This interview with John McWhorter is interesting when it comes to the ridiculous victimhood of liberals.

Or at least Entertaining to me this Not-the-bee article on Dilbert being canceled, includes all sorts of interesting real world information - like how Tesla got kicked out of ESG ratings entirely because despite the good they're supposedly doing for the environment, Elon Musk being a jerk counts for way more on the SG part of the rating than all the EV work in the world.

I still have yet to amass my large amount of admittedly "partisan" evidence against abortion. The only real reason it is partisan is because Democrats have gone off the deep end as far as denying the right to life, a basic right from the Declaration of Independence, to anybody they decide is "unwanted"- to the disabled, to minorities, to the poor.

But an interesting side question was asked, and deserves an answer: What would those of us who believe abortion is murder and genocide replace it with?

The answer is and should be obvious, but apparently it is not: We'd replace it with intergenerational households and an absolute right to private property for everybody.

All rent should be converted to rent-to-own schemes designed to give the previous owner income until they die, after which the renter becomes the owner. All families should, in this way, eventually *OWN* their households. Multiple generations of families can live in a single household, working together to build generational wealth. Divorce should be eliminated, as should the anti-human contraception schemes that keep "the poor" under oppression right now.

In other words, when you eliminate the sexual revolution, what you have left is natural, cisgendered, heteronormative humanity.

THAT is what we'd replace it with, and anybody who would object, may be a progressive, but is an anti-humanist no different than any of the other genocidal regimes of the 20th century.

Every time someone makes me a foe, I'm gonna friend them. Just for LOL's.

"Hi Buddy! Good to see ya!"

What used to be comedy science fiction very heavy on the comedy, continued the darkening of the end of Season 2 with a very important, very dark and serious episode about war-induced PTSD, racism, suicide, resurrection, and forgiveness.

Where I saw the 5th act (yes, Seth McFarlane took advantage of the Hulu deal to do what he said and make the entire show more cinematic and longer episodes) as kind of a tack on to the original story line (in that, the episode was complete an hour in, then suddenly, the engineer while having sex had a moment of inspiration and ran off in his bathrobe to "resurrect" the suicide victim using a "backup personality" found in Isaac's computerized brain- despite the central processing unit and memory being fried on purpose with a targeted electrical surge- now that's some prime technobabble worthy of the show's Star Trek heritage), I was glad for the sudden reversion to Christianity that some atheists like Seth have a tendency to do. Still, it took a very powerful morality tale, which was fine on its own from ANY standpoint, and turned it into a story line that seemed more at home on PureFlix than on Hulu (especially with the forgiveness offered by one PTSD sufferer, convincing another PTSD sufferer to help "save" the person who they both saw as an enemy due to race).

But maybe this belongs here more. When I ineptly referred to it on facebook, I got 72 hours in facebook jail.

Abortion and Guns are now likely to be the two things the major parties square off against each other in November. Both are pro-life issues. But I would say both are also *heterosexual marriage* issues.

It is male abandonment of our offspring that is the common cause of both socially alienated youth (a very small, but significant, portion of which will become violent and sometimes irrational criminals) and the perceived need by feminists for abortion.

NEITHER of the major political parties is currently willing to address this problem. Progressives aren't willing to address it because they think the patriarchal family is a tyrannical model for teaching morality, and they hate both tyranny and morality. Liberal Neocons aren't willing to address it because divorce is profitable- no-fault divorce doubly so. And of course, promoting heterosexuality flies in the face of what we're about to start, First Deadly Sin Month, in which heterosexuals will be vilified for not keeping up with the latest trends in sexual sin and worship of the Holy Orgasm.

A Canadian company, investing in Nevada real estate might be your next big chance to profit off of President Biden's Stupidity. Electric tanks and humvees will need an American supply of lithium. AWLIF is a penny stock (currently trading less than $1 a share) that has been quietly prospecting lithium in Nevada.

Is the idea of an electric powered tank rather ridiculous from an invading-foreign-nations-for-regime-change point of view (where the enemy already controls the electric grid)? Yes. But it isn't that much more ridiculous than all the other insanity the army has done over the years- and it will cause development of domestic supply chains in the United States.

Why do you want to give the incumbent any advantage at all? It does not jibe with your general attitude towards them. Artificial term limits only limit the voters' choice. And it has absolutely no effect on the power of the Party and its incumbency. The simplest, fairest way to do it is to make everyone start in the same place. Giving the incumbent any advantage of any kind at all is entirely unfair

Please use

instead of

<blockquote>

Something is afoot.. Must be part of the war effort

Assume a "Coruscant Earth"- an Earth where *all* potential space is used, both land and sea, for a combination of food production and living space. Use the Permaculture formula of one acre per person of absorbed sunlight, with 100% conversion to whatever mass/energy combination we need to create food and energy of one person to live.

Earth is about 510,000,000 km^2. There are 247 acres in a square kilometer. This yields (with much better technology than we currently have, of course) a maximum population of 125.97 billion people, each owning one acre.

Of course various contracts would increase efficiency and there'd be the normal range of capitalism creating rich and poor in the long run, but at least there'd be an agreed upon base lifestyle- even if it's only a kayak with a net anchored at sea or a tent on land.

And other interesting conspiracy theories from the land of cultural evolutionary theory of Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying can be found at https://youtu.be/ipiT5noHWk4

As we are beginning to see divisions appear that are destructive to the Constitutional Representative Republic known as the United States of America, with Democrats finding new ways to cheat at democracy and the promotion of mob rule; combined with the massive increase in information technology we've seen over the past 40 years, I propose the following changes to governmental budget processes:

1. Break up the budget into line items

2. Forward those line items to taxing authorities at every level- city, county, state, and federal

3. Allow individual tax payers to fill out an extra-long-form return, with the caveat that by doing so you agree to allocate every penny of your taxes to something that makes a difference in your life or the lives of people you care about.

Doing so would reduce the incentive of the rich to cheat on their taxes (because by paying more taxes, they can regain some small amount of power to fund government programs directly) while enhancing even the common person's ability to influence government (truly voting with dollars for programs that help your family and your friends).

People who choose not to fill out the extra long form, have their taxes applied to the general fund which provides matching grants to those programs that either nobody else will fund (one FTE if your program attracted $0 this year, whose job it will be to promote the program next year; otherwise grants will be some percentage of dollars raised).

Would there have been a case for the lockdowns and other restrictions on freedoms — including mask-mandates — if the original COVID-19 was as insignificant as Omicron?

The obvious answer is: "No"...

To me this means, any such restrictions must be lifted immediately, lest they become as permanent as rent control in New York City...

This spring, the Supreme Court of the United States, will once again be considering a case on USC 42 Title 42 Chapter 6A Subchapter XIX

Despite many changes to the law over the past century, the Biden Vaccine Mandate will be the first challenge to this law since Jacobson vs Massachusetts (1905), in which a State's Right to force vaccination upon a private individual or a group of individuals was established.

As the major Web 2.0 sites are now censoring discussion on this issue, I'm opening up for discussion- Did Congress intend this to become a power of the federal government?