An issue with our government is that
there are a strong percentage of voters
who are not interested in leaders with
good work ethics who do their best for
us, but rather demand entertainment
from those who fill their media screens,
to be made to feel good about being the
shitty folks they know themselves to be.
Just because bad people
cynically impose themselves
into public leadership for their
own private benefit, does not
negate the possibility of public
benefits from common rule.
It's not governance that
mistreats us, but those who
misuse it. Use that revolutionary
zeal to replace those who do
ill with truly public spirited,
perhaps younger so not as attached
to the status quo.
Whatever I needed to do to
get me through what I was
then going through, I obviously
did.
Cocaine fueled '80s
The perfect drug for that
high-blown lifestyle
Clearly, insisting pregnant women
die rather than get normal medical
care to save their lives, cannot be
about a right to life, cannot be pro-life.
It seems more likely to be a long,
malicious campaign to make women
terrified of pregnancy, to ultimately
prevent not abortion, but continuation
of life. Is this evangelical fervor stemming
from Malthusian philosophy? or just
a deep-seated hatred of life?
If about population pressure, you
silly people, it's been shown the best
way to lower population is to educate
women, annd give them opportunities.
Oh, right, what was I thinking --
it's not just Malthus, but even more,
misogyny.
The thing is (though strangely, I hardly
hear it said), that Presidential Immunity
is not a thing in the US. It is not a law,
a rule, in the Constitution. In fact, the
Founders were fearful of too powerful
an Executive.
There is merely a Justice Department
policy of not indicting a sitting POTUS
due to the perceived chaos that could cause.
Even so, the SCOTUS found that Bill
Clinton, while a sitting President, was
required to participate in the Paula Jones
sexual harassment suit against him.
1/8-13/24
No comments:
Post a Comment