“We have become a nation of baby killers through our military. Our soldiers have become nothing more than a collection of evil sadistic monsters whose sole purpose of existence is to maim and slaughter.
They enjoy it. I’ve seen it in their vacant, soulless eyes. Our soldiers are completely dead inside. They are minions of Satan and are so because we have allowed it, indeed, leaders like Trump have encouraged it.
And these demons reflect on our nation as a whole in the eyes of the world. Foreign nationals see Americans as bloodthirsty zombies and this is largely because of our military which has no compassion and no empathy. And I’m sick of it. No longer should we be likened to these cowardly animals in uniform. I aim to put a stop to this and to the military’s carnage across the globe.
When I become president, I will immediately cut the defense budget in half. I’ll take away all their shiny, new killing toys, I’ll cut the numbers of personnel, I’ll make them wish they’d never joined up because the Kamala Harris military will be absolutely miserable.
Only then can we begin the process of rebuilding our reputation abroad. And as we all know, reputation is everything in global works.”
I'm pretty sure we have become a nation of baby killers through support of Planned Parenthood.
The military’s job is not to have empathy. That is your job, politician. Your job is to ensure that no one has to let slip the dogs of war. When we do, it is your fault. Do not blame the tool you use to enforce your wishes for the ensuing destruction.
But she is a dope smoking Prosecutor who sent people to prison for pot, slept with older, powerful men for a job, and lies about herself, her past, & everything else like a psycho. You know she doesn't believe a word about Global Warming, it's just an excuse to steal.
And the, "I'm an oppressed poor black woman" shtick from someone who's really a half Indian Brahmin, with rich professional parents, is half legit. I have no doubt she experienced prejudice growing up. But it's half bull, too.
That seems to be the theme this year. Who is more phony? The rich half Indian "identifying" as a poor black woman? The rich kid of an Irish mobster? corrupt Judge murdered? by the drug cartels? "Identifying" as Hispanic? The rich white women who may have taken a minority person's job by "identifying" as Native American? Or the plagiarizing, racist, corrupt former Vice President who is owned by the People's Liberation Army of China, who gave his son's phony "business" 1.6 billion dollars, "identifying" as a poor, populist regular guy?
although I admit the Marxist millionaire is authentic as heck. He will be first up against the wall if his vision for a Soviet America is ever realized. And has no shame at all about being an acolyte of the most murderous death cult in human history.
Ok, maybe she did say that. I still want a second source.
As the Democrats shift left off into promises of a Soviet America, poor Barry, more authentic than all of them except Bernie, is now having his success at ruining the country blasted as too little.
Since Barry presided over multiple undeclared illegal wars, countless assassinations and weddings bombed, film makers jailed to cover up a lie, and gun running operations involving Mexico, Libya, Turkey, Syria & Iraq, with countless dead and millions of refugees, not to mention journalists hacked, spied upon and persecuted, Satan can't wait to see what this new crop will yield.
Among the worst IMO, is that they say "Why it matters: Per the Times, this a test of the movement’s impact — by causing disruptions and getting noticed by political leaders who are in NYC for the United Nations Climate Action Summit 3 days later and the General Assembly meeting that follows it." I'm not sure that causing disruptions is part of the first amendment protections. Sounds more like they plan on infringing on the rights of others. Based upon recent actions of the left, I would give pretty good odds on that.
This is how you get exploited by evil rich men who don't care if you get hurt. In fact, that you get injured or die is a Feature, not a bug.
You learn how to loot & smash windows. ( safety isn't a priority ) You may get an inside view of the criminal justice system.
You learn how to be unpaid labor for rich, evil, men who will profit greatly by your sacrifice. You may learn how to be a martyr for a cause to eliminate freedom and make your parents poor, won't that be great?
You might get your picture on the front page of the newspaper! See, that's you being crippled for life as the Ambassador from China's armored limo runs over you!
You may learn what the phrase "cannon fodder" really means.
The opportunities are endless! Oh, not for the students. Their opportunities will be eliminated.
"Where are my rights being defended in this discussion?” said resident Paul Vencel. “Don’t I have the right to go down the street without seeing such things? … If the current language is struck, anybody can do whatever they want, wherever they want, and they can force everybody to watch"
No. You don't have the right to not see such things. Such things as black people, heads without a hat, or religious symbols worn by others. I know your religion might require hats in public, or tell you to not tolerate a cross or a Star of David. Too bad. Either don't look, or enjoy life in all it's weirdness.
"However, the Free the Nipple Fort Collins website stated that “We reject that ‘family values’ are preserved through sexist discrimination, queer-erasure, victim blaming and the targeting of minors.”"
Speaking of minors if this ordinance suspension goes, how does that new policy apply to minor females? I'm no boobaphobe, but I do have a daughter, (though now an adult, that does not change my view of protection for underage girls). How does this Ft. Collins policy square with the child pornography laws on federal, (and probably Colorado's) books? If viewing of a minor is illegal, in media or in person, could an individual be subject to prosecution if they were within view, regardless of whether or not they were looking? Just a hypothetical legal question for the smarter people here.
I'm not even hypocritically a lawyer, and my take would be that if the upper torso of a human being is not an offensive sight... ( and some are! ) Hmm... no right to not be offended...
How about, if the upper torso is not obscene, then the secondary sexual characteristics of a human female are not illegal to display or view?
It'a not genitals, which most cultures have taboos on showing, that are probably based on the simple fact that you don't want to get sand, mud, etc. in or on them, for comfort, if nothing else. After all, jungle tribes "undiscovered" or had lost touch sometimes have a limited nudity taboo if any, but men wear a leaf wrapped around their outer bits and women over their inner bits. No one seems to care about breasts. I'd bet there are still aesthetic preferences for certain body shapes, even among "lost Tribes of the Jungle", but I don't know what they are.
Past cultures have shown preference for body shapes that lend themselves to surviving a brief famine, and current American trends seem to be close to ancient Greek & Roman "hard bodies" of classical sculpture. ( how much six packs in Grecian sculpture is showing off technique and how much is what folk liked, I dunno )
Cultures in the past varied a lot in if a woman's breasts were to be hidden, displayed, or ignored in polite conversation, unless obviously enhanced to attract attention.
Yeah, the daughter aspect.
Setting aside, with some effort, the Dad's protectiveness, because you can't stop others from looking at your daughter, and realizing you can't control their clothing choices as soon as they catch on that they can cram an entire club outfit in a purse.
( looks like a wide belt and a bandana... )
Of course you don't want lecherous old/young men/women/other to be gazing at "always your little" girl's body. Good luck getting over that. I haven't.