Senator Marco Rubio (R – FL) has penned an op-ed in The Hill condemning flight attendants who wish to ban lap infants, calling into question their values and motives.
Rubio: Misguided Push To Ban Lap Infants On Airplanes “Signals A Lot About Our Underlying Values”
Rubio notes that the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA is lobbying lawmakers to ban lap infants and require every passenger–including babies–to be in their own seat. He then argues that parents who are concerned about the safety of their children can already purchase a seat for an infant:
“Lobbyists claim such a ban would increase safety. They cite rare cases of turbulence that could cause a parent to lose hold of his or her child and point to two airplane crashes, one in 1989 and another in 1994, which resulted in the deaths of infants. Any child’s death is a tragedy, but there is no evidence that prohibiting lap-babies would decrease the number of such deaths in America. What’s more, parents can already purchase seats for their infants if they want. At best, the only thing this special interest handout would do is inconvenience millions of families.”
Rubio then points out, as I have on many occasions, that by forcing families to purchase extra seat(s) for infants, many may choose to drive instead, which places these infants at even greater statistical risk of harm, injury, or death.
‘In fact, enacting a ban could increase America’s annual infant death rate. One study that considered the implications of “a seat for every soul” found requiring child-restraint systems on airplanes “might cause an increase in motor vehicle deaths if many families switched to travel by car rather than paying additional fares for their young children.” Ben Hoffman, the president-elect of the American Academy of Pediatrics, echoes those concerns. “If [families] travel by car instead [of by plane], they will actually be putting themselves at a significantly greater risk, because car crashes are so much more common than airplane incidents,” Hoffman explains.”
The other problem, as I see it, is that babies simply will not stay in their own seats. They want to sit with mom or dad and any parent will not remain quietly in a seat by themselves.
But the heart of Rubio’s argument is that our policy on infant lap children says much more about our values:
There is another problem here, though, one that goes beyond statistics. The way we structure airline seating may seem unimportant, but it actually signals a lot about our underlying values…[T]here’s a reason we defer to parents with strollers in the boarding process. From one perspective, these decisions don’t matter all that much. But from another perspective, they’re crucial. These gestures serve as a daily reminder of what we value and the kind of society we want to be.
Our culture is constantly sending other signals that children are a burden—that the good life ends when you become a parent. Whether carried by the hysterical rhetoric of the pro-abortion lobby or ads that subtly promote hyper-individualism, such signals have a corrosive effect on our nation. According to a recent Wall Street Journal poll, only 23 percent of Americans under 30 believe having children is very important. That is a near-death sentence for our society, which is built on the institution of the family and relies on children for its future existence and strength.
In response, we should be doing everything in our power to promote parenting and support child-rearing. In other words, we should be breaking down obstacles for families, not erecting barriers to make things even harder. Forcing already-struggling families to pay an extra $500 or $1,000 to board a plane, on the contrary, would reinforce the message that children are a burden and an unwelcome nuisance in the public square.
I’m not sure even Sara Nelson (the union president) is out to undermine children. I do think the efforts of her union to ban lap infants is wholly misguided, but I’m not convinced that the point of this effort is rooted in the idea that “children are a burden and an unwelcome nuisance in the public square.”
CONCLUSION
Senator Rubio has penned an op-ed attacking the idea of banning lap infants on airplanes and suggesting those who wish to do so are anti-family. Does his argument resonate with you or is it just one step too far in the culture war?
image: @senatormarcorubio / Instagram
They should be banned. If I can’t hold my 15 lb backpack at a bulkhead, then there is no reason a parent shouldn’t have their child strapped into a car seat, or the like, in the seat adjacent to them.
Is he really worried about a shortage of people?
What a contorted way for little Marco to wag his pro-life finger at us.
Yes valuing life and children goes a bit further than banning the pill and allowing lap infants.
Agreed – he managed to weave in some anti-abortion rhetoric at the same time, and then complained about population growth.
On abortion: “none of our rights in America can exist without our right to life”.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cq_DoJmxUHG
Little Marco needs more babies to be born so his 2nd amendment buddies have more targets when they shoot up schools
Who caused the accident, the car or the driver? Who caused the shooting, the gun or the shooter?
If you take time to look into the school shootings, so many do not add up. I have no idea of the percentage, but some of these shootings have to be intentional. Governments attack their own citizens all the time. Our government is doing that in many direct and indirect ways right now, so I doubt school shootings are excluded from their agendas. All disarmed populations never got their guns back, so 2A all the way.
From Reddit:
Mass School Shootings – Almost Non-Existent Until 1999. MK Ultra Ended 50 Years Ago. Why is it Far-Fetched to Think it WORKED and Has Been Improved?
MK Ultra was ended by the CIA in 1972. The CIA said it was not effective, but we know that anything any intel agency tells us must naturally be a complete lie. Lying is their business. If they were able to use drugs, hypnosis and other techniques to probe and influence minds in the 1960s and 70s, how far-fetched is it to believe that technologies and methods have been improved since then and are being used to control and manipulate vulnerable people for political and other reasons?
The concept of mass shootings in schools was almost non-existent prior to Columbine in 1999. Since then, these shootings have occurred with frightening frequency. I have to wonder if at least SOME mass shootings, at schools or anywhere, aren’t being caused by people with an agenda manipulating the minds of the vulnerable young and middle aged people who are already unstable and just need pushed in the wrong direction to commit atrocities?
I’m not actually accusing the CIA of being behind domestic mass shootings. The methods and technologies could theoretically be employed by anyone who had the means and motivation to perpetuate violence for the purposes of perhaps wearing us down and eventually making a gun ban palatable to most Americans, or possibly simply as a method of psychological terrorism against our population in order to cow us into submission. You have a pandemic, baby formula shortages, another emerging pandemic possibility, economic crisis, fuel prices, inflation, the threat of WW III, and now they’re piling mass shootings targeting specific groups – children and minorities. That can take a serious psychological and spiritual toll on people.
If this is an intentional plot, who could actually be behind it and what are their motives?
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/uxl4mr/mass_school_shootings_almost_nonexistent_until
Thank you.
Before you posted that I might have mistakenly thought you had something to contribute to a conversation.
You’ve saved me a lot of time.
You’re entitled to your opinion, Jim. Some of us will focus on getting to the actual root of the hundreds (thousands?) of shootings since 1999. You are, of course, welcome to believe the spoon-fed mainstream narratives from corporate media and big government, which have been wrong, idk, about at least thirty critically important issues in recent memory. Probably way more than thirty issues they’ve been wrong about, too. Perhaps you could care about the daily shootings in Chicago in the meantime.
SMH
Paul, do you and Jim have proof otherwise? I thought not. After 9/11 everyone should have learned to ask questions and to demand answers. Most didn’t, so welcome to 2023.
Give it a break. When 65%+ of the population agrees with a woman’s right to decide, that should be the majority opinion/rule. Not the minority.
A never ending conversation here in America…..
I don’t personally know anyone who trusts polls in 2023. Either way, who advocates for the unborn? It has always been fascinating that all of the pro-abortion folks are already alive and already born, and seem to think their God-complex allows them to dictate who should and shouldn’t be born. What if you were aborted? Just BAU? F your life? Who cares? Serious questions.
It’s not a right.
100%. I’m as conservative as they come on most issues but I’m not religious. And I want certain people to continue to have abortions because they will be irresponsible parents. And I certainly don’t want to pay for more babies born to white trash or other poor people. The cycle keeps repeating if they continue to breed. See any inter city in America or redneck rural counties in certain states.
The irony of you people. From trying to jab us against our will to trying to actually infringe on 2a rights, please stfu. You lost the ability to use that language when you decided the collective was more important than the individual.
Speaking of the jab, Anthem Blue Cross bribed its providers to promote the shots. No one is shocked.
https://static-assets-1.truthsocial.com/tmtg:prime-ts-assets/media_attachments/files/110/197/039/058/185/563/original/4ba11e48e0c75760.png
Given many FA’s propensity to present ideas that only directly make their jobs or lives easier, usually at the expense of others, I am suspicious of the motive here. So what is that motive in relation?. Quite simple, they often get stuck sitting next to lap children in the undesirable seats due to standby space available travel. Quite frankly, if not for this they could care less about the rest of us and our comfort and safety.
“But they’re there for our safety”
I have to agree with what you’re saying here, Stuart. I’m all for workers’ rights and want everyone to have a fair and safe working environment, but the more I hear about FA union proposals, the more I’m starting to doubt their motives. The lackluster service, the powertrips, and the audacity these people have.
I was once flying DL 159 DTW-ICN in J last November and these DL FAs were absolutely horribly to an elderly lady who had an armsling and was on a wheelchair and her daughter who was in her 40s. They made fun of these two for wearing masks (despite the elderly lady being immunocompromised), didn’t even give the elderly lady the lunch meal service, ignored their requests, yelled at them, and then even told them to “go fly Korean Air if you want service.” These two ladies didn’t even do anything and the abuse started right as these FAs saw the elderly lady requiring assistance to get to her seat from the wheelchair. Me and a couple other passengers in J, including a dead-legging pilot, stood up for them also got shunned by these FAs during the flight. When we arrived at ICN, the immigration queue was long and I started talking with these two. Turns out, they paid full fare, not miles, and were STE+ with KE and were both US citizens and spoke English perfectly and it was just a powertrip by the FAs. After that incident, I try to not fly a US carrier if given an option.
You’ll Love the Way We Fly. Good goes around. Keep climbing.
And when they are 2 years old they got to be in a seat. Agree there should be no lap babies. When I got tickets for my grandchildren, even the 1 year had a seat.
I agree that his weaving abortion into the narrative undermined his message which I think is otherwise quite wholesome and makes the point well. Do we want to bubblewrap kids so thoroughly that they can’t enjoy life anymore in order to avoid a minor risk? People who gripe about sitting next to a lap infant (and I suffered this as well on a longhaul LAX-MUC) have to remember they were kids once.
Regarding the comment about whether society needs kids. To digress a bit (indulge me), it’s amusing that CEO’s are rewarded with huge bonuses and stock increases by wall street when they announce they are laying off workers to save money and make the industry more efficient AND at the same time, gripe there aren’t enough “cheap workers who aren’t lazy” and call for increased immigration. Bill Gates literally did this when Microsoft announced layoffs and he then spoke the next week to congress calling to increase professional work visas.
It’s a tough call: You see a parent disciplining their kid in public and you feel they’re going too far and want to say something, but keep your mouth shut. You see a parent NOT disciplining their kid whose being bratty and also want to say something. Do we get the state to set standards? A healthy society has healthy standards without it being a nanny state.
Another observation: I’m reminded of RainMan where Hoffman’s character objects to getting on a plane unless it’s Qantas with a perfect safety record OR driving on a highway so he insists on driving on local roads across the country (hence, the road trip theme of the film.) The joke is that he’d be far safer if he had just gotten on nearly any legacy airline. My wife now handles takeoffs and landings better than she used to but sheesh, I think I’m a cat from all the lives that were spent in independent cabs in Eastern Europe the way they drive…
Rubio’s op-ed is not really about lap infants but a platform to push the conservative right to life agenda. Rich coming from those who wouldn’t vote to limit assault weapons. Throwing in the bit about population decline and its “corrosive effect” and “near death sentence” is more of the hogwash conservative republicans hope the uneducated will swallow.
Could you please explain how a ban will stop bad guys who 1) won’t return their assault weapons if a ban was implemented and 2) stop their intent to destroy and kill?
The studies, data, and examination of the available evidence by scholars suggest that assault weapon bans or buybacks will have little if any effect on rates of violent crime and gun violence.
https://fee.org/articles/studies-find-no-evidence-that-assault-weapon-bans-reduce-homicide-rates
Also, Maryland, is it possible you could let folks know where they are uneducated? You’ve used this term in the past but never specifically called out where exactly the disconnect is with education for those with viewpoints different than your own. In short: a lot of name calling, but without facts and substitution to back it up. Would appreciate the corroboration. Thank you.
substantiation* autocorrect
Sen. Rubio’s state just changed the law to require rape victims to carry their rapist’s child to full term, so I would say I question his “values and motives” since he doesn’t seem to have any objection to it. He’s not willing to provide mothers any support, but he wants the airline to pick up the tab for their infant’s flights. Thanks, Marco!
Is a police report really that much of a lift if someone raped you?
..mothers seeking an abortion for a baby conceived via rape or incest would have to provide copies of restraining orders, police reports, medical records, or court documents to prove that they are victims of rape or incest. Should the records be supplied for the request to terminate the pregnancy, the exception for the ban would be extended to 15 weeks, rather than the six week restriction for others. The bill would also require that if the mother is a minor, the doctor must report the incident of rape or incest to Florida’s central abuse hotline, as required by state statutes.
https://www.wfla.com/news/politics/florida-rape-victims-must-show-proof-police-report-to-get-abortion-after-6-weeks/
@ Not Aaron. I did not use the word ban. Please attempt to read my comment. Also that answers my use of uneducated.
Ok, got it. Someone misinterpreting one word in your comments = uneducated
Now that I am clear that limiting does not equal banning, my questions still remain:
Could you please explain how “limiting assault weapons” will stop bad guys who 1) won’t return their assault weapons if limiting was implemented and 2) stop their intent to destroy and kill?
Thank you.
Abortion is murder
You NRA types pop champagne when kindergarten students are gunned down, but aborting a clump of cells is murder? Please
Please, no one pops champagne, except perhaps the elite planning these events, let’s be reasonable.
https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html
If you do not identify with life beginning at conception, then when do you believe it begins? Fetus? Birth?
Probably when the fetus can survive outside of the womb is a good starting point
PregnancyClinic.org, an abortion center in Maryland, wrote in 2019:
Unborn babies recoil away from stimulation during the abortion procedure, which demonstrates that the nervous system is experiencing a physiological stress response. Some states have laws designed to protect unborn babies from abortion past a certain stage because of evidence of fetal pain.
A recent NIH study [PMC5115678] noted: “The threshold for tactile stimuli is lower at earlier stages of gestation. The pain inhibition mechanisms are not sufficiently developed during intrauterine development, which is another factor leading to increased intensity of pain in the fetus. All this points to the fact that the fetus is extremely sensitive to painful stimuli, and that this fact should be taken into account when performing invasive medical procedures on the fetus.”
..maybe watch Unplanned for a different take. All Abby Johnson ever wanted to do was help women. As one of the youngest Planned Parenthood clinic directors in the nation, she believed in a woman’s right to choose. Until the day she saw something that changed everything. https://tubitv.com/movies/576913/unplanned
Pain is felt in the 2nd trimester, certainly not at 6 weeks, and very few elective abortions are happening that late. The ones that are happening are usually for a medical reason and old men that are only a few years from the grave themselves shouldn’t be dictating what is a proper medical reason. Should a woman who’s water breaks at 15 weeks be forced to carry the dieing fetus until it comes out itself and risk sepsis, or should they be allowed to terminate the pregnancy right away?
Six weeks versus 20 weeks is a big difference
https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/issues/abortion/federal-and-state-bans-and-restrictions-abortion/20-week-bans
So what about the 15 week scenario I mentioned? That’s a more common scenario than people realize and Florida’s new law says those women must die
I need to look into it further and not home rn but on the surface an exception seems warranted. I thought the exceptions existed for life of the mother already though.
Overall in general I’m talking about preventable abortions a la “oops” and certainly less about rape, incest, health complications etc. those are exceptional cases but many (most?) abortions are because some are too horny and unable/unwilling to use protection.
Abortion is going to be a headache through the next election. Fun times.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/republican-presidential-hopefuls-are-already-struggling-abortion-rcna79586
Sorry to say you have bought the propaganda. A miscarriage is also know as a spontaneous abortion. They are VERY common. A missed miscarriage is when the body doesn’t expel the tissue and requires the same procedure as an abortion to treat it, otherwise the health of the mother is at stake. Many states (florida) do NOT have exceptions for health of the mother and those that do are so vague that doctors are afraid the treat the condition for fear someone will report them and say it wasn’t warranted. That’s what happens when politicians make medical decisions. I repeat… this is not uncommon at all. Women will die from this
that’s your opinion re: propaganda. I’m not talking spontaneous abortion/miscarriages. Those should have exceptions of course. I’m talking about actual intentional abortions, not the body spontaneously miscarrying. I could be wrong but when people talk about abortion most aren’t talking about miscarriages. While I knew the term was spontaneous abortion I haven’t heard anyone in MSM discuss miscarriages when talking abortion. Different things to me and seemingly to the media
For the love of god… when Florida was voting on their ban, an amendment was proposed to allow for terminations of the exact case I presented and it got shot down. I don’t know why the msm doesn’t talk more about miscarriages but it’s frustrating. I’m telling you, a much larger percentage of pregnancies than you realize end in miscarriage and those women are in danger. It’s absurd that a bunch of infertile geezers are deciding this for young women
@billy, relax. Presented to who and where? To us, here? I don’t recall that. It’s impossible to keep up with all comments anyway as we aren’t notified of new ones and often times I skip over comments. Anyway I haven’t been involved with Florida abortion law so it’s really not my fault personally. There are issues, yes, but they will be worked out in time. The pendulum is swinging to the right because of how crazy the left was with demanding forced vaccines, so it’s going to take time for it to swing back to the middle. To your point below, that it doesn’t cost anything to cancel debt, that isn’t how accounting works. Every debit must have a credit, be funded, etc.
On Intl flights, kids under 2 pay 10% of the fare and do not have any seat assigned. So not sure the airline is paying the tab for anyone.
Matt, if Rubio cared about USA citizens having children, he and his party would not be against student loan forgiveness. Kind of hard to pay for kids when you have a large student loan payment.
We are certainly jumping to every possible topic from Rubio and infants. Overall, I’m not exactly against the forgiveness that SCOTUS is considering, but I am also curious why student loans are the responsibility of taxpayers.
To that point, could you please explain how student loan forgiveness and increasing the tax burden for all Americans helps those who 1) have no loans and/or 2) already paid them off?
Furthermore, student loan forgiveness does nothing to solve the actual problem of why student debt is so high to begin with:
“Colleges can set the price, knowing that the government is just going to give their customers, the student, a blank check to pay for that price,” the Wall Street Journal’s Josh Mitchell says. “And so not only is there no incentive under this current system for colleges to keep the prices in check, there’s actually every incentive for them to raise the prices.”
You still don’t address my point that student loans are an impediment to having kids.
Don’t have kids then? I’m not sure everyone should be having kids anyway. I come from a massive immediate and massive extended family. I had to basically parent my many other siblings from 12 years old to help my mother. I was balancing my dads checkbook at the same age. So I don’t have much empathy for your point. If loans are that much of an issue then work on paying them off before having kids? Or just stop posting comments like this that don’t further the convo and just seem like baiting?
And who dictated that college education is required, or that a college fund is a prerequisite for having kids?
You can’t have it both ways. It’s expensive to have kids, much more so than past generations. You can’t complain about lower birth rates and keep your foot on the neck of the population that is of child bearing age at the same time.
When boomers were that age you could drive a bus an support a family of six… now you need a 6 figure salary to afford 1 kid and have any sort of comfort… that’s where college comes in. Get it?
I missed people complaining about lower birth rates? But yes kids are expensive. Everything is expensive. I doubt Jan or anyone else here caused that or is putting foots on necks. It’s time to be mad at the powers that be for doing that, not us.. We already have rampant inflation thanks in large part to the stimulus checks. It doesn’t make fiscal sense to keep adding to that with things like the student loan forgiveness. One thing is for sure, this spend our way out of it strategy is not working and will not ever work until we get serious about the budget.
And you don’t think that taking a bunch of money out of the economy and putting it toward loans is not going to lead to an economic crash?
Idk what you’re talking about as I didn’t say this so you’re either baiting or replying to someone else
Is it more expensive to have kids than in the boomer area? Sure.
Are you implying that you need a college degree to achieve 6 figures?
Wrong.
And are you implying that you need a six figure salary to have 1 kid and live comfortably? Maybe in SF/LA/NYC, sure, but a big swath of the country? Not really. So you’re wrong again.
And those with STEM degrees aren’t usually clamoring for loan forgiveness, it’s the purple-haired Masters degree in Arts barista who’s made many terrible financial decisions that are wanting forgiveness, and taxpayers should not be responsible for their said bad decisions.
Sure you can make 6 figures without a college degree but the degree helps, and HELLO! A MORE EDUCATED SOCIETY IS GOOD FOR THE COUNTRY!
Those cities you listed are where the jobs are, and all the up and coming cities like Austin are approaching those cost of living levels.
And the barista thing is such a load of crap. 40 million people would be helped by loan forgiveness… are there 40 million baristas?
Clearly you don’t have kids
Ok but money doesn’t grow on trees. If you want to do SLF then figure out how to pay for it. These blank checks (ie Ukraine!) need to stop. Honestly the stimulus checks were a drop in the bucket for most so I think this would be similar.
https://www.forbes.com/advisor/personal-finance/who-pays-for-student-loan-forgiveness
Don’t need to pay for it… it doesn’t cost anything to cancel debt. The money’s already been spent it just stops collecting it. Think of it as a tax cut, you guys love those
@Billy Bob
“Sure you can make 6 figures without a college degree but the degree helps, and HELLO! A MORE EDUCATED SOCIETY IS GOOD FOR THE COUNTRY!”
Depends on what degree. Droves of MAs in Gender studies isn’t going to advance society in any meaningful way. The BS in Engineering, RNs and other STEM professions will. Skilled technicians, aircraft mechanics etc will.
“Those cities you listed are where the jobs are, and all the up and coming cities like Austin are approaching those cost of living levels”
You picked Austin, it’s probably one of the most rapidly increasing cost of living cities in the South, yet it’s cost of living is still far below that of SF/LA/NYC. And “where the jobs are?” Believe it or not, SF/LA/NYC is not the center of the world. It’s funny you picked Austin because it’s exactly the people moving away from SF to Austin.
“And the barista thing is such a load of crap. 40 million people would be helped by loan forgiveness… are there 40 million baristas?” No, but I seriously detest the idea that we need to give med students, surgeons, lawyers and high-level engineers a “bailout” so to speak, when they are guaranteed to hit six figures easy and can pay off any student loans by themselves. I thought the lefties hated “tax breaks for the rich?” But then also, I detest giving purple haired baristas a bailout because of their dumbass decision to pursue an MA in Gender studies.
Since the average student loan debt is ~30k USD, where are you getting that 1.2T USD? Robbing Elon. Bill and Warren of all their assets (that wouldn’t even cover half of it)?
“Don’t need to pay for it… it doesn’t cost anything to cancel debt”
This sounds about as dumb as saying “print more moneys”, honestly. No thanks, my dollar is already 16-20% worth less than it was 2 years ago, and I’m not clamoring for further devaluations.
Never mind the value of the dollar over time..
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Purchasing-Power-of-the-U.S.-Dollar-Over-Time.jpg
Was it an attack?
Or did he pounce?
Matthew seems to be using the Commie Style guide for his blog these days.
I agree that the language sounds inflammatory. It’s more accurate to say he “attacks” or criticizes their argument.
A good part of civil debate is being able to disagree with people and accepting their disagreement and not taking or giving personal animosity. I judge my own behavior during a discussion in that if I’m disliking the other person, then I’m not respecting their right to their own opinion and, besides, if someone wants to believe something dumb that’s their own prerogative and disability. As I matured, I realized that if people were smarter than me, I’d be much worse off in the world.
Or he could have used the much more appropriate term…rebuttal.
As in, “Senator Rubio Offers Rebuttal to Request to Ban Lap Children.”
But that doesn’t get clicks and, whether you like Rubio or not, immediately paints him in a negative light.
Rebuttal was too polite. Rubio suggested the motives of the FA union are bad. I felt a stronger word was necessary.
I sat next to a lap infant for the last time this past February on SQ. I had never seen the belting procedure before. It seemed kind of loose (i.e. the infant did not see fully attached to the passenger), but I am not an expert. That said, the SQ FA spent a fair amount of time setting up the belt and ensuring the infant was secure.
I wonder if a) FAs are concerned if a lap infant was injured, the FA (or airline) would be held responsible and/or b) just another thing the FAs don’t want to do. (Although as I was reminded on recent UA flights, by both the cabin and the cockpit crews that the FAs are there for the passenger’s safety – so that should include that of lap infants.)
The solution to this is an extender for parents’ belts, clearly some people in the US are using this made-up problem in order to further political agendas.
Speaking of the politics, I don’t really understand the concept of countries which are committed to reducing their carbon dioxide emissions and are investing resources in that direction (and the USA definitely is one of those countries) and at the same time supporting population growth (whether through making abortion difficult, giving state benefits and/or tax relief to parents etc). I sometimes talk to people who genuinely think that my travel habits are a bit extravagant from an environmental perspective, yet they don’t see anything concerning about someone having 2-3 kids who will go on polluting the planet decades (or centuries if they have children of their own) after I am dead. Is that some kind of passive-aggressive nationalism, or just a case of bureaucrats in different parts of the state not talking to each other?
What happens when 90% of the media is controlled/owned by (6) corporations?
What happens when those same corporations are operated and controlled by a political ideology?
What happens when the news is no longer free from bias?
What happens when the news is no longer reliable and independent?
What happens when the news is no longer trustworthy?
What happens when the news simply becomes an extension/arm of a political party?
Fact becomes fiction?
Fiction becomes fact?
When does news become propaganda?
Identity creation?
How does the average person, who is under constant financial stress (by design), find time to research and discern fact v fiction?
Majority of people more prone to believe someone in power sitting behind a big brand ‘news’ name?
Do people [human psyche] tend to follow the ‘majority/mainstream viewpoint’ in fear of being isolated and/or shunned?
‘Mainstream’ is used for a reason [dominate trend in opinion].
[If majority of people believe ‘x’ then ‘x’ must be validated / true]
Why do ‘mainstream’ media heads, within different orgs, always use the same keywords and/or catch phrases?
Coordinated? By who? Outside entity providing instructions?
Do they count on the fact that people [human psyche] are more prone to believe something if heard over-and-over again by different ‘trusted’ sources?
Do ‘echo chamber’ tactics provide validation / credibility to the topic/point being discussed?
Threat to intellectual freedom?
Would control over[of] these institutions/organizations allow for the mass control of a populations viewpoint re: a desired topic?
Read again – digest.
Would control over[of] these institutions/organizations allow for the mass control of a populations viewpoint re: a desired topic?
Logical thinking.
Why, after the election of 2016, did [D]’s and media corps jumpstart a [coordinated & planned] divisive blitz intended to create falsehoods re: illegitimacy of election, character assassination of POTUS through sexism, racism, every other ‘ism’?
Pre/post 2016 election?
Why were violent [masked] terror orgs such as Antifa immediately created/funded?
Why were these orgs tasked w/ immediate intimidation/shut down of any pro-POTUS rally[s] and/or events?
Why were marches immediately organized to counter and silence pro-POTUS rally[s] and/or events?
Why were marches immediately organized which divided people into sex/gender, race, [ism]?
When you control the levers of news dissemination, you control the narrative.
Control of the narrative = power
When you are blind, what do you see?
They want you divided.
Divided by religion.
Divided by sex.
Divided by political affiliation.
Divided by class.
When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those ‘different’ from you, not those responsible [controllers].
Divided you are weak.
Divided you pose no threat to their control.
When ‘non-dogmatic’ information becomes FREE & TRANSPARENT it becomes a threat to those who attempt to control the narrative and/or stable [livestock kept – sheep].
When you are awake, you stand on the outside of the stable (‘group-think’ collective), and have ‘free thought’.
“Free thought” is a philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, revelation, or dogma.
THIS REPRESENTS A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
TLDR: Closed minds don’t work. Off topic and political–no one is shocked.
I have a friend who is a dem on a council up north and has been for much of his later years. Was a long time teacher of multiple history subjects for decades at a school in a very prestigious town. He’s irate with me right now because I don’t accept the corporate and worldwide narratives as the absolute truth. Furthermore, he has major TDS, too. It has put a major strain on our friendship, and he was someone I really cared about. All because he, not me, can’t have an open mind, or tolerate free thought.
// Free thought is a philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, revelation, or dogma. //
I say this all to say that there is a pretty significant percentage of people who simply will not awaken and are essentially lost to to the cause. It is estimated this is likely at least 10% of people, and it could be more..these individuals who will insist, no matter how bad it gets in America, that the Democrats are the future and will fight that fight to the end. They will never see the light. They are on the great reset train and will not consider the great awakening train. The brainwashing just runs too deep for them to break away from the Democrat party.
Personally, I am independent, but lean right–right now–because it’s Red Alert and Worf needs to change the course ASA-motherf’in-P. Additionally, I’m not saying the Republicans are the answer–certainly not the RINO’s and swamp–and that leaves the freedom fighters. They are certainly not perfect. But no one is–let he who is without sin cast the first stone. I’m just appreciate of ANYONE in Congress who is fighting for our country right now. There aren’t too many who are. But thank god there’s some.
To that point, we need to go back to the gold standard immediately. Rep. Alex Mooney (R-WV) – joined by Reps. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) and Paul Gosar (R-AZ) – introduced H.R. 2435, the “Gold Standard Restoration Act,” to facilitate the repegging of the volatile Federal Reserve note to a fixed weight of gold bullion.
And then we need to seriously reform/audit the fed and if we don’t what’s coming is drastic regardless of whether we default on the debt. People made fun of preppers but I really would love to be living with one of them right now. Overall, it’s time to start looking past the D&R parties and start looking at those who are proposing real solutions. IDGAF that they are Republicans who filed this gold standard bill. They are trying to the right the ship that we are all on. Wake up, Neo.
Despite any ignorance we are literally–and figuratively–watching the destruction of the Democrat party in real time. Take Washington State. SB5599 recently passed. It allows the state to legally take children away from their parents if they do not consent to their children’s gender surgeries. All dems voted yes. All republicans voted no. Like come on.
Let me make this crystal clear:
The government does not control families and their children!
If you’re on the left, please, call for your party to stop supporting this sh!t. Focus on the family. Enough is enough, yo.
In the meantime, independents who lean right, and the actual right, will have to keep fighting this fight against this insanity. I saw a meme that on drag queens and their insistence on putting on shows for children. Text:
“Remove the makeup, dresses, high heels, rainbow stage props, lights and music, and all that remains is sick men using costumes and distractions to creep on young children, in many cases with parents full consent.”
That is, at least, partially true. I’m not demonizing all drag queens, but those who are insisting on exposing children to minority sexuality need to stop.
Just some Saturday night thoughts. Sorry y’all. 🙂
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/three-congressmen-introduce-gold-standard-015000789.html
P.S. As mentioned, congressmen who happen to be freedom fighters who happen to be Republicans introduced the bill. Demand your congressmen or women support it anyway.:
Monetary experts have noted a return to a gold standard would substantially curtail the economic damage caused by inflation, runaway federal debt, and monetary system instability.
The Federal Reserve note has lost more than 40 percent of its purchasing power since 2000, and 97 percent of its purchasing power since the passage of the Federal Reserve Act in 1913.
U.S. sound money groups and industry leaders are cheering Mooney’s actions. Government cannot continue to spend and print on a massive scale without producing existential threats to the currency and our economy,” said Lawrence W. Reed, president emeritus of the Foundation for Economic Education.
The gold standard never failed America, bad ideas and bad politicians did. If we do nothing, disaster awaits us just as it drowned earlier civilizations that spent and inflated their way to ruin,” Reed continued.
Today’s debt-based fiat-money system serves primarily to support big government and wealthy financial insiders – while the Federal Reserve’s serial policy of currency debasement punishes savers and wage earners,” explained Stefan Gleason, President of the Sound Money Defense League and Money Metals Exchange.
A return to gold redeemability would arrest the problem of inflation, restrain the growth of wasteful and inefficient government, and kick off an exciting new era of American prosperity,” Gleason concluded.
Another Republican ATTACK! Dive for cover everybody!
I long for a posting about Democrats “expressing concern.”