Yoell Roth, the former trust and safety capo at Twitter, tweeted back in 2010 a question about kids consenting to sex with their teachers. In case you were wondering why Twitter prioritized getting the Bad Orange Man rather than all the sexual abuse stuff off their platform.
That, by the way, is something to be wary of when going on Twitter. It isn’t shoved in your face, but sometimes rather innocuous searches can result in some astonishing results. So, best to have a care – I mean, you know if you search “boobs” what you’re going to get…but other words which have completely innocent meanings have been coopted by the naughty into other meanings.
Unlike Facebook, you can find actual rated X stuff directly posted on Twitter – but whether it is the real deal or just a scantily clad woman, the purpose is to get you to click a link which brings you to the adult website. Lots of us, of late, have been followed by bot accounts with all sorts of different names but they all share pictures of the same very pretty Chinese lady. We’re not sure if its Chinese spyware or just a come on for Chinese-themed dirty bits, but none but a fool would actually click the links. As for me, I just block them as they come up – must be at least a couple score by now. There is some hope that Musk will curb that – I mean, I don’t think Twitter needs to be the morality police, but certainly any links to sites which are not just dirty but downright evil should be banned. And now that Roth is out, it might happen.
On Twitter, a mutual posted a poll showing that support for Reparations now sits at 60% among Democrats. This is no surprise at all – Democrats are sheep who will just do what they’re told. But it is also going to be a tricky issue for the GOP. Given the way things are, passing out the cash is popular, as such. And the GOP is perceived as the party that will pass out cash to business and to wars, but always balks at giving money to regular folks. I doubt that Reparations will ever gain overall majority support, but its going to come close and soon – maybe as soon as 2024 and when it does get there, Democrats will campaign on it. This is especially so if trends in black voting towards the GOP accelerate. So, when the issue comes up, we’d better be ready for it and our answer can’t just be, “no”.
The Democrats, of course, just want a race slush fund – a pile of government money that their cronies control and pass out to loyal foot soldiers who will then agitate for even more money. To counter it, I think we need some sort of program to build business and home ownership among the black community. Real wealth owned by individuals, families and cooperatives. And we can’t ignore the fact that from 1776 to 1865 almost all wealth generated by blacks was stolen and from 1865 to 1965 wealth creation among the Africa-American community was hampered a thousand ways in law and custom. It is simply true that the African-American community would be per-capita richer today than it is had there not been nearly two centuries of effort to prevent black wealth creation. We should take that line with it – that those who are genuinely descended from slaves (with some sort of cut off percentage – say 33% at a bare minimum) didn’t inherit as much wealth as they could have, and so we should try to make up for that – perhaps with a program of selling federal land and using the proceeds to pay out? I don’t really know: I’m spitballing here. But some means whereby out of the national wealth, those who’s ancestors were actively prevented from accumulating wealth are granted some sort of benefit. Because, like I said, it can’t just be “no”. We’ll get destroyed on the issue if we just say “no”.
Side benefit to selling federal land: it gets land out of Uncle Sam’s hands. The less land the feds own, the less legal power they have to interfere on the State and local level.
There is a great deal of argument between anti-Trump GOPers and the Trumpsters. Each is arguing in their various ways that the other side getting their way means doom for the GOP. Nominate Trump and we’ll lose! Nominate Ron DeSantis and we’ll lose! The correct answer is: we’re going to lose.
It is always difficult to get the incumbent party out after one term. It only rarely happens – and that usually takes massive economic catastrophe. But even with such, it still won’t be easy – there is so much welfare out there that the pain felt in, say, 1980 or 1932 simply won’t be there. Nobody is going to be worrying about their next meal. So even if, as I expect, we have bad economic times in 2024, that is no assurance that we’ll beat Pudding Brain.
And this is absent fraud – which various laws in places like Georgia has made a lot harder. In a straight up race, we’ll lose. Not only because it is hard to beat an incumbent, we’re also simply too divided and too weak. The Never Trump and Trumpsters hate each other far more than they hate the Democrats. Nominate Trump and the Never Trump ‘burbs will stay home. Nominate RDS and the Trumpster rurals will stay home. In either case, I can’t see our guy getting to 270 absent something like 25% unemployment. And even then it would be iffy.
I think that for 2024 our prime effort should be on holding the House, gaining the Senate and flipping as many county commissions and school boards as we can. That is the seed corn for the future while holding part or all of Congress means that at least Democrat policies aren’t enshrined in law. Now, miracles can happen – and if we find ourselves with a trifecta in 2024, cool. But don’t count on it – and any result will be better if we also won a lot of counties and school boards, where the real power to shape the country lies.
You must be logged in to post a comment.