Elon musk and his sons

[temporal1]

i agree. i struggle with term limits. they might eliminate good reps, and, if by age, clearly, people age very differently!
the electorate is responsible.

which goes to the question of insufficient, unbalanced public education. too much is not taught! balance is sorely needed.

I am willing to give up Rand Paul if it means we get rid of the rest.

It does sadden me when I see Musk not with his family. Sleeping on factory and office floors may sound good, but there are children not seeing their father and interacting with him. He may not be wired to be a monogamous person, so he should stop having children that require that. He is doing himself and them harm.

Now go cut spending.

We may be about to witness all of this:
term limits, cut spending, and, to me, the biggest one of all: more balanced education.
with better balanced education, lots might improve. in every direction.

a great thing would be to move away from “everything” being up for partisan politics, when, in reality, LOADS of what most people want/care about, has zip to do with politics.

i have little fear about suffering due to cutting spending, and cleaning up. people are generous and caring. that’s NOT partisan. with more efficiency, there is opportunity to do more - where it’s needed.

as HK described so well wrt Honduras, there is so much (piracy) aid doesn’t help, aside from puffing up do-gooders’ ego trips.
how about accountability?

Robert:
When you throw a rock into a pack of hounds, the hit dog does the howling.
Could it be he is cutting off the pipelines to money and those loosing out are using their useful idiots to do the attacking,
just like the KKK and BLM were used?

i hope the fear mongers and saboteurs do not prevail.

[temporal1]

This expresses my understanding of Musk well:
Read the rest of the article here: [url]https://www.mind-war.com/p/he-is-not-ju ... zi-why-it-

The article is full of claims that are either unverifiable, lies or fearmongering hypotheticals.

Just a few from the article.

He won’t stop until millions are dead.

Stop what? That is a hypothetical. And if Musk wanted millions of people dead, how different would that be than the evil warmongering, that emboldened a brutal dictator and indirectly impowered a cruel, barbaric organization such as Hamas which has left thousands dead.
He was not complicit in the horrific deaths at the border, due the open border. Open borders that resulted in over 50 people, including children being cooked in a trailer. Or became the largest purveyors of sex trafficking in the world which included children.

This isn’t name-calling, and it’s not theoretical. What he has already done with DOGE will kill countless people in countries we were helping with life-saving food and medicine. He didn’t do it to save money, he did it because he hates Black and brown people and he wants them to die, as fast as possible.

Although I do think some of the USAID that went to poor countries, should not have been cut. But the rest of the statement is unverifiable and fearmongering.

Elon Musk is a serial mass killer who is quite literally sitting on the floor of the West Wing with his gaming laptop hacking the US Government to make America more white, patriarchal and violent.

There is no verification for the claim that he is racist nor that he is a mass killer.

he cannot understand empathy, and finds the whole concept of human emotion, altruism and charity to be “inefficient”

Well, let's see about his altruism and charity.

$55 million to St. Jude Children's Research Hospital: which helped and supported pediatric healthcare and research. And…gasp…some of the lives saved were black and brown children.

XPRIZE Foundation: $54 million which hosts competitions to spur technological innovation.
https://www.xprize.org/

Schools and Nonprofits in Brownsville, Texas: $20 million to Cameron County schools and $10 million for downtown revitalization in Brownsville, near the SpaceX launch site. These donations supported education and community development in an area tied to his business operations.

He provided Starlink to places devastated by floods, hurricanes, etc.

Sent hundreds of Powerwall battery systems that can be paired with solar panels to the devastated Puerto Rico in an effort to restore electric power there after a hurricane. And once again…gasp…those people were brown people.

He has donated to the Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation, Oxfam, the Clinton Foundation, and Doctors Without Borders and gave $480,000 for water filtration in Flint, Michigan, and $424,000 for laptops in Flint schools.

And lastly, his company brought the stranded astronauts back to earth.

i wouldn’t want to read anything more from Jim Stewartson, at all.
He might be great with creating fantasy video games. Full stop. BUYER BEWARE
This piece alone might set him up for a lawsuit.

https://www.uclaextension.edu/instructo ... stewartson

A digital entertainment leader with 20+ years of executive experience building successful companies, platforms, and products at the intersection of media and technology. Jim founded his first VR company in 1995. Jim is currently CEO and Founder of Awesome Rocketship, a startup focused on building integrated systems for the out-of-home VR market. Previously, Jim was Executive Producer on a massive augmented reality project at Google's Niantic Labs, CEO of Fourth Wall Studios where he won a Primetime Emmy for the company's pioneering work in transmedia content, and founder of several companies innovating 3D, mobile gaming, alternate reality games, and augmented reality.

[justme]

Politics, by nature, is hypocritical. Therefore, offering opinions about political matters and politicians will be viewed by others as hypocritical. I think what you are observing about the responses you are seeing on MN is generally true. I've observed it on both sides.

thank you GaryK
i was beginning to think i was the stupid one for understanding where szd was coming from, when other conservatives were arguing that he is wrong.

[Valerie]

Politics, by nature, is hypocritical. Therefore, offering opinions about political matters and politicians will be viewed by others as hypocritical. I think what you are observing about the responses you are seeing on MN is generally true. I've observed it on both sides.

thank you GaryK
i was beginning to think i was the stupid one for understanding where szd was coming from, when other conservatives were arguing that he is wrong.

He never responded to my point. And you probably didn’t see it either. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but when I tried to explain the difference to him, he didn’t reply but kept pushing his argument. If one can’t discern the difference, then it’s time to move on.

[JohnH]

Politics, by nature, is hypocritical. Therefore, offering opinions about political matters and politicians will be viewed by others as hypocritical. I think what you are observing about the responses you are seeing on MN is generally true. I've observed it on both sides.

thank you GaryK
i was beginning to think i was the stupid one for understanding where szd was coming from, when other conservatives were arguing that he is wrong.

He never responded to my point. And you probably didn’t see it either. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but when I tried to explain the difference to him, he didn’t reply but kept pushing his argument. If one can’t discern the difference, then it’s time to move on.

I perceive that Szd is doing a classic type of liberal tactic, which you can read about in Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky. (I doubt he does this on purpose, but it is something that is all over social media and other media that people with left-wing political persuasions read.) The tactic is to that conservatives do not denounce someone enough who happens to be helping a non-left-wing agenda in some way.

They do this despite the fact they never do the same thing: their own denouncements of people on the left who accomplish great evil, are highly immoral, or unhinged are conspicuously absent. The tactic is, basically, "Use the enemy's rules against them." (It is notable that folks on the left wing consider us their "enemy", even those of us who are politically neutral, frequently point out problems with the right wing and right wing politicians, and advocate for a third way following a heavenly kingdom.)

One of the best things to do is to simply ignore them. Sometimes, though, when someone claims to be a Christian, concern for their soul arises in me, and I consider my duty to point out a purported fellow believer's error. The left wing has laid many snares that will keep people out of heaven - most notably, promoting gross sexual immorality and claiming it is actually good. But I would add falling into repeating blatant lies and using ungodly tactics to advance the "left wing", which is no way advancing the kingdom of heaven, but rather the kingdom of darkness.

Perhaps for some of us, we could use more time in prayer for our fallen brethren than in online argument and debate. However, I made a decision some time ago that I did not think certain settings needed to have a retreat of every conservative and sincere believer and become dominated by a tiny but very loud minority promoting all manner of evil, thinking it be good:

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

I will commit to spend less time in debate, though, and more time in prayer for each of these precious souls. Perhaps you will join me?

[JohnH]

Or in cartoon form...

[Valerie]

thank you GaryK
i was beginning to think i was the stupid one for understanding where szd was coming from, when other conservatives were arguing that he is wrong.

He never responded to my point. And you probably didn’t see it either. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but when I tried to explain the difference to him, he didn’t reply but kept pushing his argument. If one can’t discern the difference, then it’s time to move on.

I perceive that Szd is doing a classic type of liberal tactic, which you can read about in Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky. (I doubt he does this on purpose, but it is something that is all over social media and other media that people with left-wing political persuasions read.) The tactic is to that conservatives do not denounce someone enough who happens to be helping a non-left-wing agenda in some way.

They do this despite the fact they never do the same thing: their own denouncements of people on the left who accomplish great evil, are highly immoral, or unhinged are conspicuously absent. The tactic is, basically, "Use the enemy's rules against them." (It is notable that folks on the left wing consider us their "enemy", even those of us who are politically neutral, frequently point out problems with the right wing and right wing politicians, and advocate for a third way following a heavenly kingdom.)

One of the best things to do is to simply ignore them. Sometimes, though, when someone claims to be a Christian, concern for their soul arises in me, and I consider my duty to point out a purported fellow believer's error. The left wing has laid many snares that will keep people out of heaven - most notably, promoting gross sexual immorality and claiming it is actually good. But I would add falling into repeating blatant lies and using ungodly tactics to advance the "left wing", which is no way advancing the kingdom of heaven, but rather the kingdom of darkness.

Perhaps for some of us, we could use more time in prayer for our fallen brethren than in online argument and debate. However, I made a decision some time ago that I did not think certain settings needed to have a retreat of every conservative and sincere believer and become dominated by a tiny but very loud minority promoting all manner of evil, thinking it be good:

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

I will commit to spend less time in debate, though, and more time in prayer for each of these precious souls. Perhaps you will join me?

You explained it very well & I really appreciate your heart, concern, & priority to pray. Thank you for the encouragement to pray more!

[Southerner]

thank you GaryK
i was beginning to think i was the stupid one for understanding where szd was coming from, when other conservatives were arguing that he is wrong.

He never responded to my point. And you probably didn’t see it either. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but when I tried to explain the difference to him, he didn’t reply but kept pushing his argument. If one can’t discern the difference, then it’s time to move on.

(It is notable that folks on the left wing consider us their "enemy", even those of us who are politically neutral, frequently point out problems with the right wing and right wing politicians, and advocate for a third way following a heavenly kingdom.)

Just to clarify, JohnH, you consider yourself "politically neutral"?

[JohnH]

Just to clarify, JohnH, you consider yourself "politically neutral"?

Sure do! I don't vote, campaign, or run for office, and often advise other believers to withdraw with these worldly systems.

People who have strong political opinions, however, often think I hold a political opinion that is opposite theirs. This is due to a lack of political centrism and a willingness to put someone in your opponent's mindset that is so prevalent today.

[temporal1]

Just to clarify, JohnH, you consider yourself "politically neutral"?

Sure do! I don't vote, campaign, or run for office, and often advise other believers to withdraw with these worldly systems.

People who have strong political opinions, however, often think I hold a political opinion that is opposite theirs. This is due to a lack of political centrism and a willingness to put someone in your opponent's mindset that is so prevalent today.

i hope we’re on the downside of that divisive arc, with peoples’ eyes opened that most have so much in common, to shift away from partisan-everything. it’s early to know, but, i hope! (there will always be some die-hards and hangers-on.)

it’s hard to perceive you’ve lost, maybe even harder to perceive you’ve won. it’s all a temporal illusion.

think of it, tho.
Trump, and many with him were former Dems who felt their party left them, and/or their party wouldn’t tolerate them.

i’m beginning to think of the former parties now as The Deplorables and The 20 Percenters.
Throughout history labels have often been assigned, not chosen!