Next Generation
There is a report out that the Houthis in Yemen have acquired hypersonic missiles. These are "next generation" weapons -- top of the line. So, when the Houthis decide to use such weapons, are they ready to be ushered into the "next generation" warfare? You know ... really massive mass destruction, like nuclear weapons or other, non-nuclear weapons that yield devastation. Of course, given today's mindset, the obvious answer is, "No, those who currently possess such weapons are unlikely to use them because someone might get hurt." A world of paper tigers ruled by Islamic extremists, then.
Breaking ... Yawn ... News
I know, I know ... this isn't really "news" as in "Wow, I didn't see that coming!" Both Biden and Trump have already won their party's nomination. (It feels like the story out of Moscow of Putin running with no opposition.) Some states haven't even voted yet. But when I saw my primary ballot and it included some 10 names, only one of which was running anymore, I knew it was a foregone conclusion. And so with Biden. Once again America offers its best candidates ... somewhere else, because they aren't going to be on our ballots come November.
After All ...
Vice President Harris visited a Planned Parenthood clinic in Minnesota as part of the Biden administration efforts to urge the expansion of the murder of unborn babies ahead of the election. After all, if the government can't encourage killing the most defenseless humans, who can they kill?
Connecting
Social media is a good way for young people in particular to connect. Like in Massachusetts where six 8th-graders chatted online into the wee hours of the morning with "hateful and racist comments" and aims of violence, racial slurs, derogatory images, and a mock slave auction. So where am I to look in that story? Where were their parents? Why was that "okay" in the minds of these kids? How did children so young become so hateful? At what point does speech without action become criminal? Makes you really think highly of social media, doesn't it?
Got to Beelieve
Boeing has announced that it has managed to fix a malfunctioning whistleblower. (Actual story). In a related story, a group of terrorists decided not to hijack a plane when they discovered it was a Boeing. As luck would have it. And from the UK comes this heart-rending story of millions of British kids being forced to live normal happy lives as the government bans puberty blockers. Oh, the humanity!
Must be true; I read it on the Internet.
6 comments:
The Houthi's better get there licks in now, because one thing you can say about Trump in foreign policy, he was no pushover. It is unfortunate that it will take some actual death to get people involved and willing to fight back.
Maybe somewhere in the multiverse there are 2 candidates that aren't the lesser of two evils. Of course, just like the multiverse theory, it helps us none here.
Killing babies? They're just getting warmed up. Lol all the babies and all the elderly and there won't be a population for them to govern. I mean, that's the ultimate goal of any American, not to have to do anything. If there are no people to govern, government doesn't need to do it's job and they can retire into the wasteland utopia they've been dreaming of.
And people keep telling me that everyone is basically good.
The Houthi hyper sonic missile thing is pretty scary. They clearly don't have any concept of how to win friends and influence people, and those are very difficult to defend against. I think this is a situation where it's reasonable to engage in a preemptive strike against them to render them as harmless as possible. Perhaps they forgot that they are affiliated with the religion of peace.
Note: The link in the Connecting story is fixed.
Next Generation
What a horror! Even if one believes the world would be better without weapons, the fact that the world is better off when only better people have them is a legit goal in a fallen world where weapons will always exist. These people only have evil intent. They should not have them and should be regarded as a clear and present danger, every bit as much as their Iranian sponsors are.
Breaking ... Yawn ... News
First, these two offered themselves and people chose them over others who did as well. There's nothing whatsoever "Putin-like" about it, though the Dems are pushing as close to such things as they believe they may be capable.
In response to David, all such contests are "lesser of two (or more) evils". As Stan's previous post reminds, there are none who do good and such. What we know is that between the two, one has proven himself to have been superior to both his predecessor (arguably several of them) and without a doubt is superior to what replaced him fraudulently. How much better off we'd have been had that not happened is not tough to figure, and all suggestions otherwise have no basis. Some had stated a preference for Pence, and this selection of VP made it easier for such to hold their noses when voting for Trump. But in no way would we have been better off given Pence's history of spinelessness. In any case, while I would have relished not hearing all the nonsense about why Trump shouldn't be in office which has no relevance to what it means to be a good or great president...damn the general welfare!...the people clearly want more of what he brought to the table the first time around. I want more than that and hope he'll have learned from his mistakes, even if he never admits to them. It's no different than other presidents for whom I voted.
After All ..."
Don't know what's worse: People voting for Dems because they want more freedom to off their own kids, or the Dems knowing they'll benefit by campaigning on providing it.
Connecting
This sickens me, and the liberty given by the parents to these kids to do this sort of thing is child abuse. I pray the kids will grow out of it, but it's more likely their kids will be even worse.
My comment was in regard to a fictional alternate universe where each candidate is trying to be the slightly better choice. What we have is two candidates trying to be the not-as-bad-as-him choice. They are both trying to be only less distasteful than the other.
As for "damn the general welfare", I'm hoping you don't mean what I think you mean. As far as I understand it, the whole purpose of government is to promote and protect the general welfare of its people. Now, if you're taking specifically about the financial system we call "Welfare", then sure, not too thrilled about that.
As for the personal foibles of the person, I think they do matter as to there effectiveness as president to a degree, or at least our trust in him. I imagine you have castigated Haley, like most everyone has (and I think properly), for turning back on her word about supporting whoever ended up being the nominee. You can't be mad at her for her unwillingness to keep her word, and yet ignore that very same standard for Trump (the man has been divorced how many times and cheated on his current wife? Not exactly a man of his word). Did he do an okay job, in comparison to other choices at the time? Sure. But that doesn't mean I can ignore his faults either. Just as pastors and elders are held to a higher standard than laymen, government officials, especially at the highest level, should be held to higher standards than the normal citizen. This nation has pretty much given up on any kind of moral standard, so it's not surprising that our only choices are corrupt (Biden) and degenerate (Trump).
David,
All we need to do when it comes to governments offing their citizens is look north to Canada, the fact that the left idolizes their "health care" system and wants to bring it here signals a rise in deaths of the very young, the old, and the very ill.
I agree with Art that all elections are to some degree a choice for the lesser of two evils. But in the last two presidential elections our choice has been between two of the worst candidates in (recent) history. Both of them are low character individuals who are in many ways ill suited for the office. Even granting that Trump did have some successes in his firs term, he's still not the best candidate that the GOP could have run. Clearly the character of these two candidates is less important to many of their supporters than other factors. My hope is that we can get past this election and the next 4 years, and hopefully find better people to run for president.
Obviously, I'd agree that Trump is the lesser of two evils in this case, but that is a low bar indeed.
Excellent point about the double standard of the Trump supporters. It's ridiculous to compliant that Haley has gone back on her promise, when you look at how Trump is treating DeSantis, who did support him. I think that this is one of the things about trump that bothers me the most. As someone who can only serve one term, it seems reasonable that he should be looking beyond himself and to who will follow him. If you look at the likely 2028 candidates De Santis has to be at the top of that list. Yet Trump's obsession with bashing someone who has the most executive experience and a track record of success in FL that is impressive, makes me wonder if he is even interested in who follows him? Given his recent announcement that he's not a conservative, why would we assume that he would endorse or support a conservative to follow him? I could see him choosing Gabbard for his VP, and pushing her as his successor despite her lack of conservative/GOP credentials. IS that really who we want in 2028?
IMO, Gabbard as VP is actually not a bad choice from a selfish perspective. She's at least not totally nuts, and she might help Trump pick up a few more black voters who are on the fance about him.
Post a Comment