[PJ] Every so often, we hear about a progressive Christian leader who says something outrageous and downright heretical. The latest case is Rev. Rachel Small Stokes, pastor of Immanuel United Church of Christ in Louisville, Ky. The United Church of Christ is a far-left denomination; it’s actually the denomination where Barack and Michelle Obama attended church when they lived in Chicago — until his toxic pastor began hogging the headlines.
In an undated clip courtesy of Woke Preacher Clips on Twitter (an essential follow), Stokes has her congregation stand and recite what she calls "The Sparkle Creed."
#1
I think this is a "Lutheran" congregation in the Minneapolis Metro Region (SW of the city).
Posted by: lord garth ||
06/29/2023 9:01 Comments ||
Top||
#2
United Church of Christ in Louisville, Kentucky, lord garth, according to an article Besoeker found — I just moved it to the post above to make pondering the various aspects of the thing easier.
#3
Your faith belongs in your heart (spirit), not on your sleeve. All the stuff about gathering to worship aside, God is most interested in what's in your heart.
Not the icky leftist flavor of the week.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
06/29/2023 9:32 Comments ||
Top||
#4
This was a historic heat wave that is now ending.
San Angelo, for example, was at or above 105F for 14 out of 15 days ending yesterday. Some places in TX had 14 or 15 days in a row over 105F, some had 4 or 5 in a row at or over 110F.
Posted by: lord garth ||
06/29/2023 8:01 Comments ||
Top||
#9
In 1979 in Phoenix City, Alabama we had a week of 100+ temperatures. Lowest was 104 and highest was 107. I was working construction on a 3 tiered parking lot. Even my boots were soaked through. Also no AC in the house.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
06/29/2023 11:52 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Solar flares have increased more dramatically than expected since 2019. In the past two days the sun unleased radiant fury via a powerful X1.0 Class solar flare.
#12
Canada has napalmed itself so Ohio is pretty cool. I am hoping they burn some menthol next week to change the flavor in my mouth. Food is starting to taste funny.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/29/2023 12:29 Comments ||
Top||
#13
I remember back in the late 50's Enid, Oklahoma was over 100 a lot.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
06/29/2023 15:27 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Daily Mail just straight up running propaganda this week.
Article originally appeared on the substack of John Mearsheimer, posted on the Live Journal page of Russian military journalist Boris Rozhin.
[ColonelCassad] This article examines the likely trajectory of the war in Ukraine.This article examines the likely trajectory of the war in Ukraine.This article examines the likely trajectory of the war in Ukraine.This article examines the likely trajectory of the war in Ukraine. I will answer two main questions.
Where are we now.
First, is a meaningful peace agreement possible? My answer is no. We are now in a war in which both sides - Ukraine and the West on the one hand, and Russia on the other - see each other as an existential threat that must be defeated . With maximalist goals everywhere, it's nearly impossible to reach a workable peace deal. Moreover, the two sides have irreconcilable differences over Ukraine's territory and relations with the West. The best possible outcome is a frozen conflict that could easily escalate into a hot war. The worst possible outcome is nuclear war, which is unlikely but cannot be ruled out.
In other words, Russia will win an ugly victory. But in the end, this will lead to the annexation of a large part of Ukrainian territory, while at the same time turning Ukraine into a dysfunctional stump of the state. In other words, it is not going to conquer all of Ukraine, which is necessary to achieve Moscow's three goals: regime overthrow, demilitarization of the country, and severing Kyiv's security ties with the West. Russia will eventually win the war, although it will not inflict a decisive defeat on Ukraine.
Before I address these issues directly, three preliminary remarks must be made. To begin with, I am trying to predict the future, which is not easy to do, given that we live in a world of uncertainty. Thus, I do not claim that I have an exact answer, in fact, some of my statements may be wrong. Moreover, I am not talking about what I would like to see happening. I don't support either side. I'm just telling you what I think will happen as the war progresses. Finally, I do not condone the behavior of Russia or the actions of any of the states involved in the conflict. I'm just explaining their actions.
To understand what the war in Ukraine is leading to, one must first assess the current situation. It is important to know how the three main actors - Russia, Ukraine and the West - assess their environment of threats and set goals for themselves. However, when we talk about the West, we are talking mostly about the United States, as its European allies take their orders from Washington when it comes to Ukraine. It is also important to understand the current situation on the battlefield. Let me start with the threats posed by Russia and its goals.
Since April 2008, it has become clear that Russian leaders across the board view Western efforts to bring Ukraine into NATO and turn it into a Western stronghold on Russia's borders as an existential threat.Indeed, President Putin and his aides repeatedly emphasized this in the months leading up to the Russian invasion, when it became clear to them that Ukraine was almost a de facto member of NATO.
Since the war began on February 24, 2022, the West has added another layer to this existential threat by adopting a new set of targets that Russian leaders cannot help but view as highly threatening. I will go into more detail about the Western goals below, but suffice it to say here that the West is determined to defeat Russia and knock it out of the ranks of the great powers, if not cause regime change or even provoke the collapse of Russia, as happened with the Soviet Union in 1991.
In his important address, which Putin delivered in February this year (2023), he stressed that the West poses a mortal threat to Russia. “During the years following the collapse of the Soviet Union,” he said, “the West never stopped trying to set fire to the post-Soviet states and, most importantly, to end Russia as the largest surviving part of the historical possessions of our state. They encouraged international terrorists to attack us, provoked regional conflicts along the perimeter of our borders, ignored our interests and tried to contain and suppress our economy.” He further emphasized that “the Western elite makes no secret of their goal, which is, I quote, the 'strategic defeat of Russia'. What does this mean for us? It means they plan to do away with us once and for all.”
[ColonelCassad] Let me shift gear and move away from the present and talk about the future, starting with how events on the battlefield are likely to play out. As noted, I believe that Russia will win the war, which means that it will eventually seize and annex a significant amount of Ukrainian territory, leaving Ukraine as a dysfunctional stump state. If I am right, this will be a heavy defeat for Ukraine and the West.
However, there is a silver lining in this outcome: a Russian victory markedly reduces the threat of nuclear war, since nuclear escalation is more likely to occur if Ukrainian forces win on the battlefield and threaten to return all or most of the territories that Kiev ceded to Moscow. Russian leaders would no doubt seriously consider using nuclear weapons to salvage the situation. Of course, if I'm wrong about where the war is heading, and the Ukrainian military gets the upper hand and starts pushing Russian forces east, the likelihood of nuclear weapons being used will increase significantly, which doesn't mean it can be certain.
What is the basis of my assertion that the Russians are likely to win the war?
The war in Ukraine, as emphasized, is a war of attrition, in which the capture and retention of territory is of secondary importance. The goal of a war of attrition is to wear down the other side's forces to the point where they either stop fighting or are so weakened that they can no longer defend the contested territory. Who wins a war of attrition depends largely on three factors: the balance of resolve between the two sides; population ratio between them; and the exchange loss ratio. The Russians have a decisive advantage in population and a marked advantage in casualty ratio; Both sides are equal in determination.
Think about the balance of determination. As noted, both Russia and Ukraine believe they are facing an existential threat, and naturally both sides are fully committed to winning the war. Thus, it is difficult to see any meaningful difference in their resolve. In terms of population, before the start of the war in February 2022, Russia had an advantage of about 3.5:1. Since then, the ratio has changed markedly in favor of Russia. About eight million Ukrainians left the country, reducing the population of Ukraine. Approximately three million of these emigrants left for Russia, increasing its population. In addition, there are probably about four million more Ukrainian citizens living in the territories now controlled by Russia, further tilting the demographic imbalance in favor of Russia.
Finally, there is the loss-to-trade ratio, which has been a contentious issue since the war began in February 2022. The conventional wisdom in Ukraine and the West is that casualty rates on both sides are either roughly equal, or that the Russians have suffered more casualties than the Ukrainians. Oleksiy Danilov, head of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, goes so far as to claim that the Russians lost 7.5 soldiers for every Ukrainian soldier in the battle for Bakhmut. These statements are incorrect. The Ukrainian forces undoubtedly suffered far greater losses than their Russian counterparts, for one reason: Russia has far more artillery than Ukraine.
In a war of attrition, artillery is the most important weapon on the battlefield. In the US Army, artillery is widely known as the "king of battle" because it is primarily responsible for killing and injuring soldiers in combat. Thus, the balance of artillery is of the utmost importance in a war of attrition. By almost all accounts, the Russians have an advantage in artillery somewhere between 5:1 and 10:1, which puts the Ukrainian army at a significant disadvantage on the battlefield. Other things being equal, one would expect that the ratio of losses approximately corresponds to the balance of artillery. Consequently, according to the most conservative estimates, the ratio of losses is about 2:1 in favor of Russia.
One possible objection to my analysis is that Russia is the aggressor in this war, and the attacker invariably suffers much more casualties than the defender, especially if the attacking force engages in broad frontal assaults, which is often said to be the method of operation. Russian armed forces. After all, the intruder is out in the open and on the move, while the defender mostly fights from fixed positions that provide substantial cover. This logic is at the heart of the famous 3:1 rule of thumb, which states that an attacking force needs at least three times as many soldiers as a defending force to win a battle. But there are problems with this line of argument when it is applied to the war in Ukraine.
To date, it should be obvious that the war in Ukraine is a huge catastrophe that is unlikely to end in the near future, and when this happens, the result will not be lasting peace. A few words should be said about how the West found itself in this terrible situation.
The generally accepted view of the origin of the war is that Putin launched an unprovoked attack on February 24, 2022, which was dictated by his grand plan to create a great Russia. They say that Ukraine was the first country that it intended to conquer and annex, but not the last. As I have repeatedly said, there is no evidence in support of this line of argumentation, and indeed, there is significant evidence that directly contradicts it. Although there is no doubt that Russia has invaded Ukraine, the ultimate cause of the war was the decision of the West – and here we are talking mainly about the United States – to turn Ukraine into a western stronghold on the border with Russia. A key element of this strategy was Ukraine’s entry into NATO, a step that not only Putin, but the entire Russian foreign policy establishment regarded as an existential threat that needed to be eliminated.
It is often forgotten that many American and European politicians and strategists from the very beginning opposed the expansion of NATO, because they understood that the Russians would perceive this as a threat and that such a policy would ultimately lead to a catastrophe. Opponents include George Kennan, Secretary of Defense under President Clinton William Perry and his chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General John Shalikashvili, Paul Nitz, Robert Gates, Robert McNamara, Richard Pipes and Jack Matlock, and these are just some of them. At the NATO summit in Bucharest in April 2008, both French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel opposed President George W. Bush’s plan for Ukraine’s accession to the North Atlantic Union. Merkel later stated that her opposition was based on her belief that Putin would interpret it as a “ declaration of war ”.
Of course, opponents of NATO expansion were right, but they lost the battle, and NATO moved east, which ultimately provoked the Russians to start a preventive war. If the United States and its allies had not taken steps to join Ukraine in NATO in April 2008, or if they were ready to take into account Moscow’s security interests after, as the Ukrainian crisis erupted in February 2014, probably there would be no war in Ukraine today, and its borders would look like they looked when it gained its independence. independence in 1991. The West made a huge mistake, for which he and many others have not yet finished paying.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
06/29/2023 12:01 Comments ||
Top||
Text taken from the V Kontakte page of Alexander Pechersky Foundation.
later and would like to tell you today. This story is about the feat of Soviet soldiers, about salvation, about a long search and a touching meeting. Continued on Page 49
From the Facebook page of Russian military correspondent Aleksandr Kots.
I see a strange sentence from some: "How could you cross off all Wagner's past merits and change shoes so quickly." Despite the fact that I personally didn't cross anything off. And on every broadcast I say that the Wagner CHC has inscribed itself in the History of the Russian military.
No one will take away their former achievements from them - neither Palmyra, nor Tsar, nor Artemovsk. I won't bother crossing all that out. All the more so that Russian soldiers died in these battles, who certainly have nothing to do with the rebellion. And to cross off all past merits now means to betray the memory of them. There will definitely be a big chapter in my book about the achievements of the Wagnerov people in the Self Defense Zone. But that's my humble opinion.
At the same time, the president does not cross anything. On the contrary, it demonstrates respect for private fighters, emphasizing their contribution to the liberation of Donbass. Offers a choice - to go to the Ministry of Defense, go home or to Belarus. But it gives a clear assessment of what happened on June 23-24:
“The organizers of the riot betrayed their country, their people, betrayed those who were involved in crime. They lied to them, pushed them to death, to fire, to shoot their own people."
It’s a pity that the story of the legendary combat unit ends like that. But after a day on the brink of the abyss the choice was between crappy and very crappy. There simply was no third option.
[DZEN] “Talking for the second or third time, I warned him. I already see that he is ready to back down, but I warn him: “Eugene, no bloodshed. As soon as you deliberately (inadvertently) kill at least one person, especially a civilian, that’s it, there will be no negotiations with you and I won’t talk to you. "He swore to me. We, he says, have no such goal, and I swear to you that it won't.
After several rounds of negotiations, Yevgeny Prigozhin eventually abandoned his original demands.
“He told me: “Alexander Grigoryevich, I will not demand from the President that he give up Shoigu and Gerasimov, and I will not even ask for a meeting,” I say: “Well, that’s good. This is a very good move. It is not necessary in this situation, straining the situation, to demand the impossible.
The next condition, which was agreed upon during negotiations with Yevgeny Prigozhin, is to stop the further movement of the PMC convoy to Moscow.
"At five o'clock in the evening he called me and said:" Alexander Grigoryevich, I accept all your conditions. But what should I do? We stop - they will start to wet us. "I say:" They will not start. I guarantee you. I take it upon myself."
We were in contact with the leadership of Russia, the FSB dealt mainly with this issue, with Bortnikov. I just urged you not to. Bortnikov is a smart person. He said: "Alexander Grigoryevich, well, I'm not a fool, I understand what could be."
If they stop somewhere, the column will shrink ... It will gather in a heap ... To avoid, you know, the desire and temptation to take it and cover it here. They promised it wouldn't happen.
I said to Prigozhin: "This is a guarantee" - "What's next?" - "To the extent that I will take you to Belarus and guarantee you complete safety. And to your guys who have advanced here in this column." - "Yes, I believe you. I believe." - "Okay, we will work in this direction."
I say: "Good. Bortnikov is doing this. You need to contact him" - "He does not pick up the phone" - "He will. Call in 20 minutes." I asked Ivan Stanislavovich (Tertel, chairman of the KGB): urgently, I say, find Bortnikov, let him call me. He called.
I say: "Alexander Vasilyevich, be sure to pick up the phone if Prigogine calls you." He, of course, is all bubbling inside.
I say: "Listen, put everything aside and do as we agreed with him." They talked. He turned the column around and they went to their camps in the Lugansk region. They went to the camps."
In a further conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin, he once again asked that the situation should not be resolved by force. He promised and kept his promises.
The confusion was thus averted. Dangerous events that could have been removed. Security guarantees, as Putin said yesterday, promised, were provided," Alexander Lukashenko stressed.
[ColonelCassad] Regarding the defamation of the fighters of the PMC "Wagner".
1. The main claims of the state exist against Yevgeny Prigozhin and a narrow circle of officially unidentified persons (for the broad masses - the state, of course, is well aware of who planned and did what to organize and attempt a military rebellion)
2. The political position of the state on what happened in general - what happened is an armed rebellion. The closure of the criminal case against Yevgeny Prigozhin does not cancel the political assessment made by Putin and the key law enforcement agencies of the country.
You may or may not like this assessment, regardless of your personal relationship with the Wagner PMC, but from the point of view of the state, this was an armed rebellion. And it will go down in the history books as an armed rebellion. There is nothing good in what has come to this, of course. If the conflict between Prigozhin and the leadership of the Ministry of Defense had been stopped in a timely manner, the rebellion would hardly have taken place.
3. The political position of the state in relation to the fighters of PMC "Wagner" - they are heroes who were involved in the actions of Yevgeny Prigozhin. Many unconsciously, following orders.
4. Some of the fighters of PMC "Wagner" have already entered the contract with the Russian Defense Ministry and will continue to fight at the front. An as yet undetermined part of the Wagner PMC fighters will do this in the foreseeable future. When PMC "Wagner" is indiscriminately poured with mud, these people, who are either on a contract or at the stage of signing a contract with the Russian Defense Ministry, are also being poured.
5. The remaining fighters of PMC "Wagner" will continue their activities on the territory of Belarus and possibly on the territory of a number of countries (there is still no clarity here). Some may be demobilized. There are no open criminal cases against them (in any case, this has not been publicly announced). They themselves will be able to form a public attitude towards them there after an attempted rebellion. Here the future will show.
6. The country continues to have a law on discrediting participants in the SVO, which provides for a period of up to 15 years in especially serious cases for its violation. In the case of PMC "Wagner" we are talking about active participants in the NWO.
7. The indiscriminate defamation of all the fighters of the PMC "Wagner" in the current realities contradicts - the position of Putin himself, the current legislation, the official political assessment, and simply is the indiscriminate slinging of mud at those who took Popasnaya, Svetlodarsk, Uglegorskaya TPP, Soledar and Artemovsk. These victories will also remain in history, as will the attempted military rebellion.
8. If the state considers it necessary to bring to justice individuals associated with the organization of the rebellion or those who are directly involved in the death of pilots of the Russian Aerospace Forces, it will do this without unnecessary hysteria. Obviously, in addition to resolving the political crisis, the state intends to continue to use a significant part of the resources and personnel of the Wagner PMC in the public interest.
Therefore, in the current conditions, the indiscriminate pouring of mud on all the fighters of the PMC "Wagner" looks, to put it mildly, not smart. Great idiocy is only speculative constructions, who would win - "Wagner" or the National Guard in clashes in Rostov or in the Moscow region. Apparently someone really wanted to see it. Especially Ukraine and the West.
The main achievement on June 24 is precisely that we did not see this and did not begin to find out who is stronger and who could kill whom more. We have a real enemy, on whom efforts should be directed, and not to find out who is cooler in the rear areas.
[The Federalist] Following the sensational whistleblower testimony that dropped Thursday, revealing how the Department of Justice systematically blocked an IRS investigation into Joe Biden’s son Hunter and diverted agents from examining the incriminating evidence against his presidential father, House Republicans are threatening the overdue impeachment of Attorney General Merrick Garland — except most of the pro-Biden interference in the DOJ happened before Garland was installed, while President Donald Trump was still in office.
Does Garland still deserve impeachment for his assortment of abuses, such as sitting on his hands to avoid real accountability for the younger Biden (and his pop), while weaponizing the country’s top law enforcement agency to try to send Biden’s top presidential challenger to federal prison? Absolutely. Is it smart politically for Kevin McCarthy to use the current momentum to hold Garland to account? Probably. Is the alleged involvement in a foreign bribery scheme enough to merit Biden’s own impeachment? Most definitely.
But if the blame — and punishment — for the DOJ corruption revealed by whistleblowers stops with Merrick Garland or even Joe Biden, it will happen again.
That’s because the Justice Department’s pattern of shielding the Biden family from the law wasn’t masterminded by either man. It happened because of career officials and bureaucrats, whose names most Americans don’t know, and whom Americans will never have the chance to vote out. They didn’t have to be told what to do.
According to whistleblower Gary Shapley, it was in late 2019, a year before Joe Biden was elected, that the FBI acquired and authenticated the infamous laptop Hunter Biden left at a Delaware computer repair shop. The IRS began an investigation into likely tax crimes almost immediately.
Between April and June 2020, when IRS agents were preparing to execute interviews and search warrants, it was "career DOJ officials," Shapley said, who "purposely slow-walk[ed] investigative actions."
After IRS agents discovered a WhatsApp message in which Hunter Biden purportedly threatened a Chinese business associate that "I am sitting here with my father" and that the Bidens could "hold a grudge" if a "commitment made" to them was not "fulfilled," federal prosecutors rejected IRS efforts to look into the messages. That was around August 2020, when Trump had nearly half a year left in the White House.
In October 2020, Assistant U.S. Attorney Lesley Wolf acknowledged "probable cause had been achieved" for executing a search warrant on Hunter Biden but still refused to allow a search. In the meantime, the DOJ continued to block IRS investigators from accessing the laptop and openly cited the investigation’s potential to hurt Biden’s electoral chances as their reason for slow-walking it.
Wolf would also order IRS investigators not to ask about "dad" or about an email stating there would be "Ten held by H for the big guy." That happened in December, more than a month before Biden’s inauguration.
#1
I remember realizing there was a problem during Reno’s actions to help Cuba in the Elian Gonzales case. The fact that the DOJ was also corrupt during the GOP administrations wasn’t clear to me until I saw Jeff Sessions get Shanghai’d and stuffed into a school locker for the duration of his “service.”
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/29/2023 12:54 Comments ||
Top||
#2
agree w Super Hose
a lot of the biden protection moves came about during the Trump Admin
Ashcroft was too timid to get into the weeds. Sessions also. Barr was a bit better but overwhelmed by fighting fires and temperamentally unwilling to acknowledge the rot within. Trump didn't help this either because he caused a lot of turbulence that distracted Barr.
Posted by: lord garth ||
06/29/2023 14:02 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The rot seems to creep during GOP administrations and slime must faster when we have a Dem leader conspiring to corrupt the system.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/29/2023 14:46 Comments ||
Top||
#5
^Exactly. We had Feds with guns all over the place. Now they are censoring the internet, and the IRS is pointing guns as well. I am sure that they have a plan to federalize the city police forces next. Did security get better when they absorbed airport security?
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/29/2023 16:56 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I think how the US dealt with the Elian Gonzalez deal was heartless bullshit. The little boy needed to be with his father. Period. End of political story. I don't care if it's fooking North Korea.
[American Greatness] n a communication to a Chinese business associate in 2017, Hunter Biden pitched his family’s influence-peddling operation as "the best" choice for doing "exactly" what the Chinese Communist Party-linked Energy Company wanted. The Republican-controlled House Oversight Committee released the newly uncovered WhatsApp exchange onto Twitter Tuesday.
In the 8/3/2017 exchange, Hunter Biden told Gongwen (Kevin) Dong, an associate with the now defunct Chinese energy company CEFC, that "the Biden’s[sic] are the best I know at doing exactly what the Chairman wants from this [partnership]."
#3
Yes, that's what they did. It would have been a total failure without the gummint lockdowns.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
06/29/2023 10:11 Comments ||
Top||
#4
At some point in his decline, I expect Joe to pull the upper corner of each eye with his index fingers and begin to answer press questions about his Chinese connections in a Charlie Chan voice as a “joke” like his gag with Modi the other day. Alternatively, he might mime some Jackie Chan moves or make incoherent statements involving Moo Shu pork. He is donezo. I can’t imagine him trying to lie under oath like the Clintons did.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/29/2023 12:40 Comments ||
Top||
#5
more than $40million from foreign nationals
It will be a helluva lot more than that when the dividends $1.5 billion Chinese investment fund is disbursed.
[Gateway] As reported earlier, Popular conservative commentator, Tucker Carlson, launched a critique of the Biden regime’s foreign policy in the latest episode of his podcast, "Tucker on Twitter," suggesting that the current battle for uniparty-defined "democracy" could lead to dictatorship.
Carlson questioned the purpose of the US involvement in the conflict with Russia, implying potential economic and even existential consequences for the country. He expressed concerns about the loss of innocent lives and the considerable financial cost of the war and wondered aloud if the motives might be less noble than claimed.
Then Tucker Carlson pointed out the obvious reason why Democrats do not fear running an unpopular, corrupt, senile octogenarian for US President. They all know it’s a sham. It’s obvious to anyone paying attention.
Then Tucker spoke about why Joe Biden is running for reelection. From what we now know, Joe Biden is one of the most corrupt politicians in US history. His policies suck, the economy sucks, his foreign policy is embarrassing, his energy policy and is based on fantasy. Joe Biden can barely walk and cannot think clearly. So why are Democrats running this obvious loser? Because they can.
"people who believe in and spread conspiracy theories have a combination of personality traits and motivations including relying strongly on their intuition, feeling a sense of antagonism and superiority toward others and perceiving threats in their environment."
#3
The Don Jr broadcast on Rumble might get pretty spicy once they swap in the Pat Riley manikin.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/29/2023 12:32 Comments ||
Top||
#4
actually Democrats (at least the big bucks contributors) are afraid, very afraid of running Joe Biden
and they are desperately seeking a path that will sideline both Biden and Harris -- so far no one has a good workable idea on how to do this
Posted by: lord garth ||
06/29/2023 14:49 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The dems are the party that replaced "The Torch" after the deadline to do that passed. The dems are the party that gave Bernie the unceremonious heave-ho when it suited them.
If they want Bidet and Kamala-lala-ding-dog off the ticket, it will happen.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
06/29/2023 14:59 Comments ||
Top||
[WIRE] A new Danish landmark study finds that suicide rates and psychiatric conditions are much higher among trans-identifying people.
Trans-identifying people in Denmark had a suicide death rate 3.5 times higher and a suicide attempt rate 7.7 times higher than people who did not identify as transgender, according to the study, which was published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
There were 92 suicide attempts and 12 suicide deaths among the study’s 3,759 trans-identifying people between 1980 and 2021.
The study analyzed the medical and legal gender change records of nearly seven million people in Denmark, including the nearly 3,800 transgender people, over the last four decades.
Trans-identifying people also tended to die younger overall, whether by suicide or something else, the study found.
However, suicide rates in both groups decreased over the four decades the study examined.
"Results suggest that transgender individuals had significantly higher rates of suicide attempt, suicide mortality, suicide-unrelated mortality, and all-cause mortality compared with the nontransgender population," the study said.
Meanwhile, the rate of psychiatric conditions was higher for the trans-identifying group.
#1
IF a person can't figure out what's between their own legs, wants to live in a fantasy world, or uses it for perverted sexual satisfaction issues. It isn't a surprise they seldom find stability.
It's a MENTAL ILLNESS and should be treated as such, to protect the public.
#2
If these and other deviants were.... "born that way" (as we have been told repeatedly for decades), why is the recruitment of children and youth necessary ?
#3
The medical question is whether gender affirming treatment or therapy or watchful waiting is the best response to gender dysphoria.
Really difficult to do an honest study for several reasons. In the USA it is becoming impossible to do an honest study of anything that is touched by progressive doctrine so it is good that other countries are doing work on this.
Posted by: lord garth ||
06/29/2023 7:50 Comments ||
Top||
#4
If "X" and "Y" are determined in the womb, then "Q" must be a learned or acquired trait, no ?
#14
#2 If these and other deviants were.... "born that way" (as we have been told repeatedly for decades), why is the recruitment of children and youth necessary ?
Posted by Besoeker 2023-06-29 07:47|| 2023-06-29 07:47|| Front Page || Comments Top
LGQTPGs don't consider this a problem because they intend to take control of other people's children through teachers associations. They refer to straight couples simply as 'breaders".
#15
They are confused victims of evil people who are trying to ruin the world. At a certain point the victimized join the movement as the Stockholm Syndrome works its magic. That what they are doing is intrinsically evil is apparent because the movement starts and ends with targeting kids for exploitation. They also have a penchant for blasphemy. Now that I know that Sam Briton was a member of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgences, I wonder what exactly is included in security clearance background checks. The standards must have changed as dressing up as Marcel Marceau costumed for an episode of the Flying Nun while perpetrating public blasphemy used to take you out of the running for a TS clearance.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/29/2023 13:16 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Bet: It also shows that there is a higher incidence of mental illness before they were transgender. But then I repeat myself.
Posted by: ed in texas ||
06/29/2023 15:44 Comments ||
Top||
#17
This has been known since at least the 60's. Also well established is that "gender affirming care" does nothing to reduce suicide rates. In other words, we aren't helping them at all, and doing real harm in the bargain.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[The Federalist] Following the sensational whistleblower testimony that dropped Thursday, revealing how the Department of Justice systematically blocked an IRS investigation into Joe Biden’s son Hunter and diverted agents from examining the incriminating evidence against his presidential father, House Republicans are threatening the overdue impeachment of Attorney General Merrick Garland — except most of the pro-Biden interference in the DOJ happened before Garland was installed, while President Donald Trump was still in office.
DoJ and Janet Reno "rot" back in 1993. 
[WIRE] A new Danish landmark study finds that suicide rates and psychiatric conditions are much higher among 
