>The entire Federal apparatus needs to be systematically, surgically, and completely dismantled, Yes. The whole thing is a private rothschild corporation and hasn't been a legitimate government since 1865. >Under that pretense, any individual entity is just a hydra head, waiting to be replaced with two more upon running it out of town. So only take on the entire machine rather than dismantle it systematically? That's dumb. In a fight you find points of failure (weakness) and attack those points first rather than take on the whole. The more complicated a thing is the more points of failure it will have but that doesn't make the whole easier, that makes the part easier. >You know what would be a cool re-take on the premise of Fight Club? If the entire script forked when they had the politician in the bathroom, his balls wrapped up in a tight rubber band, and a sharp knife against the base of his sack. > >If, only, they had simply recognized they outnumbered their enemy to such extremes, all they had to do was do that same thing to all of them, at the same time. I fail to see the relevance to this specific chain of comments. If you're saying we need to attack each individual unelected "leader" to defeat the whole, that's hilarious because your initial statement says the precise opposite. >You need to decide if you're gonna keep playing checkers, or if you want to join some of us in playing chess. Excuse me? You think you're playing chess while wanting to fight the whole at once as a single unit rather than it's individual, weak units? That's laughable. e; Because what you're painting right now is that you think overturning (((Roe))) as a singular suit was the wrong choice and States' Attorneys General should have brought some mass "RICO" type suit to SCOTUS with every single infringement of the 10th and the constitution as a whole forth. That's retarded and lesser than even checkers. That's childish. Everything you're pushing as "the way to go", as muh chess is foolish, wrong and childish.