Opinion: This is about far more than swimming topless : Holly Thomas, CNN.COM

The Nat-C View from "National Review".

First of all, I did not find DeSantis’s statement to be particularly offensive. Did it lack the moral clarity I would prefer? Certainly. The use of “territorial dispute” to describe Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (the initial goal of which was to absorb the country wholesale if possible) is the sort of studied, bloodlessly “neutral” language choice that suggests a degree of audience pandering. But unless you want to elevate in-the-weeds policy disputes about which weapons systems to send to Ukraine into elemental moral choices between Good and Evil in United States politics, then the criticism of DeSantis cannot properly be that he wrote out a careful, line-straddling response to the question.

Because I have a brain and enjoy using it on occasion, I can clearly see that this “position statement” on Ukraine has been lawyered within an inch of its life to signal to voters that DeSantis, while not a Rand Paul–like isolationist, is also not a kept pet of the neoconservative Republican old guard (who, as Charlie delicately pointed out in his earlier piece, don’t exactly have the finest track record on these matters). DeSantis is wooing Trump or Trumpy voters, not voters like me. (Voters like me want to see someone conservative and effective win the nomination, so that we win the presidency and get to do enjoyably conservative things. We can already agree about DeSantis, regardless of whether he is our first choice or not.) I suppose some expect me to find the compromises politicians make in positioning themselves in presidential politics — the way they trim and tack in the political winds without letting their masts snap or sails shear away — to be something to condemn.

Nah. And you will never stampede or shame me into thinking otherwise. Furthermore, Ron DeSantis has nothing really to defend; his campaign wrote a statement I pretty much agree with...

So I find it insulting that we are being asked to pretend that this is the latest in a series of “disqualifying” acts committed by Ron DeSantis when it is no such thing...

Sandy Hook Plaintiffs Call Alex Jones Too Malicious To Discharge $1.4B Damage Award In Bankruptcy

Proud Y'all Qaeda Nat-C Republicans - Fascists by Any Other Name are Still the Same

"If you don't defend child pornographers, we are only one step away from naziism." Andrew Kloster

Matt Gaetz's new "Counsel".

https://www.thedailybeast.com/matt-gaetzs-new-staffer-identifies-as-a-raging-misogynist

I'm groaning aloud from the cringe that I feel.. It's no laughing matter to be cut off and peeled...

A penis ought not be, an exception for rules, that prohibit removal of parts that are "you".

Yet still to this day, this butchery proceeds, with dicks in the lips of those making them bleed.
It's licensed and practiced all over the world, with blessings from "YAHWEH", the "God" that they dread!

No reasonable person would ever assert that dicks are for cutting right after a birth.
The pain it inflicts on the child, soon a man, is literally irreparable, not ever, in hand.

The penis's frenulum roughly contains, 4000 nerve endings, for pleasure and pain.
Removing the foreskin that lubes and protects, is bereft of reason, it punishes sex.

Dismembering dicks of a lad as a babe, is crime that I'm angry 'bout still to this day.

May reason rule.

He's guilty of facilitating the deaths if over 800,000 of our citizens

He's guilty of crimes against humanity.

He's a Fascist GOP Nat-C.

He and his ilk have the same three goals as the historical Nazis:

Intimidation
Incarceration
Extermination

The Nuremberg trials delivered the type of Justice that he deserves.

May reason rule and Justice be served!

Wrote this back in 2015 under the nom de plume, Unh Huh and The Yeah Whatevers

Alex Jones would get $520,000 salary under bankruptcy plan

Right on y'all! I appreciate the civil intellectual discourse, it's how I continue to learn!

Thank you for the meaningful, well thought out and and informed responses.

TIL about Terry Heick, I will read into his work further, as I find his examination of curiosity most fascinating! So cool!



I learned at an early age that definition of terms define how one approaches a subject.

Differentiation of terms and the inferences one draws from them are akin to our life experiences, where many experience the same thing simultaneously, with each coming away with their own unique experience.

I was reared as a "true believer" within a sect of the Abrahamic Blood Cults. I was inculcated from birth, and was taught to reject all doubt, instead embracing the delusion of faith, which as presented within the fable, requires one to cast aside all doubt, and merely "believe".

Within the fable, Thomas was decried for his lack of "faith" because he doubted.

Today, I view the fabled Thomas as a heroic figure. He was the only character that even attempted to embrace reason.

It took me thirty years to escape the tenacious grip of the Abrahamic delusions that I had been inculcated with since birth.

So for me, doubt is a many splendid thing.

When I rejected doubt, I was "beat to hell" by the delusions that I embraced as a result of that rejection.

When I embraced doubt, I was "lifted out" by the doubt that I had necessarily employed to gain reason.

Hence, "Beat to hell, lifted out, odd to say, both times by doubt!"

Doubt is my "savior".
Reason is my "god".

My best take on the Abrahamic tales is: "If your father's forgiveness needs blood for the plan, wash in the son of your god's, not the suffering mans!!"

Peace y'all, and may reason rule!