Special Edition: Chaos as a Governance Strategy — and What It Keeps Us From Seeing

On January 3, 2026, news outlets reported that the United States carried out a major military operation in Venezuela that struck key locations in Caracas and elsewhere and resulted in the capture of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, according to statements from the U.S. administration. President Trump announced that they had been flown out of Venezuela and were en route to the United States to face prosecution. 

This represents the most direct U.S. military action in a Latin American capital since the 1989 Panama intervention. Reuters+1

The U.S. government has characterized Maduro as responsible for narco-terrorism and narcotics trafficking, and the Justice Department has indicted him on related charges. Trump and his advisors indicated that this intervention was rooted in those allegations and framed as part of a broader campaign against drug networks. The administration also suggested future involvement in Venezuela’s oil sector. The Guardian+1

The Venezuelan government, international legal scholars, and several foreign governments have condemned the operation as a violation of international law and national sovereignty. Although some Republican lawmakers have praised the operation, others — including Democratic members of Congress — have raised serious questions about its legality, particularly regarding whether Congress had any formal role or authorization under the U.S. Constitution. Wikipedia

This dramatic escalation did not emerge overnight. In mid-2025, the Trump administration expanded military pressure on Venezuela, including airstrikes against vessels the U.S. alleged were linked to narco-trafficking via operations in the Caribbean Sea and Eastern Pacific, and deployed significant naval assets to the region. The administration designated groups tied to the Maduro government as foreign terrorist organizations and authorized the Pentagon to use military force against specified drug cartels — moves that were highly controversial and raised legal scrutiny at the time. Council on Foreign Relations+1

---

Why This Matters: The Promise and the Peril

1. Legality and Domestic Process

Under U.S. law and the Constitution, the power to authorize war or major military engagement rests with Congress. Historical debates over executive military actions without congressional authorization — such as in Iraq, Kosovo, or Libya — are long-standing precisely because they test the balance of powers. The legality of the Venezuela operation is already being questioned, and many foreign governments have condemned it as violating international norms that prohibit forceful regime change without Security Council approval. Wikipedia

Regardless of political perspective on Maduro’s governance, the precedent of unilateral military action without clear legal authorization sets a significant constitutional and diplomatic marker.

---

2. Likely Scenarios in Venezuela’s Future

Removing a long-standing authoritarian leader does not, in itself, create stability. Instead, it opens a series of plausible outcomes, many of which have historical analogues in other nations that experienced sudden leadership disruption:

Scenario A — Fragmentation and Internal Power Struggles

Political factions within Venezuela — including Maduro loyalists, opposition forces, and regional strongmen — could compete for control. When a ruler who controlled state mechanisms for more than a decade is suddenly removed, no clear successor or unified transition process may exist. This kind of power vacuum historically leads to:

• competing militias or armed groups gaining influence,

• breakdowns in security and governance at local levels, and

• heightened risk of internal conflict.

Similar dynamics have occurred in Libya and Iraq after sudden regime change, where the absence of stable succession structures contributed to prolonged unrest.

**Scenario B — Foreign Influence Escalates

Venezuela’s strategic importance — especially its vast petroleum reserves — attracts interest from multiple global powers. Over the past decade, Russia, China, Iran, and Cuba maintained political or economic links with the Maduro government, while Latin American neighbors navigated competing pressures. With the central authority suddenly removed, outside states could intensify their influence, seeking to shape the next governing configuration. Congress.gov

In such cases, external actors with different geopolitical agendas can deepen divisions and fuel proxy rivalry inside the country.

**Scenario C — Economic Turmoil Deepens

Venezuela was already facing severe economic collapse, hyperinflation, and infrastructure deterioration long before any military action. Political disruption — especially involving military strikes in urban centers — risks exacerbating:

• shortages of basic goods,

• breakdowns in public services,

• displacement of civilians,

• refugee flows to neighboring states.

This creates a humanitarian crisis alongside political instability, with real consequences for ordinary people.

There's still people in Venezuela who support Maduro.
There's still people in America who support Trump.

That tells us what, exactly?

It tells us that even obvious failures can still keep loyal followers when identity, fear, propaganda, and grievance politics do their job.

---

3. The Geopolitical Ripple Effects

A U.S. military operation of this scale in Latin America — involving strikes on territory and the capture of a sitting head of state — invites diplomatic pushback from other nations and international bodies. Countries such as China and Russia have already criticized actions in Venezuela as violations of sovereignty. Such international responses carry consequences for global alliances and regional stability. Wikipedia

The reaction from regional organizations, neighbor states, and global powers will shape international norms about the use of force, diplomatic engagement, and conflict resolution.

---

4. A Moment of Decision for U.S. Policy

The Venezuela episode poses fundamental questions for U.S. foreign policy:

• Should military action against another country’s government be used as a tool against criminal networks?

• What are the long-term implications of replacing diplomacy and sanctions with direct military intervention?

• How do constitutional processes factor into decisions of war and peace?

These are not partisan questions; they are structural ones about how a democratic republic conducts itself on the world stage.

---

Conclusion

The reported U.S. operation in Venezuela marks an escalation with far-reaching consequences — legally, regionally, and geopolitically. What happens next in Venezuela will depend on how local political factions respond, how neighboring states act, and whether international actors push for a negotiated, peaceful transition or a more fractious struggle for control.

The removal of a long-entrenched leader is a pivotal moment. Without stability mechanisms, inclusive governance structures, and multilateral support, the risk of prolonged turmoil — not the promise of peace — is high.

As the United States heads into a pivotal election year, we are doing so under a president who has repeatedly demonstrated an autocratic style of governance — one who concentrates power in the executive, marginalizes congressional authority, disregards international norms, and treats military force like a political instrument rather than a last resort. 

The Venezuela operation is not just about one country; it is a reflection of how power is being wielded here at home. Voters are being asked a fundamental question this year: do we want a presidency defined by unilateral action, chaos governance, and erosion of democratic guardrails, or do we want a nation anchored in constitutional process, stable leadership, and respect for the rule of law? 

The stakes are not abstract. They are immediate, they are global, and they are ours to decide.

Cheers! Sláinte! Na zdravie!

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

The Take It Down Act and the Real Fight Ahead

Social media has become the magnifying glass on every social upheaval. The choice is whether it fuels democracy or destruction. And whether we let it, or not.

We hear a lot about internet “algorithms” pushing people into echo chambers rather th7an toward truth, logic, or reality. And I keep asking myself: why is this so hard to fix? Couldn’t Congress simply pass a law requiring platforms to guide people toward reality instead of reinforcing their biases?

Then I look at what they have done, and what they haven’t.

---

The Take It Down Act: Proof Congress Can Move

In May 2025, Congress passed and President Trump signed the Take It Down Act. The law was bipartisan and straightforward: it criminalizes the distribution of non-consensual intimate images, including deepfakes, and forces platforms to remove them within 48 hours of notice.

That’s meaningful. It’s real protection for victims of online exploitation. And it shows Congress can move quickly when there’s broad agreement about harm.

---

What It Doesn’t Do

Here’s the catch: the law’s scope is very narrow. It addresses one type of online abuse… “revenge porn” and deepfake sexual images. It does not touch the algorithms that drive conspiracy theories, political radicalization, or misinformation.

Why? Because the second you move from “intimate images” to “misinformation,” everything explodes into partisan fights and First Amendment debates. Who decides what’s real? What about political speech? What about corporate profit motives?

---

Algorithms Are the Real Problem

Social media platforms aren’t neutral bulletin boards. Their recommendation engines amplify outrage and division because outrage makes money. If you click on one partisan video, the algorithm serves you more, tightening the loop. Engagement equals profit.

The result is echo chambers that corrode democracy, where people live inside a 30 percent slice of facts surrounded by 70 percent spin.

---

Why Congress Won’t Fix It

Profit: Big Tech thrives on division. Regulation would hurt their bottom line.

Power: Movements like MaGA rely on these echo chambers. Leaders who benefit from them have no incentive to change the rules.

Politics: Regulating “truth” online runs straight into free speech fights, even when the speech is demonstrably false or manipulated. Donald Trump’s so-called ‘Truth Social’ and the ‘Truths’ he posts there are nothing more than an offensive front for ever more cruelty and lies, an affront to this nation and humanity at large in continuing his manufactured delusions as “reality” and “truth”.

So instead of confronting the deeper issue, Congress picks easier, narrower targets like intimate image abuse, where consensus is easier to find.

---

The Bigger Picture

The Take It Down Act proves one thing: Congress can legislate online behavior when it wants to. But it also proves how limited their appetite is for tackling the real forces warping our democracy.

Until we demand more, algorithms will keep steering millions away from truth and into self-designed echo boxes, while the people profiting off that distortion smile all the way to the bank.

---

Shame, Power, and Toxic Capitalism

Donald Trump’s MaGA-style autocratic personality cult has been engineered to mirror his own numbness to shame and his own psychological defects. Corporations are not built that way.

They fear lost profits, lost credibility, and lost talent. The task is to turn toxic capitalism against itself, forcing it to lean into its defects until it becomes more pro-social, more pro-people. Demand transparency, pressure advertisers, insist on accountability, and change will follow.

---

Change and Violence

We also have to recognize that big social changes often fuel violence. When those changes are illiberal or outright autocratic, the harm is not accidental…it is built into the change itself. Social media doesn’t just witness these upheavals, it amplifies them, concentrating their energy like a lens. That is why these companies cannot pretend neutrality. They are active participants in shaping whether change drives us toward democracy and connection, or toward chaos and destruction.

Social media companies, which now own the channels of that change, must understand they are the magnifying glass on an already blinding light, focusing its energy directly onto all of us. Simply deplatforming people doesn’t solve the deeper problem.

It treats the internet itself as the enemy, as if nothing more can be done. In reality, these platforms already have the tools to turn the volume up or down. The choice is whether they use that power only to enrich their own pockets, or to enrich all of us in our relationships with one another, with those companies, and with our democracy.

---

The Real Fight

The Take It Down Act was deliberately small, a tiny step, but an important crack in the wall of toxicity. The fight ahead is bigger: forcing social media to serve democracy, not just its own addiction.

Either we make these companies, and our government, feel the pain of their choices, until they realize that leaning toward us, not away, is good for them and for us, or we let them all keep profiting from our destruction.

In the end, that choice is ours.

Cheers! Sláinte! Na zdravie!

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

What's the Deal With Who Broke Social Security?

If I understand Social Security funding correctly, we contribute to it throughout our working lives, with the expectation of receiving benefits in retirement. However, at some point, Congress began using these funds for other purposes, shifting the system to rely on younger workers to pay for current retirees.

To fix this, we need to stop diverting Social Security funds, accept the financial burden of covering current and soon-to-retire beneficiaries, and transition to a system where each generation's contributions are preserved for their own future benefits. This would make Social Security self-sustaining and potentially even profitable.

Sounds good, but let's look at that more closely, as there are a few clarifications and nuances to consider:

1. How Social Security is Funded:

   • Workers pay into Social Security via payroll taxes (FICA), which are split between employees and employers.
   • These funds go into the Social Security Trust Fund, which is used to pay current beneficiaries.
   • Originally, the program operated on a "pay-as-you-go" system, meaning today's workers fund today's retirees.

2. Congress and the Trust Fund:

   • In years when Social Security collected more than it paid out, the surplus was placed in the Social Security Trust Fund, which was legally required to be invested in U.S. Treasury bonds (essentially loaning money to the federal government).
   • Congress has indeed spent this money on other government expenses, but Social Security still holds Treasury bonds as IOUs that the government is obligated to repay.

3. The Current Problem:

   • With an aging population, fewer workers are paying in compared to the number of retirees collecting benefits.
   • The Trust Fund is projected to be depleted around the 2030s, at which point Social Security will only be able to pay out what it collects from current workers, leading to an estimated 20-25% cut in benefits unless changes are made.

4. Proposed Fix & Challenges:

   • Stop using Social Security funds elsewhere: This would require Congress to change how surplus funds are handled (e.g., investing them differently or keeping them separate from general government spending).
   • Continue paying current retirees: This means we still have to cover benefits for those who paid in under the old system. That could require raising taxes, cutting benefits, or using other government funds to bridge the gap.
   • Phase into a self-sustaining system: If we ensure that every worker's contributions stay within the system and are not used elsewhere, it could eventually become fully self-funding—but this transition period would be financially painful.

5. Alternative Fixes Being Considered:

   • Raising or eliminating the payroll tax cap (currently, only income up to ~$168,600 is taxed for Social Security).
   • Gradually increasing the retirement age.
   • Adjusting benefit formulas to reduce payments for wealthier retirees.
   • Creating new sources of revenue (e.g., taxing investment income for Social Security).

In short, Social Security could become self-sustaining again, but getting there would require either temporary sacrifices (higher taxes, lower benefits, or both) or major restructuring of how it's funded and invested.

So it's correct in that the money was mismanaged by Congress and it can indeed be made a functional payout system if it's not abused.

Congress has used Social Security funds for other government expenses by requiring the surplus to be invested in U.S. Treasury bonds rather than keeping it separate. This means that while Social Security technically has its own trust fund, the money has been loaned to the government, which must pay it back with interest. Some see this as mismanagement because it allows Congress to use Social Security funds for other budgetary needs instead of ensuring they remain exclusively for future retirees.

And yes, if Social Security funds were protected from being used elsewhere and properly managed, it could function as a self-sustaining system—especially if adjustments were made to address demographic changes (like fewer workers per retiree). The challenge is getting Congress to make those changes instead of continuing to use Social Security as a stopgap for other spending.

This doesn't seem complicated. Fixing what was broken does.

The concept is simple: stop raiding the Social Security Trust Fund, ensure contributions are used only for their intended purpose, and adjust for demographic shifts.

The hard part is fixing the damage already done:

• Paying back the money that was "borrowed" through Treasury bonds.
• Covering the gap as fewer workers support more retirees.
• Overcoming political gridlock, since no one wants to be the politician who raises taxes or cuts benefits.

If the system had been managed properly from the start, we wouldn’t be facing a crisis. Now, fixing it requires tough choices—ones that politicians have been kicking down the road for decades.

Elon Musk has labeled Social Security as "the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time," suggesting that it is unsustainable and fraught with fraud and waste.

Regarding his role with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Musk has been granted significant authority by President Trump to streamline federal operations and reduce waste. This includes targeting entitlement programs like Social Security for potential cuts.

However, this concentration of power has raised concerns. A federal judge recently ordered the urgent release of DOGE records, citing "unprecedented" authority and "unusual secrecy" within the department.

In summary, while Musk's characterization of Social Security as a Ponzi scheme reflects his critical stance, his expanded role under the current administration has sparked debates about transparency and the potential impact on essential social programs.

No, Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme in the classic sense. A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment scam where returns are paid to earlier investors using money from new investors, rather than from actual profits. The scheme collapses when there aren't enough new investors to pay the older ones.

Social Security, on the other hand, is a pay-as-you-go system where current workers fund the benefits of current retirees. While it shares some characteristics with a Ponzi scheme—relying on new participants to sustain payouts—it is not fraudulent, as it's a government program designed to be transparent and structured for long-term sustainability (even if mismanaged at times).

The real issue isn't fraud but demographics—fewer workers per retiree and longer life expectancies, which strain the system. Fixing it requires adjustments, not scrapping it altogether.

The best way to fix Social Security without harming retirees or workers requires a balanced approach that spreads the burden fairly. A mix of these solutions could restore long-term stability:

1. Stop Using Social Security Funds Elsewhere

• Ensure payroll taxes go only to Social Security, not other government spending.
• Invest surplus funds in higher-yield but safe assets instead of just U.S. Treasury bonds.

2. Gradually Adjust Payroll Taxes (Without Overburdening Workers)

• Raise or eliminate the payroll tax cap (currently ~$168,600). Wealthier individuals would contribute more.
• Slightly increase payroll tax rates (e.g., by 1% over time) to strengthen funding without major financial strain.

3. Small, Gradual Adjustments to Benefits

• Protect lower-income retirees from cuts.
• Slightly adjust the benefit formula for higher earners so they receive proportionally less.
• Raise full retirement age gradually (e.g., by a few months per year), but not so much that it harms those in physically demanding jobs.

4. Expand the Revenue Base

• Tax investment income for Social Security (e.g., capital gains or dividends above a certain threshold).
• Implement a Social Security surtax on very high earners to help close the funding gap.

5. Phase in Changes Over Time

• Any tax or benefit adjustments should be gradual, preventing financial shocks to current retirees or workers.

By combining these steps without drastic cuts or sudden tax hikes, Social Security can return to sustainability while ensuring that people get the benefits they paid for.

President Trump's appointment of Elon Musk to lead the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has sparked both support and criticism. Supporters argue that Musk's innovative approach could streamline federal operations and reduce waste. Critics, however, express concerns over the concentration of power and potential lack of transparency in DOGE's operations.

Additionally, Musk's recent comments labeling Social Security as "the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time" have intensified debates about his suitability for this role, given the sensitivity surrounding entitlement programs.

In summary, while Musk's appointment aligns with Trump's agenda to overhaul federal efficiency, it raises valid concerns about transparency, accountability, and the potential impact on essential social programs

Compiled with aid from ChatGPT

If Trump Were Zelensky: From 2020 Russian Invasion of Ukraine Until Today

Timeline of Zelensky’s/Trump's Leadership From the 2022 Russian Invasion to the 2025 Oval Office Meeting

1. February 24, 2022 – Russia Invades Ukraine

• Zelensky's Response: Refused to flee Kyiv, rallied Ukrainians with defiant speeches, and secured international military aid.
• If Trump Were President of Ukraine: Likely would have tried to negotiate with Putin instead of resisting, possibly delaying military mobilization while claiming he could "make a deal."

2. March 2022 – Kyiv Under Siege

• Zelensky's Response: Walked the streets of Kyiv in defiance, rejected U.S. evacuation offers with "I need ammunition, not a ride."
• If Trump Were President: Would likely have fled to Western Ukraine or abroad while claiming the war would have never happened if he were in charge. Would have blamed NATO, the EU, or past Ukrainian leaders. He would have prioritized evacuation to ensure his personal safety, potentially accepting the "ride" offered.

3. April–May 2022 – War Crimes in Bucha, Defense of Mariupol

• Zelensky's Response: Exposed Russian atrocities, secured more weapons, and rallied Western nations.
• If Trump Were President: Likely would have downplayed war crimes, possibly saying "both sides have done bad things." Would have obsessed over who praised or criticized him, rather than military strategy.

4. September 2022 – Ukrainian Counteroffensive in Kharkiv

• Zelensky's Response: Oversaw one of the war’s most successful counterattacks, reclaiming occupied territory.
• If Trump Were President: Would have taken full credit for any success while attacking his own generals if anything went wrong.

5. December 2022 – Zelensky's Historic Speech to U.S. Congress

• Zelensky's Response: Addressed Congress in person, securing more military aid and strengthening U.S.-Ukraine ties.
• If Trump Were President: Would have demanded personal loyalty from Congress, attacked critics, and likely insulted allies who weren’t giving Ukraine “enough.”

6. 2023–2024 – Stalemate and Struggles for More U.S. Aid

• Zelensky's Response: Maintained global support, pressed Congress, and kept morale high despite heavy losses.
• If Trump Were President: Would have blamed NATO and Europe for not doing more, possibly considering deals with Russia to end the war on unfavorable terms.

7. February 2025 – Oval Office Meeting With Trump

• Zelensky's Reality: Berated and pressured while standing firm on Ukraine’s needs.
• If Trump Were in Zelensky’s Shoes: The meeting would have been a complete disaster:
• Trump would have taken everything personally, likely ranting about unfair treatment.
• He might have threatened to walk out, insulted Congress, or refused to take responsibility for Ukraine’s struggles.
• Instead of rallying support, he would have blamed allies and possibly hinted at withdrawing from the war altogether.

If the roles had been reversed—meaning Zelensky was in Trump's position as the U.S. president, and Trump was the leader of a nation at war facing Russian aggression—Zelensky would likely have handled the situation very differently.

Zelensky’s Likely Approach:

1. Respectful Diplomacy: Zelensky has consistently treated world leaders with diplomatic courtesy, even in difficult situations. Instead of berating Trump, he would have likely expressed firm support while encouraging a strong alliance.
2. Commitment to Aid: Given Zelensky’s track record, he would have reassured Trump that the U.S. remains committed to providing assistance, whether in military aid, humanitarian relief, or diplomatic efforts.
3. Clear Communication: Zelensky is direct but measured. He would have likely acknowledged Trump’s struggles while emphasizing the importance of international unity against Russian aggression.
4. Public Support: Rather than embarrassing Trump in front of the press, Zelensky would have reinforced a public show of unity, avoiding the kind of humiliation that Trump subjected him to in the real meeting.

In contrast, Trump’s actual behavior toward Zelensky was dismissive and condescending, showing little empathy for a wartime leader. Had the situation been reversed, Zelensky would have approached it with far more tact and leadership.

Final Takeaway

Zelensky has led with resilience, diplomacy, and unwavering focus on Ukraine’s survival. If Trump had been in his position, Ukraine might not have lasted this long, as his need for personal praise, deal-making tendencies, and lack of military strategy would have played into Putin’s hands.

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

If Trump Were Zelensky: How He Would Have Melted Down in the Oval Office Showdown

First a couple of things.

Fox News Brit Hume: "It didn't see that Zelensky was reading the room." At the Oval Office meeting. Who the FUCK could have read THAT room? I wasn't reading THAT room when I was watching it unfold! It was a room of Trump mental patient inmates.

From "The Angry Staffer" - "The Most Embarrassing Day".

This blog came from this concept: "Take the Trump / Zelensky Oval Office meeting yesterday and turn it around. How would TRUMP have handled that situation with Zelensky's VP attack dogging Trump? Exactly."

Yesterday in the Oval Office, America was humiliated while the Right, Republicans, and Trump supporters attempted to lay the blame all at the feet of Ukraine's Pres. Zelensky, who was by all accounts treated very improperly for the leader of a state at war.

Also...

The recent Oval Office meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has raised questions regarding its orchestration and the timing of Russian media coverage.

Pre-Arranged Coverage:

Russian state media's access to the meeting suggests a degree of pre-arrangement. A reporter from Russia's state-owned news agency gained entry to the Oval Office, even as other media outlets were barred. This unusual access indicates that Russian media were prepared to cover the event extensively.

Timing and Coordination:

The swift and detailed reporting by Russian media following the meeting points to prior knowledge. Russian officials, including former President Dmitry Medvedev, quickly commented on the incident, describing Zelenskyy's treatment as a "proper rebuke." This rapid response suggests coordination and possible pre-awareness of the meeting's dynamics.

Speculations on Trump-Putin Communication:

While the orchestrated media coverage raises questions about the meeting's setup, there is no concrete evidence linking President Trump and President Putin in arranging the event. The timing of Russian reactions aligns more with the meeting's immediate aftermath than with any coordinated effort between Trump and Putin.

In summary, the access granted to Russian state media and the rapidity of their coverage suggest a level of pre-arrangement, though direct involvement of Trump and Putin remains speculative without further evidence.

Zelensky was treated shamefully in the White House, especially considering that he is a wartime leader fighting for his country’s survival. Instead of being met with the dignity and respect due to a head of state risking everything against an aggressive invader, he was subjected to public berating and political grandstanding.

Why This Treatment Was Disgraceful:

1. A Disregard for Diplomacy – Instead of a constructive discussion on Ukraine’s needs, the meeting became a humiliating spectacle where Zelensky was talked down to rather than treated as a critical U.S. ally.

2. Undermining an Ally in Crisis – Ukraine is not just asking for aid out of desperation; it is actively fighting a war that aligns with U.S. national security interests. The way Zelensky was handled signaled weakness in America’s commitment to defending democracy against authoritarian aggression.

3. A Break from Traditional U.S. Conduct – Historically, U.S. presidents have shown strong support for allies at war, regardless of party politics. Forcing Zelensky into a pleading position in the Oval Office was a stark contrast to how past leaders, like Churchill or other wartime allies, were treated.

4. Fuel for Russian Propaganda – The humiliation of Zelensky on U.S. soil played right into Putin’s hands. Russia thrives on any sign that Ukraine is losing Western support, and this moment likely gave the Kremlin ammunition to claim that America is abandoning Ukraine.

5. A Missed Opportunity for Unity – Instead of rallying support, the meeting sent a divisive message. It should have been a moment to reaffirm that defending Ukraine is in America’s best interest, not an occasion for public disrespect.

Zelensky’s treatment in the White House was not just disrespectful to him—and to America as it was a bad look for America as a global leader. At a time when authoritarian regimes are watching for signs of Western weakness, the handling of Zelensky sent all the wrong signals. Pres. Trump seems to be vying for a position for America as anything in the world but its leader, going forward.

Zelensky handled the Oval Office debacle with remarkable restraint and composure—far better than many leaders would have in his position.

1. He Stayed Focused on Ukraine’s Survival – Instead of getting caught up in the political theatrics, Zelensky kept redirecting the conversation back to the stakes of the war and Ukraine’s need for continued U.S. support.

2. He Pushed Back Without Escalating – When Trump berated him, Zelensky firmly but diplomatically countered, making it clear that Ukraine had already delivered on its commitments. He didn’t resort to anger, which could have alienated U.S. lawmakers, but also didn’t back down.

3. He Resisted Being Humiliated – The moment could have turned into a power play where Zelensky was forced into a submissive stance, but he refused to let that happen. His body language, tone, and words all signaled that he was an equal leader fighting for his country, not a beggar.

4. He Handled the Pressure in Real Time – The public nature of the moment, with cameras rolling, meant Zelensky had to balance assertiveness with diplomacy. He didn’t let Trump bait him into a spectacle, which would have played into the hands of Russian propaganda.

5. He Showed Strength Under Fire – Instead of letting frustration take over, Zelensky held his ground with facts and logic, reinforcing Ukraine’s contributions and needs without losing his cool.

Overall, he turned an uncomfortable, humiliating situation into a demonstration of leadership, proving why he remains an effective advocate for Ukraine on the world stage.

If the roles were reversed—where Ukraine was a superpower aiding the U.S. in a war against Russia, and Trump was in Zelensky's position yesterday, the Oval Office debacle would have played out very differently. Here’s how:

1. Trump’s Ego Wouldn’t Allow Humility

Zelensky handled the situation with restraint, pushing back firmly but staying diplomatic. Trump, on the other hand, does not handle criticism well. If a foreign leader berated him in the Oval Office, he would immediately fire back—likely louder and more aggressively.

2. He’d Turn It Into a Personal Grievance

Instead of keeping the focus on America’s survival (like Zelensky did for Ukraine), Trump would likely shift the conversation to how he personally felt insulted. He might say something like:

"Nobody’s done more for Ukraine—excuse me, America—than me! And you’re treating me like this? Very unfair!"

3. He’d Make It About Respect

Trump often demands total loyalty and praise, so if the Ukrainian leader (in this case, the powerful one) was grilling him, he’d lash out about being disrespected rather than addressing the military aid issue.

4. He’d Threaten to Walk Out

Zelensky stood his ground and kept the conversation going. Trump, however, might storm out or threaten to cut ties, saying something like:

"Maybe we don’t need your aid! Maybe we should just go it alone! Maybe Ukraine doesn’t appreciate us!"

5. He’d Brag About How He Could End the War Instantly

Instead of focusing on securing more support, he might claim he alone could solve the war if only he were in charge of both sides—similar to his past claims about ending the Ukraine war in “24 hours.”

6. He’d Turn to the Cameras for a Show

Zelensky kept his cool under pressure. Trump, however, would turn it into a performance, talking past the Ukrainian leader and addressing the media:

"See, folks? Very unfair. They’re not treating us right. And quite frankly, America deserves better. Maybe we should stop fighting Russia altogether—who knows?!"

Final Takeaway

Trump’s inability to handle criticism, love for theatrics, and need for dominance would have made the meeting chaotic, combative, and counterproductive. Instead of advocating for America’s survival, he would have made it about himself—probably damaging U.S.-Ukraine relations in the process.

America can do better. We just need a leader somewhat comparable to one who holds the Office of the President of the United States of America.

 Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

Walkabout Thoughts #66

My thoughts, Stream of consciousness, rough and ready, while walking off long Covid and listening to podcasts…

NOTE (from after this walk and notes below): Had curry at Yoko Yoko in Bremerton today. So tasty.

Then saw DUNE Part 2 today. Liked it better than Part 1.

But worst theater experience in years. Guy down front couldn't stop talking to his girlfriend for more than 20 seconds the entire movie (I seriously considered he was mentally challenged), and a guy behind me at one point said, "Bro, come on, be quiet." To no effect.
Then half way through we lost the video. Took them about 10 minutes to fix, then they backed it up for about 15. Sigh... I'll watch it again in my home theater.
Later...I noticed I lost my reading glasses. Usually don't take them to lunch in case I lose them, and lost them. So I won't be able to edit below after my walk. Apologies.

Shooting for 3 miles today. Had to deal with the heart beating too hard at the beginning again now, after the half mile point seems to be pretty settled down. Man, you can take this getting old stuff and shove it. They come up with a youth pill, taking it!

Weather for the day… starting out, 61° when I got home 66°

Podcast today Pod Save America, ep., Trump’s Bloodbath? (feat. Katie Porter)

It’s interesting to note that MAGA is ignorant enough to not understand when Trump uses a term like bloodbath it’s a disingenuous and MAGA are clever enough to rationalize. It’s a harmless comment, but they’re not clever enough to avoid his authoritarian use as a term affecting them exactly the way he intends.

Before I left home today I watched a C-SPAN2 show I want to share a few quotes from on China, TikTok and the CCP's efforts in America that I KNOW are extremely important. Lots of confusion about TikTok, which Katie Porter said she voted against the bill in Congress because it needs work but more so, America needs eduation to understand why our government is so concerned. If YOU'RE confused or angry about it, read this next (then I'll continue with my normal blog):

Congressional Hearing on Risks of Chinese Technology in US

Reva Price, US-China Economic & Sec. Review Commission Vice Chair: I think it's clear to most Americans how this matters on the security realm. But how would you address this so that they were concerned about what it means for their personal information? What is the impact of the Chinse Communist Party having this kind of information on them [American citizens]? Like where they shop and what kinds of things they buy, or what music they listen to or whathaveyou?

Nazak Nikakhtar, Nat'l Sec. & Int'l Trade Attorney [2 other experts on the panel declined any need to expand on her answer here]: 

So our adversaries have talked for years about what sort of "information warfare" information campaign. It stems all the way from what children are exposed to, the kind of news we get. Most fundamentally what I see is sowing a lot of discord into the United States. If we're fighting with each other and the long list of what we're fighting about keeps growing because they're infusing sort of inflammatory sentiment to our ecosystem. The more we let that happen, the more we're at each other's throats...and this is by design... that we don't form a united front against a common adversary."

Ivan Tsarynny, Feroot Cybersecurity CEO & Co-Founder: "I completely agree with that statement and what information even collected on pixels can provide and has been provided is information of teenagers or anyone else is reading or which pages they follow or which pages they visit, that creates a real powerful insight and data about creating discord or other conflicts in our societies."

Jack Corrigan, Senior Research Analyst at Georgetown’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET): "I don't really have anything to add, I think what they said, I would agree with."

For what's next. Congressional hearing - Nazak Nikakhtar, Nat'l Sec. & Int'l Trade Attorney, said she also worries about Chinese photo apps which gain access to your phone camera, etc., can add malicious code & can copy code to your router & "across systems like cancer. 

Nazak Nikakhtar: Where American orientation is money, CCP in China is to infiltrate, and then cripple our systems and gain the upper hand. Without question.

Ivan Tsarynny: I was born in a communist  county and there laws make no difference, it is what the leader at the top wants to have happen. Also apps like Alipay. Alibaba and Tencent...

Nazak Nikakhtar: China owns the Radisson Hotel chain. They are not interested in hotels.

Continuing on with Walkabout Thoughts:

Add in the C-SPAN congressional hearing

The podcast has a good point that this may be one of the most damaging former presidential speeches ever even if you remove the bloodbath comment from Trump speech at the rally the referring to in the podcast that everybody this week has seen on the news, one way or another

Regarding former V POTUS, not endorsing supporting Donald Trump I agree it’s a big deal. While some may say it’s not the podcast. Take a win when you get one.

The whole Paul Manafort after prison, after pardon by Trump, may be running his campaign after all his Russian connections that have been verified documented costume dearly. Denying the Russian connections with Trump at this point is just stupid.

Trump on his stacking the Scotus to destroy Roe versus Wade saying on a lot of counts there very good things done there one in the bigger picture far far more bad things came of it. I’ve been saying for decades that Congress needs to get their shit together and make this a national federal law Because what happens if Skoda shoots it down. Now that won’t happen, everybody said. OK

Republicans who are saying they want to go after contraception and after recreational sex I have to ask what happened to freedom actual freedom of the individual freedom of spirit freedom to the pursuit of happiness? I mean what’s next we’ve already had the fashion police with people getting beat up for wearing a fucking Covid mask when sometimes they had medical conditions where they could die if they caught Covid. I’m assuming everybody read your 1984 George Orwell book we’re headed into the thought police because that’s where autocrats always go. That’s one of the biggest paranoids of the Chinese communist party.

This is America I’m all for freedom of religion, freedom of thought regardless of the fact how much I’m against organized religion, and the other bullshit it leads to. But the Republican party really needs to assist itself from theocratic tendencies, because after all, regardless of how they view this country being founded Freedom as a primary tenant of America in the US Constitution

Oh yes Chuck Schuber calling out BB Netanyahu as needed to be removed because he’s leading Israel in the direction that has lost their way. When you’re attacked this thousand people are killed that you respond by killing people in the tens of thousands including mostly children the elderly and women non-combat Greatly missing the Hamas targets your after yeah you’ve kind of lost your fucking way

BB at yahoo has been leaning authoritarian like Putin like Trump as with China etc. America could be called it has been called a kleptocracy and what’s worse than that? Easy an oligarchy and a theocracy which Trump is pushing us into

Mitch McConnell called Schumer speech p grotesque this coming from Mr. grotesque himself and I don’t mean his looks but it’s political leanings and actions. He’s been a horrible person in Congress for a long time.

To be clear Schumer is not anti-Israel he’s very pro Israel but he’s very anti-autocrat anti-Bibi Netanyahu anti-Trump anti-Putin

It’s also important to note bibi says that Schumer is delving into Israeli politics too much Netanyahu Does it like all the time historically

I’m saying we should do this and I want obviously Israelis Jewish people to be protected like everybody but one does wonder if we were to turn things around with Israel’s enemies? How would that make things better or worse? I ran as a big problem in international affairs and they’re religious. Had a State is on his last legs and there are many and I ran would like to see things turn around, since things are so problematic as they are what do you keep doing to maintain that and what do you do different to make progress?

Nazi starved in incinerated Jews in World War III. Explain to me how Israel has not done that to Palestinians since October 7.

Why is Netanyahu dealing with people like bengavir?

Here’s the thing that BB Netanyahu doesn’t get and MAGA doesn’t get about Trump and the Republican Party doesn’t understand about how they should not support Trump or MAGA bullshit… Regardless, if your guy is saying what you want here but he’s a lowlife criminal. You don’t choose him. You don’t support authoritarian theocratic nonsense in a country like America in order to protect American citizens. MAGA think that American citizens are MAGA, they are a corrupt, confused disinformed over propagandized minority

What so ironic about the MAGA claims of stolen elections is that our elections aren’t stolen that’s not the problem. They are unduly unfairly and ill liberally skewed by big and dark money, and the Republican party in the best sense of Trump who calls out what others say accurately in observing his actions About the others who are fighting against the things he’s claiming they are doing. Again when it’s doing it.

Yeah, the senator on the podcast has a good point saying she wore a red dress to a Democratic function and people said you can’t do that because it’s Donald Trump‘s color it’s Republican it’s mega and she said I’m not giving him a whole color. And that’s a damn good point same thing I said about certain words and things before. MAGA, bigoted assholes, stole the word, patriotism, and our American flag for a while, and I believe we may have taken it back. If you flew a flag just a few years ago you were a Trump supporter if you said patriot, they knew you were Extreme right wing. So I would suggest half of every buddy at Democratic events going forward where red because if that’s how it works MAGA and Republicans will see MAGA and Republicans supporting Joe Biden Democratic events and how is that a bad thing?

My still third Catholic sister invited our cousin and I over for Easter dinner. Thankfully, she’s not MAGA or conservative or Republican. In fact, my entire family was raised democratic and a union family, with my stepdad being a blue-collar worker who retired from a warehouse at Nalley’s food foods in Tacoma. But again this is America I will support to the death peoples rights to their delusions about anything. Regardless, your religious political delusions as long as you’re not working against America like MAGA and Donald Trump are. When you see your leaders lineup with your national enemies, wake the fuck up.

And for those like my older brother, who says I have TDS, when in his maggot delusion, he does I’m a veteran I have a college degree psychology, and I spent the first half of my life studying several things. Soviet espionage and religion. I gained a deep respect for the Russian people in history, but not for their autocratic socialist bullshit. No more than the Chinese socialist. Bullshit authoritarian is authoritarianism. Wasn’t until the 90s I really started paying attention to politics and applying my previous skills back. I voted for Reagan the first time I voted against him the second time I voted his VP and his president and since then I’ve not voted for a Republican because of the useless people they put up, Quail VP was a sign.

I thought George W. Bush was a war criminal I thought Gore won the election in 2000. I I warned after 911 but America was going to attack another country probably an innocent country because they needed an enemy and they wanted to punch somebody in the mouth and bush didn’t like Hussain because of his dad back in the Kuwait Iraq conflict when we took out which set us up for a lot of bad shit. Not because he took the sane out, but as usual, because of what we did in the after effects. I was a big Obama and Bernie and even Hillary supporter. I thought Hillary earned her time to run for president. I think we may have done better in some ways with Obama but I didn’t like everything he did and Hillary would’ve handled Putin better, and we may not be in the situation today, so thanks a lot fucking Trump

I’m coming up on the end of my 2nd mile and with all the jawing I’m doing and aside from my desire to get the 3 miles today I really feel I have to do a3 mile and so far I feel pretty good for it :-)

Katie, as a guest says regardless of citizens, United, or this toxic spewed conservative Scotus. There are lots of things we can do about big money, dark money, and our politics and our elections. Thank God for that.

Do you know it’s worse than “woke ism“? Anti-woke ism

Trump needs to eat that “hamburger from heaven” very very soon. Bye-bye.

Two political standards always crack me up. “I don’t want career politician, representing me“ and why can’t the guy you partied with who stood next to the keg giving you a beer be the president?“ I think the reasons are obvious. Politicians that are new have to learn and there’s a ramping up time that could be years or maybe never for some. So I’m on a career path of Ted Cruz, which is anything to enrich and empower me. Do you really want a dumb fuck next to the keg running the country when the best way is someone who’s been through Congress which Biden has been. Someone who knows the system at least the constitution which Trump doesn’t. The last thing you want is a businessman. Now there’s two kinds. The corporate thought type businessman thinks only of the shareholders and profit. More enlighten, types worry also about other things like our environment the future actual people being humane because there’s money in that too not quite as much if you’re willing to allow people to die and poison our environment and support really bad people politics to promote your efforts. And the EPA, because poison in the environment makes you a lot of money as long as you eventually moved to a clean area and start poisoning that over the next hundred years.

OK I hit the 2 1/2 mile point which means I’m guaranteed to do 3 miles if I ever want to get home again. I actually walked a little further today progress!

Representative Katie Porter has a good point and that she voted against the TikTok bill in Congress because she thought the American people needed to be better educated and understand why and it wasn’t a great bill. So she hopes the Senate corrects that or votes it down. She said it’s kind of screwed up that we don’t want to talk about American companies and their data collection. We should probably very closely adopt the EU law because they seem to be ahead of us on all of that stuff to protect their citizens. Our toxic capitalism is such that we don’t care so much about protecting citizens and if MAGA Trump gets in he wants to dissolve the EPA. So enjoy your filthy air and filthy water.

We need to really look at things and not just technologies and protections but but we should already have high-speed rail all over the country if we’re so great. We should have cellular service that you can get from just about anywhere like you can in Europe and Asia. we should have a population that’s more savvy about using the technology when so many of us don’t know what the hell they’re doing or how to do it

I wish you all great success and health! Until next time!

Cheers! Sláinte!

Walkabout Thoughts #57

My thoughts, Stream of consciousness, rough and ready, while walking off long Covid and listening to podcasts… July 17, 2023, Monday

Weather for the day… 60 starting out, 72° when I got home

Podcast for the day is “Pod Save the World” episode, "Israel’s Judicial Coup, and Samantha Power on Ukraine"


I should mention that yesterday I watched a congressional hearing on UAP’s I thought was groundbreaking, and they said, in the hearing, it was historical. Coming from that, will hopefully be a process set up to acquire sightings from military, commercial pilots and people. It’s worth watching the nearly 3 hour hearing and make up your own mind. Some of the comments I’ve heard about it at first I called ridiculous but I recant that as I now see it more as simply “normal”. SOP. Standard consideration among people. Yes we have other things to worry about. But this is definitely something.

I should also mention that oddly enough Republicans in the hearing acted like congressional members and not partisan MAGA Republican fools. So they CAN do it they want; and ARE capable and should do more of that in Congress in every other area they’re involved in. Passing a resolution saying that Israel isn’t exactly what they are, and are doing, is just like MAGA Republicans, in being illiberal in a democracy. Just to be MAGA rather than American Congresspeople is ludicrous and frankly, offensive and offensively wasting our tax dollars while they rail about Democrats doing that. At least with the Dems we ARE getting SOMETHING, not just endless hearings and nonsense. Now they're trying to what, impeach Joe Biden so their Trump won't look so bad in all his court trials? So, the GOP party of obfuscations and besmirching for no reason other than obscuring how bad their primary candidate is. It really is disgusting.

I know the elderly sometimes have to go on blood thinners for issues of coagulation, blood clots, whatever. Covid and long Covid have similar issues which along with cell morphing can enhance or initiate that. I have found that at 67, having caught Covid three years ago and then again a year ago, both times getting long Covid, that I did not have heart or blood clotting issues before that. But I have since. I assume the heart issues are vagus nerve related. That’s gotten better, but has yet to go away. Typically one or 2 80mg aspirin, alleviates the situation, usually only taking them for a day, sometimes two. It’s really annoying though. Along with long Covid triggering long dormant viruses which all humans seem to have, it’s like a disease created to either kill humans, or simply be really annoying.

I updated my blog post from last week about "Pvt. Ravel’s Bolero", my film I’ve gotten so far 18 international awards for. I quadrupled the number of people seeing that post after reposting it to various social media. 

Oh, I got my second award for my biopic true crime screenplay, "The Teenage Bodyguard"! 

Now I just need to sell it and get it produced. It almost was three time. A producer and i talked with three different directors but I didn't appreciate their orientation. It's not a kids film. It's an adult drama. People hear 17 year old, they immediately go to hormones & horny!

Speaking of which (I know, nice segue)… Elon Musk… Changing Twitter to “X”? There’s something wrong with that guy, obviously.

I heard on NPR this morning that this Saturday, Washington state citizens will be able to get online and view convictions related to marijuana going back 50 years and have them expunged and their money for court fees and such, will be returned. I took one hit off a weed pipe I think in 1985 at a state park in Pierce County just adjacent to Tacoma across the Narrows bridge past Gig Harbor at Kopachuck State Park with a female friend I worked with at Tower Video in Tacoma. I took one hit, put it in a grocery type paper bag, and a Ranger popped out of the trees, a few feet from me, having been watching me the whole time. And a really good day quickly ended. He wrote me up. took a little bottle of pills I had for allergies, because he said they were having drug problem with pills at the park and took one pill of each. They were proved out to be what I'd said they were later. But I had to go to court and come back again which wasn’t fun and I got the $350 charge down to $75. What a stupid law charging people for getting high. But then I guess they charge you for drinking alcohol at state parks… So there’s that.

[UPDATE 8/2/23: I could not find that I had a court record though it happened in a state park, so...WTF? maybe I shouldn't care, esp., as it screwed me for a new career in the late 80s, and I doubt it will affect me any now, I just like closure...]

The public defender I got for that case was a nice guy, smart, and saved me some problems and money, but his comment at the end was, "You don’t ever wanna work for the government do you?" Uh, I don't know, maybe? I asked him if I could get it expunged at some point and he said, no. I had already been in the Air Force with a secret security clearance for nuclear weapons. But as it turned out, within a couple years, I had moved to Seattle, gotten married, had a kid and my wife’s father, who was a defense contractor, was going to give me an executive position in Florida. So I told him the truth about the cannabis conviction and he said, Well that’s too bad. And that ended that, because I wouldn’t pass the security check. So once again what has happened far too often in my life, happened again. Missed a great opportunity. Maybe. Would I have wanted to be a defense contractor exec? No. But the money. I had a young family. So...

I just like to mention the stupid cannabis laws in the war on drugs, and my example above is just one small issue that cost me and my family, financially and for my entire life. And the taxes I would’ve been paying a lot more taxes, was the stupidest paradigm for protecting American citizens on the books. Prohibition was stupid, regardless, how well-intentioned it was intended by mostly delusional religious types. This "war" mentality is destructive because... you know, it’s a WAR mentality. The war against drugs in practice and function turned out to be a war against American citizens.

Well? Maybe now I can get that stupid charge expunged and my money back. Money which was everything to me back then. $75 now is a quick shopping trip. $75 back then was a lot, part of my monthly rent and food out of my mouth. Not to mention it’s nice they’ll pay us back our money, but considering cost-of-living, etc. I’m not getting back my money, I’m getting back a token. $211.39 is what $75 in 1985 calculates out to now.

Did I send you the article that Amazon is finally going to add AI to Alexa? I think I did they're going to present it at the September show. And I fear which would be ridiculous that they make a spy new Alexis when I don't know what it's got to even do with Alexa, which is just an interface.

I agree with two advisers to the White House that it’s time to stop sending money for the military to Israel, considering their somewhat more gentle authoritarian putsch considering BB, seems proving out to be a racist and a PPBJ, Perceived Pure Blood Jew type. Yeah, maybe that's strong words, but what he's doing seems pretty disturbing. Protesters have been on the streets in Israel for 28 weeks and crowd control is having little concern for their safety when they’re just saying things like "we want our democracy back" and "Biden save us."

Israel receives more aid from America then any other country. We have an annual basis (other than Ukraine right now) where we give them $4 billion a year. I would say knock that down to $4 million and see how they act.

If Congress, especially MAGA, want to support Israel’s democracy then they need to act now, as Netanyahu is turning it into an autocracy. Why the hell is that so popular anymore? It's a BAD IDEA! And if they don’t, they really are just trying to get Trump back into office, which at this point it should be obvious to everyone is a criminal offense, even if it’s not legally indictable. And actually in many cases, it is and hopefully in execution, will be.

The other day in Israel 200 people marched 40 miles to the capital to protest what’s going on and by time they got there, they were joined by 20,000. That says something. .02% of Israel marched in protest. But that’s not nothing.

So this 23-year-old military person who was in a South Korean jail for a fight at a bar and kicking a cop car, was held for a week on base under observation, and then taken to the airport under escort to be sent home. He went on a tour to the DMZ and cross over like a fucking idiot to North Korea. Wait. What? OK. The thing is, the excuse is, he was taken to the airport but his escorts didn’t have tickets to go to the plane. OK, but when you’re escorting someone out of country, you take them to the plane. You watch the plane takeoff. You watch the plane to be sure they don’t get off out the back door. What is going on here.? That should all have been foreseen that you walk him to the gate. You get permission, without having to buy a ticket. It’s an official state thing. This is incompetence on the part of the US military and I would assume maybe, their law-enforcement? Or whomever. Escort him to the plane to be sent home. Oh, when he headed into NK apparently there was a van, potentially waiting for him when he crossed the border as if it was pre-planned? Which makes it sound more like a defection. But who the hell defects to the hermit kingdom and what kind of mental health issues do you have to have to do that?? Is he MAGA? Because that really would explain it, running away to Trump's political lover, and fetishist talisman leader of North Korea. Although if that is the case, then mental health is kind of still at issue.
If this kid who, lets call it escaped to North Korea, starts showing up in pro-North Korean propaganda films, especially with an anti-American orientation, and he seems happy, he’s probably a defector. Just  understand it’s complicated in North Korea. If he seems unhappy in those films, he still may have been a defector. Because I am assuming even if he’s happy in those films, he won’t be at some point soon thereafter. It's NORTH KOREA!

Interesting. Apparently the BBC got to interview three N. Korean residents talking about how it’s been since the border is closed in 2020 because of Covid and they said it’s pretty horrible. It wasn’t that great beforehand.

Remember, the old adage that you are who you surround yourself with? Who does Trump admire or surround HIMSELF with? Kim Jong-un. Vladimir Putin. MAGA government officials who bend to his autocratic illiberal criminal intentions? Yeah. OK.

Bad guy, Ukrainian militia, separatist leader, who Russia arrested Igor Aleksandrovich Kornet? He was supplying arms to the separatists, including munitions that shot down that commercial aircraft in 2014 which was simply flying over Ukraine.
Apparently, after the Prigozhin military action against Putin‘s military leaders, Kornet foolishly spoke out as a far right-wing Telegram blogger against Putin himself. Article in Financial Times: "Russian FSB Arrests Pro-Russian Separatist Leader"

Apparently, there are higher-ups in Russia, who are claiming that Putin’s time in power is limited to likely a year. As Putin‘s island of power shrinks, conscription is from 18 to 36 in Russia, but has been changed. So that senior officers as old as 70 could be called back into service. I'm sure they're just overjoyed about that.

A Russian pilot in Syria launched flares, which hit the prop of an American drone doing ISIS reconnaissance damaging it. Surely there’s some hawkish discussions going on about how to respond. I would say the answer is somewhat simple. Arm these things so that if they’re attacked, they launch a missile, doesn't even have to be big, doesn't even have to damage anything. It just has to hit what it’s aimed at. And then let the Russians know, where "it’s out of our control because it’s autonomous and will protect itself!"

It’s ironic how I’ve long claimed that Trump’s face, as well as his voice, are so very “punchable”. And so is Ron DeSantis’s though his face is less punchable, his voice takes up that extra slack.

If I ever write a horror story about a petulant little bitch, five-year-old whose the parents both agree to drown him in a slimy family pond, I will name him Donald. And if he has a bigoted bully friend, that’ll be his friend Ron, for Ron DeSantis. Maybe both kid's parents can get together and deal with the kids in similar kind of a twisted way they did in Shirley Jacksons “The Lottery“?

To be clear, the military is fine, they’re functional, they’re not worried about the shit the MAGA Republicans are forcing them into in their culture war nonsense. When I was in the Air Force, we had regular briefings on the topic of "rumors and propaganda". I’ve spoken about this before. It was a big deal. A big concern. The military is highly aware of and careful about that because they know how, in such a closed environment, in what has been euphemistically been referred to as “the perfect society“, it's like dropping a match into a tinderbox. Rumors and propaganda easily get out of control, so the military squashes it as fast as they can. Had America taken that tact with Donald Trump and the direction the Republican Party has been taking for decades now, we wouldn’t be in this fucking situation. Free speech is wonderful until it's weaponized and that has to be dismantled in order to allow it to flourish once again.

“Bless your little heart”, red states. We know it’ll take another hundred years to wash the generational butt hurt confederacy and racism out of your hair. But we love you anyway. We’re just going to protect America against you until you become fully American...Again?

I’ve noticed a couple of things throughout my life in working out. Not working out for a long time, then starting again, and so on. When you start working out, you can feel like you have a cold the first few days. Which is why many people give up. Some people never feel this, some have it really bad. Push through it. When you start getting your muscles toned, any fat layer on top of that starts to look worse. That’s the time if you haven’t already done, so to readjust your diet. Because of this past winter and long Covid, not feeling well and catching or feeling ill from long Covid flare ups, since winter past, I’ve been eating for pleasure too much. I’ve been cutting back on that now. I’d gotten down to eating one cookie (with chocolate on it) after lunch. But as I’ve gone back up 15 pounds from where I had been from being ill, with a restricted diet and  feeling much better regarding my weight back then, I’m switching now to fruits as my guilty pleasure. That will be healthier but it’s still fructose (a sugar) and so I’ll see how that goes. if I start losing weight, I will stay on it. If I don’t, I will readjust my diet again. Because this is about the journey of and accomplishing the mission of, getting back in shape. and being in a way where I feel healthier and happier.

About recovered UAPs… Those who keep saying that the moon mission had alien technology and on and on and such bullshit. Even if we had alien technology, what makes you think we were ever capable of replicating that.? In many cases we don’t or wouldn’t have the technology to reproduce the size of we we found, or those elements in some of these materials. Think about it. One of our drones ends up in the year 1750. How is that gonna advance technology? It will alter the course of technology, and it may even speed it up... a bit. But it will be 100 years before we have the tools and knowledge to replicate it, potentially in our case even thousands of years. I responded to a so-called sci-fi writer and Futurist on Facebook today about this, and I didn’t say this detail of information in the post, but I should’ve. How you can call yourself a Futurist and not see what I just said above, is quite beyond me. I don’t call myself a Futurist. I’m a speculative fiction writer, a sci-fi writer, and a horror writer. Also a screenwriter and a filmmaker. I took my first college class in Futurism in 1980. But I haven’t given paid talks, so I don’t consider myself a “Futurist” (maybe just a "futurist"). But I’ve still been studying it all my life. Science fiction is, if nothing else, about futurism. I was thinking, what Futurist type stories have I written? Definitely, "EarVu". "Jaonny's Apple Tree". "In Memory, Yet Crystal Clear" (my first published story in a horror quarterly in 1990). "Quantum History". Some others. So yeah, been a few, writing about it for a while now.

There was some nonsense back in the 70s that the Xerox copier came from alien technology. Still today you hear that moon landing involved alien technology. This is ludicrous. Because if you trace the research and development of these things, there’s nowhere in it for alien technology. It was simply brute force hardwork. And blood sweat and tears.

Science has no room for conspiracy until something has been studied and proven to be a "conspiracy", in the legal sense. 99% of conspiracy theories are just that, theories and nonsense. 

Did you know that in the blue and yellow of the Ukrainian flag, the yellow is for their wheatfields, and the blue is for their Ukrainian sky?

Cheers! Sláinte!