Pfeiffer For President Savage Mode

Day 3,238, 17:24 • Published in USA USA • by Goddess Dilvany




I am writing this not because it gives me sexual pleasure(It does), but because I think it is important to establish an important distinction. I disagree with the character of Pfeiffer I think he is an egotist and possible sociopath. Now do I hold that against him, no people are too hating of sociopaths and egotists. They do have feelings and lead ordinary lives.

Pfieffer is in my opinion has some good ideas. I want to see a more rigid investigation of how we can optimize taxes. He is right about how the game designers set it up so you have to be dependent on them to even make an in game profit. Companies are only profitable after you have put in thousands of gold and even then you are often losing out to pollution. He is strategic, a good planner, and generally smart(When he is not spewing establishment talking points).

I mean there is a lot of bad shit you can say about Pfieffer. Should he be blacklisted by his own standards? Yes! Is he an establishment figure who just appeals to populism to appear socialist? Most Certainly! Will his plans lead to more government cronyism? Maybe.... time will tell... I am hopeful!

Also I really have quit watching Pfeiffer streams. I liked them but there is nothing production by watching or trying to participate. Hopefully I can get a schedule and try to build up another QNN Live or SFP radio show.

On Cerb



This is all under the assumption Cerb isn't trolling us it could be true, but I am inclined to believe he is being honest.

I don't disagree with Cerb, entirely. Do I think he should of renamed the party and basically taken over, no. I am not against cleaning up the image of the SFP. My style of joking around and not taking much seriously will not pull in everyone. Discipline and building alliances are good strategies. The problem I have with Cerb is that his solution to this problem is built on a fundamental fallacy. The reason why we have problems working with other parties is that we are actually a threat to their power. What amount of compromise is acceptable? This is where the disagreement lies. It is this idea that we can still be revolutionary if we give up everything, because hey now we have power! But power to get anything done? I have a poem that explains the Cerb phenomena maybe you are familiar with it.

After the uprising of the 17th June
The Secretary of the Writers Union
Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee
Stating that the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?