people have been killed by them as the facts of those cases tends to not fall in with the legal definition for the crimes.

3. Democrats have said that they will eliminate the Electoral College for a long time now. They said they would do it during the Obama years, and even when they were in power and controlled both houses then they were not able to accomplish that.

4. Yes, it’s entirely possibly that adding new States could result in them becoming a new voting bloc for 1 party. DC has always been a liberal and progressive bloc. But simply adding new States might fragment the Democratic Party with more left leaning people. And there’s never a guarantee that any particular state or demographic will vote a particular way. We saw that with this past 2 election cycles.

5. This is a tricky one because as an avid supporter of the 1st Amendment the rhetoric that has come out from the Left is in fact troubling. I’m confident that no laws will be passed regarding censorship and even if they are the Supreme Court will not allow them to remain. Notwithstanding that, public opinion and public censorship is a very real thing and has become an issue in censoring thoughts, ideas, and discussion on a myriad of issues that in the past we could discuss without being offended. Without getting into a huge rant on “cancel” culture and the problems that it presents, I think any “laws” that may come about in this area will easily be defeated and struck down by the Courts.

6. This will not happen. The UN has declared that access to the internet is a human right in this day and age. Now while the US does not have the best track record with abiding by what the UN says, with the current administration being very Centrist, there will not be any restriction to internet access. Likely we will see a return of Net Neutrality from the FCC when the appointments are revisited and there will be a greater expanse in access to it by those across the country.

7. Hate to tell you but these already exist and are called “hate crimes.” “Hate speech” is not protected under the 1st Amendment and most criminal laws in the county include sentencing enhancements when the crimes are associated with “hate speech” or racial groups/minorities.

8. Not going to happen. The snowflakes on the left and right can bitch and moan all they want but it won’t be abolished.

2 hours ago, Cubey said:

I think Trump did actually unify a lot of people together.

He unified both people with common sense to see how unfit he was for the office and that he needed to be removed one way or the other. But he also brought together the worst aspects of America that previously were forced to hide out of shame. He normalized racist, bigoted, sexist, and idiotic behavior and all those people in the country like that felt that they could do do the same as the President acted that way.

Moreover he unified people around the world AGAINST America. He always preached “America first” but in doing so he made us a laughing stock on the world stage and made other countries band together and showed that the US cannot always be trusted to honor its commitment to its Allies. So in a horrible sense, yes, he did unify people at home and around the world.

2 hours ago, Cubey said:

The first president to not start a new war since WW2

This is a true statement. However while not starting any wars and running on the premises that he would pull troops out of the Middle East, he made the world a more dangerous place for America. And I won’t go into every since instance because we would be at our computers all day just typing but, take North Korea, pulling out of the Iran Nuclear deal, pulling troops out of Syria leaving our allies to be killed by Turkey are just a few of the instances at least globally that made the world less stable.

2 hours ago, Cubey said:

He was the first "president of the people" that the US had in a very long time. Not part of any establishment, and all the love he had, was from the people, not from the elites. But much of this what I say is not understood about Trump because the media is truly making people turn on him and think he is the most evil man ever.

This is also tricky. He did run on a pseudo-populist platform in 2016, but he quickly transitioned more of an authoritarian vision of his Presidency. The media worked both ways. The media was instrumental in creating him and elevating him in 2016, but since then has polarized with some basically making him the second coming of Christ or the anti-Christ depending on what outlet you watch. (Yes this is a gross generalization).

Personally, I think he is evil. Even before he took office the things he said and believed (if we even know what he believes/stands for anymore) just are things that normal people don’t. He incited his own supporters to not concede and in essence march on the Capitol and intimidate lawmakers. He caged and separated migrant/immigrant children from their families (regardless of how you stand on immigration this is morally and ethically wrong). He is not a moral, ethical, or empathetic person.

January 7, 2021

As with all politics I don't want to get preachy but it is kind of unavoidable given the recent events.

These are unprecedented times for sure. And I know it was plastered all over the news that this was/and is one of the few days that will live in infamy in the United States' history. It is pretty clear that the divides in our country (US) run deep and will likely not be healed for some time. Some think that it may get much worse from here before it gets better, but everything with Trump the past 4 years has come to this moment. The fact that there had to be a loss of life yesterday in something that is nothing more than ceremonial is beyond reprehensible and is downright shameful as a nation. We are fortunate that there was some common sense among the leaders of a certain party to drop most of the rhetoric and do the duty that they should have done from the start.

But to get back to the main point, the country, republic, and democracy will survive as it has in the past. But our credibility, prestige, and status of the nation has been severly damaged on both the world stage and in the eyes of the citizenry. But just because it is damaged does not mean it is broken beyond repair.

January 2, 2021

Well done you guys! Always enjoy the reads, interviews and realism news!

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Events

Posts posted by Samuels 1st MRB