Thank you all for your support and following us here on Locals! To get the full experience, all the behind the scenes, the interactive chat, and the weekly chats with our talent; you should join as a supporter here on Locals! For as little as $5 a month or $50 a year, you can support Right Side Broadcasting Network in our efforts to showcase free speech and the free exchange of ideas!
Hit the "Become a Supporter" button on PC or the + button on Mobile!
Thank you for your support!
Interact with other like-minded supporters of the RSBN Community and know the others in the chat are supporting Right Side Broadcasting just like you! Encourage others to join the chat and have fun!
Note: Chat is moderated to prevent NSFW content. Keep it civil, clean and respectful!
The left, because of their claim of being "progressive", refuses to accept even their own previous spending patterns and policies in a Congressional bill. Instead, it is ever "onward and upward". The extent of this extreme is being seen now: If other members of Congress do not accept their very latest 'advancement', then they would rather shut the government down then to even accept their very own bills or CR's that they advanced up until now. This extremism makes it unmistakably clear that the way to approach federal bills from this time forward is not by simply attempting to forward previous iterations, since the left won't even accept that. Instead, it is time to lay the ax to the entire tree, and cut out everything that they have forwarded until now and present a completely fresh bill, which among other things, represents all the drastic spending cuts needed to spend less than what the government takes in. This is what true leadership looks like in the face of an opponent that leaves ...
In a meeting recently, Amy Klobuchar was sharing a personal story of her relative being killed by a shooter. After sharing this and other related things, she then asked Kash Patel "should we limit assault rifles? what do you think?" One of the tactics of those who promote gun restriction is to make their narrative personal and create a leadup, to pull on the hearts of the listeners and "bend" them in their direction. This is not new, but how this question is answered is very important. It is a trap, designed to make it easy for the person answering to either compromise their convictions or seem cold and unsympathetic, and their answer is used against them to the public. It is possible to answer these questions in a way which balances true sympathy and respect, with the reality that the right to keep and bear arms 'shall not be infringed'. This balance does not have to be a mental tightrope. An example of such an answer is:
"[Person's Title], I am very sorry for your loss, and have ...
