Right reversal

Photo by Sora Shimazaki on Pexels.com

“The sky is falling! The sky is falling!”

OK, Chicken Little…or littles….there is a lot of yelling, crying, hand-wringing, and plain old threats of violence over the Supreme Court of the United States’ reversal of the Roe v. Wade decision. A decision that has been on debate about the correctness, legality, and morality since it was handed down nearly 50 years ago.

In my humble opinion, this is the right reversal. I say it that way because of two things: it overturns a precendent set in the past that was wrong from the start and it removes the ability to legally kill human babies.

I wrote all the way back in December of last year, when this case was being heard by SCOTUS, that the danger of precendent was something that the court could not and should not stand on, simply for standing on precendent. I also wrote about it way back in 2019, about precedent being danderous. I was trying to show that previous courts had made decisions that were wrong and that needed to be overturned because they were morally wrong and righted wrongs that never should have existed. When this decision was leaked to the press (in and of itself, unprecedented) early, the sky began falling then. This just confirms that there are some who clearly are going to die on this hill and that a large portion of the United States is morally bankrupt.

So, again, overturning the first decision to legalize abortion at the federal level was the correct thing to do. It’s the right reversal. There is no inherent right or implicet right in the Constitution for an individual to take a life, let alone to kill babies. It can’t be Constiutionally protected because there are no means to justify it.

It’s the right reversal because there is no moral justification for taking the life of a baby. You can’t tell me that an inch and a half (or three, or whatever amount) of skin and tissue makes the different between whether or not a baby, a child, a human is alive or not. Once it has a detectable heartbeat, no matter the time or space, it is alive. Some might even argue earlier, but a heartbeat for sure is discernable and can’t be debated. It just can’t. No argument can be created or defended that would change this fact and to do so would simply be smoke and mirrors to displace the real issue.

Once again, there will be a lot of complaining, groaning, screaming, and lying (yes, lying) about the wrong that has been done with this right reversal. For many in the country, there can no better or singular issue to demonstrates their depravity than this. Any opinoin that directly supports killing children, at any age, tells you alot about the person holding the opinion.

Afternoon pondering

Photo by Brett Jordan on Pexels.com

Just had a thought float through the brain. It was sort of a random thing since I wasn’t thinking about this at all, but it just sort of popped in and now I can’t seem to get it out of my head?

Anyone been following the Elon Musk and Twitter thing? You know, that he wants to buy it for like $46 billion?

The thought that floated and stuck…what if he bought it for that boat load of money and then just pulled the plug? Like just shut it down. No more Twitter, period.

How cool would that be?

Anyone else think that would be cool?

Talk about the ultimate boss move. Buy it. Shut it down. Move on.

Cool.

Probably won’t happen, but I think it would be cool if it did.

Vacuum Tube

Photo by Matheus Cenali on Pexels.com

*Eye roll*

*Sits back and watches insanity unfold*

So, there is still this argument by a large segment of the population that kept saying “Follow the science” that isn’t going to accept the fact that the science never supported the mandated masks on airplanes. In most cases, in general, the mandated masks were never really supported in most places. But, this is a victory for all who have ridden in a large, silver, metal vacuum tube and felt suffocated by the policy.

As I am sure you are all aware now, the mask mandate on public transportation, the biggest of which was airlines. The CDC, which instituted the policy while under the watch of President Trump, was ruled to have exceeded their authority – really no surprise here. At first, it seemed a reasonable step as there was so much unknown about what was going on (I am trying to avoid being shadowed banned here, possibly, so being a little vague but you know what I mean). Through every iteration of the unknown, the mandate has remained in place even though the severity, and risk, has diminished substantially.

The CDC themselves said that the science showed that most face masks didn’t work for stopping the spread, but there was never a requirement instituted that you had to wear a certain kind of mask on a plane to stop the spread. More science showed that the air in an airplane (granted this is the industry that stands to benefit from riders) was mostly safe since it was cycled in and out regularly and often. As such, when you put those two scientific finding together, masks on an plane didn’t make much sense.

Isn’t it weird (actually it’s not) that one side of the aisle screams follow the science when it fits their agenda but doesn’t want to follow the science when it doesn’t?

Now, there are people all over social media screaming and crying about having to fly in a metal death trap tube because masks aren’t required. Hold up! Wait, wait, wait! It’s not required…not banned…meaning, if you still feel the need to wear a mask, wear one! If you feel at risk and the bare faces of the people around you makes you feel anxious, don’t fly.

It’s pretty simple…you know, just like they were telling those of us that didn’t want to get stuck or wear a mask or provide proof…if you don’t want to do it, just don’t go the the place that require it. Take your business somewhere else that will accommodate you. Or just don’t.

Shoe’s on the other foot now, isn’t it?

Counter-productive

Or maybe mixed message.

Hell, all I know is the Democrats want to have their cake and eat it too.

Democrats push clean energy. Like PUSH it. It is the solution to all the world’s ills and will save the planet. We keep hearing this over and over and over. It doesn’t matter that creating clean energy also has it’s drawbacks. Except…see below.

Democrats also want to protect the environment. By that, they mean earth, plants, animals, etc etc etc. Thus, their push for clean energy is their answer. At all cost, protect the environment. Seems that protection has a cost that is intentional and unintentional at the same time.

Democrats are punishing clean energy (their answer for everything) for killing part of the environment (their favorite hill to die on) by using the very government they control (at the moment) to hurt the industry they tout because it hurt the environment they want to protect.

I mean, come on, this is kind of ludicrous any way you look at it. You want clean energy so they build it. But, in building it, there will be some wildlife that dies because, well, their wild and you can’t control their actions. So, you make suggestions to mitigate the damage and you make exceptions and create acceptable collateral damage waivers. If the companies don’t play your game, then you punish them for wild things doing what wild things do.

Equivelent? You need to get from one place to another. You need a road to get there. Someone wants to build said road (let’s say 100 miles) through an area where wild animals are known to exist. You tell the road builder (or the people using the road) that they need to do something to keep the wild animals crossing the road from getting hit by vehicles driving on the road. You tell them they either need to build a 8 foot fence on one side, both sides, or apply for a waiver that will exempt people from having to pay a fine when animals get killed. They decide the cost is too prohibitive to build the road because of the regulations, so they don’t build the road you wanted. OR, the rules get waived, the road gets built, and then the rules are reinstated afterwards leading to the people that built the road or travel the road to get punished because you changed the rules on them.

Anyway, you can see the stupidity here, right? Democrats hurting the very thing they encourage.

Not science

Photo by Ekky Wicaksono on Pexels.com

Don’t where mask. Wear masks. Masks won’t help, masks help, masks are virtually worthless. No mask mandate, mask mandate, no mask mandate, more mask mandates, relax mask mandates. Now, the CDC says that masks aren’t needed by most people while indoors. OK, so what does that mean? Well, “the CDC says…” is at it again. Only other government agencies don’t seem to be listening to them either.

The TSA just extended the mask mandate for another month, despite the fact that the CDC said it was safe to drop the mask mandate. So, for those of you flying on planes over the next month and a half (or so) you will still be wearing the nearly useless (the CDC’s words) face condom.

The curious thing is that when people were flying early on in this whole thing, the government and airlines were touting that airplane air was nearly the safest you could have because of filters and quick recycling, etc. The need for masks on a plane seemed strange then if there was this whole PR campaign around how safe it was. Now, as the whole things is beginning to wind down and “the CDC recommends…” is back on the menu, they want to extend mask usage “in the safest air” space.

So was the science true or not?

Perhaps this is more of the parental “Because I said so” statement from the government rather than for real good reasons. When you combine the information from what “science” says with what the CDC says, maybe it should be left to the individual on whether or not you should wear a mask. For those who are scared and feel unsafe, wear a mask. For those who are not or feel protected sufficiently, they should have the choice not to.

Seems simple enough, right?

Flip-flopping away…

Photo by cottonbro on Pexels.com

Did you see that? No, really, did you see that theater by the President last night? I am not even sure Biden was serious last night or if it was really intended to be a comedy show because there were so many obvious, moments of pandering and flip-flopping that I had to keep manually closing my jaw as it seemed it was frozen open last night.

I don’t really look for much when it comes to the State of the Union address. It typically is a clap-fest for whichever party is in control and there is a bunch of vague plans with grandios goals. There is almost never any substance and the political pandering to the party base is sickening.

I hope Biden is actually OK this morning because he must have strained his back or his neck or maybe some leg or arm muscles after all that flip-flopping he did regarding issues the independents and Republicans have been screaming about for two years. I haven’t seen fish do more flip-flopping than that.

Now he wants to protect our borders?

Now he wants to fund to the police?

Can you say playing to the crowd?

Well, some of the crowd. Remember that mask mandate? Suddenly dropped – science hasn’t magically changed. Remember that forced vaccination mandate? Remember all those people who lost their jobs and livelihoods. Suddenly all is supposed to be forgiven as he makes a few promises that will actually never be realized?

It was quite the show. As it always is…

Laughably true

Perspective…

I don’t know who made this but I saw it come across a social media feed this morning and all I could think was how laughably true this meme was, and how truly it puts leadership and circumstances into perspective.

Anyone else seen this running around the web? What do you think?

Check back

Photo by Aimee on Pexels.com

Yesterday the invasion and subjagation of Ukraine began. The Soviets, er, I mean Russian government is up to it’s old tricks. There was no doubt that it was going to happen. The writing on the wall started well before the last administration. Not to say that the previous administration could have stopped it either, but there shouldn’t have been any surprise that it was only a matter of time.

I listened to Mr. President’s speech and then Q & A after. One thing really stuck out to me.

“Let’s check back in a month and see how the sanctions are working on Russia…” or something to that effect. I can’t remember the exact wording but I was like, “Do you really think the Ukrainian people have a month? This is all going to be over in a month.”

Ukraine is vastly out manned, out gunned, and honestly there are no good options for providing aid to them. We live in a world where the spectre of a nuclear war (if not just a limited, tactical one) hangs over our heads when dealing with Russia or China. But, in this case, Putin is almost sure the Americans will do not much of anything to stop him.

Sanctions aren’t the answer and it can’t be the only answer.

Sanctions take a LONG time to have any effect and almost always it is the people of a country that is harmed by them, not the government or the elite. It’s not like Putin is going to wake up one morning, head to the ATM, and get the “Funds Denied” message so he decides the war with and invasion of Ukraine isn’t worth it. Let’s be real.

I don’t want war, but I am not sure what would convince Putin to stand down. He knows the American people don’t have the stomach for more war (after 20+ years in Afghanistan and the fiasco of a withdrawal there). Most Americans likely will rattle the sabers, talk big, even attend rallies protesting Putin’s actions, but when it comes time to actually get out of their comfort zones and ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING or SACRIFICE SOMETHNG they will balk.

So, we are left with “check back in a month”.

I feel sorry for Ukraine and the lack of action that they really needed from the West to keep it from happening.

I feel sorry for my children and grandchildren as we enter a new Cold War era…

Misplaced blame

Photo by Gezer Amorim on Pexels.com

The Sandy Hook and Remington settlement is bad news for gun makers, sets a horrible precedent, and is a total and complete case of misplaced blame by the Left.

Democrats and Progressives have tried to tie gun crimes to guns and gun makers for years and years. In this settlement, they have finally achieved their goal. Demonize the tool and not the criminal. In fact, they have gotten more successful in that direction as a whole.

The Left is decriminalizing all kinds of things that have been crimes in the past because they blame the “system” for failures. This is totally off topic for this post, but of course it isn’t the “system” that has failed – except that they keep making the “system” bigger so the blame could be placed directly in their lap again. Less government, less “system.”

Anyway, the settlement with the gun maker isn’t a solution. The blame should be placed squarely on the individual who committed the crime. The gun (and the gun maker) didn’t commit the crime. The gun is a tool, and when used incorrectly it obviously can have devastating and tragic consequences.

But let’s get realistic though. Are you going to blame a knife and knife maker for a mass stabbing? Are you going to blame a hammer and hammer maker for a mass bludgeoning? A car and car maker for someone who plows through a crowd of people?

You can’t blame the tool or the tool maker. The action comes from the person on the end of the tool causing tool to either fulfill it’s purpose or to misuse it from it’s purpose.

The person is the only person who can take the blame. The person provides the impetus, the motive, the intent, the action. Otherwise, the tool sits there – useless.

The Left needs to think about the true cause of the crime. It isn’t the tool. It’s the person wielding the tool. The heart of the person. The mind of the person. There is the true cause. Until they recognize this and actually do something about making a difference in people’s lives that ACTUALLY makes a difference, they are just addressing the symptom, not the cause.

Stop misplacing the blame and start addressing the heart and mind issues.