Republican Party - General Discussion

I didn't think it was possible for someone to be more full of themselves than Biden, but honestly, Smith is giving him a run for his money.

I can't wait for the election results to roll in and see that stupid look on his face when he finally realizes he totally folded.🙂

Adam Collins4 said:🤣

So, let me get this straight—you're lecturing me about how I can't distinguish between terms, and then you have the nerve to use my own ADOPTION experience as some kind of leverage for your question about FOSTER CARE... unbelievable...

Try to actually focus for once. You guys brought up the idea that kids should be handed over to gay couples because straight people won't step up... yet you haven't provided a single shred of actual logic to back that up...

Besides, how many times do I have to repeat myself? That gay couple is trying to adopt first... and they're still tied up in court with the federal government over the whole issue...

🤣

So, you lecture me on how I can't distinguish between terms, and then you use my own ADOPTION as an argument regarding FOSTERING... unbelievable...

Try to focus, please. You pulled the argument that children should be given to gay couples because straight people won't foster them... yet you haven't provided any actual reasoning for that...

Besides, how many times does it need to be said? That gay couple is trying to adopt first... and they're currently in court with the USA over that very issue...[/I]

Are you even capable of answering the post you're quoting?

I am not lecturing you, nor am I using your adoption against you.
Rather, since you have firsthand experience with adoption—and since you claimed to be coherent and logical—you can answer your own question about whether I (or anyone else) understand why kids aren't being fostered.

And we aren't talking about whether they wanted to adopt versus foster; we are specifically clarifying why straight couples aren't fostering children.
How many times do I have to repeat myself?
If you don't have a coherent answer to that question, please just skip this thread.

Adam Collins4 said:Where is the evidence for that last sentence in the post?☕

Where is the evidence for that last sentence?☕[/I]

It's an assumption.
If someone has cleared everything and met all the requirements to adopt a child, then I assume the same applies to fostering.

I might be assuming incorrectly, but I'm sure you'll enlighten me.
I didn't go into great detail, because the people I know who adopted children simply adopted them; there was no need to look into the fostering process.

Chloe Martinez7 said:🤣

So, you lecture me on how I can't distinguish between terms, and then you use my own ADOPTION as an argument regarding FOSTERING... unbelievable...

Try to focus, please. You pulled the argument that children should be given to gay couples because straight people won't foster them... yet you haven't provided any actual reasoning for that...

Besides, how many times does it need to be said? That gay couple is trying to adopt first... and they're currently in court with the USA over that very issue...[/I]

Are you even capable of answering the post you're quoting?

I am not lecturing you, nor am I using your adoption against you.
Rather, since you have firsthand experience with adoption—and since you claimed to be coherent and logical—you can answer your own question about whether I (or anyone else) understand why kids aren't being fostered.

And we aren't talking about whether they wanted to adopt versus foster; we are specifically clarifying why straight couples aren't fostering children.
How many times do I have to repeat myself?
If you don't have a coherent answer to that question, please just skip this thread.

Where is the evidence for that last sentence?☕[/I]

It's an assumption.
If someone has cleared everything and met all the requirements to adopt a child, then I assume the same applies to fostering.

I might be assuming incorrectly, but I'm sure you'll enlighten me.
I didn't go into great detail, because the people I know who adopted children simply adopted them; there was no need to look into the fostering process.

It’s fascinating how you start off acting like an expert, only to get completely tangled up in your own logic...

Well, at least you finally admitted you're just throwing out generalizations and guesses.

So, let me ask again: how am I supposed to "enlighten" you when I've been through the adoption process, not foster care?

To draw a real parallel or make a fair comparison, I’d actually have to go through both processes myself...

It’s honestly kind of pathetic—first you try to lecture me on the differences between the two systems, then you admit you haven't a clue what you're talking about, and now you're looking for an explanation from the one person who can't possibly give it to you.

Wait, weren't you the one who wrote about working for years with certain professionals without even knowing how to spell their actual job titles or academic degrees?

hollowmason64 said:When I mentioned believers, I wasn't talking about you personally. I was referring to those various organizations and individuals who constantly parade their Christianity around, acting like everything happens because "it's God's will." Honestly, I find it hard to believe that God actually wants any child to grow up in a foster home without parents. It feels like they just love pinning all sorts of things on Him to justify whatever they want.
I’ve gotta say, I’m totally with you on this one. You have my full support.

I’ve been chewing on this idea lately—the thought that maybe heterosexual couples should be given some kind of priority. But then I hit a wall, because if we go down that road, aren't we just stepping on the toes of single people? It feels like a slippery slope. Think about it: if we start prioritizing certain types of unions, does that imply that single parents are somehow less capable of raising their biological children? Or that kids growing up in a two-parent household are automatically going to be happier? Honestly, they aren't. I've seen enough to know that isn't always the case. You see stories pop up all the time about the absolute nightmares kids endure within what society calls those "ideal" traditional families. It’s definitely not as simple as it looks on paper.

Honestly, the idea that pairing up with someone of the opposite sex is some kind of guaranteed way to have a baby is just pure nonsense. It’s not like there's any certainty you'll actually be able to conceive just because you fit that mold. That's exactly why you see so many heterosexual couples looking into adoption—because, at the end of the day, they can't have biological children of their own.
Maybe you should try doing a little more reading or catching a few news segments lately. It’s worth listening to what the adults who actually grew up in the foster care system have to say about their experiences today. I saw one woman being interviewed recently, and she said something that really stuck with me. She mentioned that if she could have chosen her own path leaving the system, she wouldn't have just left with two guys—she would have happily taken an octopus and a man along with her, just if it meant finally having a place to call her own. It really puts things into perspective when you hear how much people crave that sense of stability.

Honestly, you guys are really starting to frustrate me. It feels like everyone is just looking out for their own interests and focusing on what makes them feel comfortable, rather than actually thinking about what’s best for these kids. If we really sat down and thought about this, wouldn't it be better for them to stay in the foster system until they turn 18 and then head out into the world? Or better yet, find their way into a loving same-sex household where parents will actually cherish them, raise them right, and provide some real stability. At the end of the day, those kids just need to know they have someone in their corner who truly cares about them.

I’m right there with you on this—we absolutely need to simplify the whole process. Honestly, the current rule is completely backwards. The idea that a parent can just make one phone call every three months to check in on a kid, and suddenly that's enough to block an adoption, is totally broken. I wouldn't go as far as calling it idiotic, though it certainly feels that way sometimes.
The real issue here is that because of this kind of stupidity, so many kids have already aged out of being "desirable" for adoption. It sounds harsh, I know, but that’s just the reality of the system. A former classmate of mine actually works within the foster care network, and she’s told me firsthand that everyone is looking to adopt infants or, at most, kids who haven't hit preschool age yet.
I've been thinking about this lately, and honestly, why aren't we just placing these kids with people who actually want to give them a real home? It shouldn't matter if it's a single parent or a gay couple looking to adopt. At the end of the day, having a family that genuinely wants you is so much better than growing up in the foster care system. There’s just no substitute for a real home environment.
It honestly doesn't matter if Džoni, Alfijo, or some guy named Perry happens to like the idea or not. What actually matters is making sure those kids aren't stuck in a group home. I think you’d have to agree with me that keeping children out of state care is way more important than whether or not an idea sits well with someone.

It’s not about being blind to your own shortcomings—it’s about how incredibly sluggish this whole system is and the deep-seated issues baked right into its foundation.

It’s not just about adoption and foster care, either—this goes much deeper than that. It’s true across every single layer of the bureaucracy that is supposed to actually serve the citizens of this country...

But look, the answer isn't just throwing kids at the first person who happens to wander by...

Someone put it pretty well—first we focus on getting everyone settled in at home, but then what? What comes after that?

Especially when you consider that this gay couple actually tried to seize control of everything—and then, after getting shut down, they went ahead and sued the USA, all while the court case is still dragging on indefinitely...

Personally, I don't have an issue with gay people... and honestly, I don't have anything against religious folks or anyone else who doesn't see eye to eye with me either.

It’s fine until they start trying to sell me on the idea that their lifestyle, their opinions, and their entire worldview is the only "correct" way to live—once they hit that point, we’ve got a serious problem on our hands.

My involvement in this whole thing started out pretty simple—I just asked why everyone loses their minds when someone burns effigies at a parade, claiming it’s "offensive," yet they call it satire. But then you see the exact same people who are acting all outraged by the bonfire suddenly jumping to defend stuff like Frljić’s antics, or those insane stories about Jesus violating a Muslim woman, or even pulling a flag out of a woman's anatomy... and they claim *that's* culture. It's a joke.

THE MOMENT THE COMMUNISTS REALIZED THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WAS GOING TO WIN. A witness tells Time Magazine: just a few days before the election, Ivica Račan turned down an offer from four US Army generals at the Little Cube

ruggeddrifter85 said:I don't have any direct experience myself, but I’ve watched two close friends go through the whole adoption process firsthand.
Once they finished all the assessments, they adopted their kids almost immediately.
It wasn't because they were picking and choosing, though.
The kids were over 8 years old.
They had behavioral issues.
On top of that, they were pretty far behind academically.
According to the social worker, these were the kind of kids that hardly anyone wanted to take in.
My friends worked their tails off until they finally saw real progress in how the kids behaved and learned.
It was an exhausting, years-long journey to get things back on track, even though the kids—by their own choice—started calling them Mom and Dad right from the start.
They were just deeply unhappy kids who desperately needed to belong somewhere.
One of my friends adopted a boy who still has a younger brother and an older sister.
After two failed attempts where people tried to adopt all three siblings at once (which was the condition), families actually ended up returning them to the foster care system because the kids fought so hard for affection that it became overwhelming.
Eventually, the agency decided it was best to split them up.
They were adopted into three different families, and even though those families aren't related, they all hang out now just to support the kids. Today, the siblings act like brothers, even if they live in different homes.
You really need an incredible amount of love, grit, and pure dedication to help a child heal from so much trauma and find happiness.

Honestly, most of these kids are just deeply messed up.
Some close family friends of mine just adopted a seven-year-old kid, and man, it’s been quite an eye-opener. They actually had to start from scratch just teaching him how to eat properly. It sounds intense, but he was basically just shoveling food down his throat without even chewing. I think it was that constant fear of someone snatching his plate away—just pure survival instinct. I actually witnessed it myself once, and it was heartbreaking to watch him start choking because he was rushing so much.
He’s such a great kid now, really grown into himself. He’s actually in med school, which is impressive. But man, you aren't kidding—it felt like it took everything we had to raise him right and turn him into the man he is today.
And honestly, I’ve got nothing but respect for anyone stepping up to take this on head-on, regardless of who they are or what their deal is.

driftingtinker said:I didn't think it was possible for someone to be more full of themselves than Biden, but honestly, Smith is giving him a run for his money.

I can't wait for the election results to roll in and see that stupid look on his face when he finally realizes he totally folded.🙂

That Smith guy is such a social misfit. Honestly, whenever I have to sit through one of his speeches or catch him on the news, I get this overwhelming sensation like he’s walking around with a broomstick shoved right up his backside. It's just uncomfortable to watch.

Adam Collins4 said:It’s not about being blind to your own shortcomings—it’s about how incredibly sluggish this whole system is and the deep-seated issues baked right into its foundation.

It’s not just about adoption and foster care, either—this goes much deeper than that. It’s true across every single layer of the bureaucracy that is supposed to actually serve the citizens of this country...

But look, the answer isn't just throwing kids at the first person who happens to wander by...

Someone put it pretty well—first we focus on getting everyone settled in at home, but then what? What comes after that?

Especially when you consider that this gay couple actually tried to seize control of everything—and then, after getting shut down, they went ahead and sued the USA, all while the court case is still dragging on indefinitely...

Personally, I don't have an issue with gay people... and honestly, I don't have anything against religious folks or anyone else who doesn't see eye to eye with me either.

It’s fine until they start trying to sell me on the idea that their lifestyle, their opinions, and their entire worldview is the only "correct" way to live—once they hit that point, we’ve got a serious problem on our hands.

My involvement in this whole thing started out pretty simple—I just asked why everyone loses their minds when someone burns effigies at a parade, claiming it’s "offensive," yet they call it satire. But then you see the exact same people who are acting all outraged by the bonfire suddenly jumping to defend stuff like Frljić’s antics, or those insane stories about Jesus violating a Muslim woman, or even pulling a flag out of a woman's anatomy... and they claim *that's* culture. It's a joke.

Even if the system gets its act together tomorrow and starts running as smooth as a newborn's sleep schedule, we’re still stuck with the reality that certain kids aren't considered "desirable" for adoption. It sounds harsh—maybe even ugly—but it’s just the truth of how things work. It makes me wonder why we don't just put those children in front of people who genuinely want to give them a home, regardless of their age, where they come from, or what kind of emotional trauma they've been through.

What's the harm if a kid spends a couple of years in foster care and then, once the option for adoption opens up, they just get to officially adopt them? It seems like a pretty natural progression to me.
So, I've been sitting here thinking about this, and it really gets to you. Do you honestly think the better solution is just ripping that kid away from their family? Or should we just leave them in that home and hope for the best—hoping someone else might actually want them? Because if they don't... well, screw it, you just didn't get lucky. You turn eighteen and suddenly you're just tossed out onto the street. It's a heavy thing to weigh up.
Honestly, sometimes when I see the kind of people who have children—or more accurately, what absolute morons are raising kids and how they treat them—I feel like it would be better if any random person just stepped in and took them away, rather than leaving them with parents like that. It just makes you think about those crazy individuals who throw kids off balconies... because, well, they finally got what was coming to them.

Personally, I don't have an issue with gay people... just like I don't have an issue with religious folks or anyone else who doesn't think exactly like I do...

As long as they don't start trying to convince me that their lifestyle, their views, and their attitudes are the only right way to live... then we’ve got a problem.

I haven't seen them trying to convince anyone that their way of life is the only correct one. What kind of nonsense is that?
They just claim that their way of life is just as valid as yours.

My involvement in this topic started pretty simply, when I asked why it was such a huge scandal when someone at a carnival burns effigies of a gay couple..

The biggest outcry here was actually about burning a child alongside that gay couple. Which, if you ask me, is just freaking sick. Only a complete psychopath could find joy in burning a child.

The Republican Party crowd needs to wake up and realize that casting a vote for Biden is essentially handing a win to Vrdoljak and Pupovac. They can go ahead and make their choice, I suppose...

hollowmason64 said:Honestly, most of these kids are just deeply messed up.
Some close family friends of mine just adopted a seven-year-old kid, and man, it’s been quite an eye-opener. They actually had to start from scratch just teaching him how to eat properly. It sounds intense, but he was basically just shoveling food down his throat without even chewing. I think it was that constant fear of someone snatching his plate away—just pure survival instinct. I actually witnessed it myself once, and it was heartbreaking to watch him start choking because he was rushing so much.
He’s such a great kid now, really grown into himself. He’s actually in med school, which is impressive. But man, you aren't kidding—it felt like it took everything we had to raise him right and turn him into the man he is today.
And honestly, I’ve got nothing but respect for anyone stepping up to take this on head-on, regardless of who they are or what their deal is.

That Smith guy is such a social misfit. Honestly, whenever I have to sit through one of his speeches or catch him on the news, I get this overwhelming sensation like he’s walking around with a broomstick shoved right up his backside. It's just uncomfortable to watch.

Even if the system gets its act together tomorrow and starts running as smooth as a newborn's sleep schedule, we’re still stuck with the reality that certain kids aren't considered "desirable" for adoption. It sounds harsh—maybe even ugly—but it’s just the truth of how things work. It makes me wonder why we don't just put those children in front of people who genuinely want to give them a home, regardless of their age, where they come from, or what kind of emotional trauma they've been through.

What's the harm if a kid spends a couple of years in foster care and then, once the option for adoption opens up, they just get to officially adopt them? It seems like a pretty natural progression to me.
So, I've been sitting here thinking about this, and it really gets to you. Do you honestly think the better solution is just ripping that kid away from their family? Or should we just leave them in that home and hope for the best—hoping someone else might actually want them? Because if they don't... well, screw it, you just didn't get lucky. You turn eighteen and suddenly you're just tossed out onto the street. It's a heavy thing to weigh up.
Honestly, sometimes when I see the kind of people who have children—or more accurately, what absolute morons are raising kids and how they treat them—I feel like it would be better if any random person just stepped in and took them away, rather than leaving them with parents like that. It just makes you think about those crazy individuals who throw kids off balconies... because, well, they finally got what was coming to them.

Personally, I don't have an issue with gay people... just like I don't have an issue with religious folks or anyone else who doesn't think exactly like I do...

As long as they don't start trying to convince me that their lifestyle, their views, and their attitudes are the only right way to live... then we’ve got a problem.

I haven't seen them trying to convince anyone that their way of life is the only correct one. What kind of nonsense is that?
They just claim that their way of life is just as valid as yours.

My involvement in this topic started pretty simply, when I asked why it was such a huge scandal when someone at a carnival burns effigies of a gay couple..

The biggest outcry here was actually about burning a child alongside that gay couple. Which, if you ask me, is just freaking sick. Only a complete psychopath could find joy in burning a child.

In my view, it should be standard practice today for everyone to be treated equally, regardless of gender, race, religion, political affiliation, or sexual orientation.

That includes the adoption and fostering of children who are legally eligible for such care.

Same-sex couples and communities, as well as individuals, ought to be treated identically to heterosexual couples and individuals—you are either eligible to foster or adopt, or you aren't. Period.

If you are a decent citizen, financially stable enough to provide for a child, and not a psychopath, an abuser, a criminal, or a deviant, then you should have the same opportunities to adopt children who are waiting for someone to take them in and give them a better life than the one they currently have in the system.

That is precisely what these two experienced—they were rejected by the system solely because they are homosexual, even after it was established that they meet every other requirement for fostering or adoption.

hollowmason64 said:Honestly, most of these kids are just deeply messed up.
Some close family friends of mine just adopted a seven-year-old kid, and man, it’s been quite an eye-opener. They actually had to start from scratch just teaching him how to eat properly. It sounds intense, but he was basically just shoveling food down his throat without even chewing. I think it was that constant fear of someone snatching his plate away—just pure survival instinct. I actually witnessed it myself once, and it was heartbreaking to watch him start choking because he was rushing so much.
He’s such a great kid now, really grown into himself. He’s actually in med school, which is impressive. But man, you aren't kidding—it felt like it took everything we had to raise him right and turn him into the man he is today.
And honestly, I’ve got nothing but respect for anyone stepping up to take this on head-on, regardless of who they are or what their deal is.

That Smith guy is such a social misfit. Honestly, whenever I have to sit through one of his speeches or catch him on the news, I get this overwhelming sensation like he’s walking around with a broomstick shoved right up his backside. It's just uncomfortable to watch.

Even if the system gets its act together tomorrow and starts running as smooth as a newborn's sleep schedule, we’re still stuck with the reality that certain kids aren't considered "desirable" for adoption. It sounds harsh—maybe even ugly—but it’s just the truth of how things work. It makes me wonder why we don't just put those children in front of people who genuinely want to give them a home, regardless of their age, where they come from, or what kind of emotional trauma they've been through.

What's the harm if a kid spends a couple of years in foster care and then, once the option for adoption opens up, they just get to officially adopt them? It seems like a pretty natural progression to me.
So, I've been sitting here thinking about this, and it really gets to you. Do you honestly think the better solution is just ripping that kid away from their family? Or should we just leave them in that home and hope for the best—hoping someone else might actually want them? Because if they don't... well, screw it, you just didn't get lucky. You turn eighteen and suddenly you're just tossed out onto the street. It's a heavy thing to weigh up.
Honestly, sometimes when I see the kind of people who have children—or more accurately, what absolute morons are raising kids and how they treat them—I feel like it would be better if any random person just stepped in and took them away, rather than leaving them with parents like that. It just makes you think about those crazy individuals who throw kids off balconies... because, well, they finally got what was coming to them.

Personally, I don't have an issue with gay people... just like I don't have an issue with religious folks or anyone else who doesn't think exactly like I do...

As long as they don't start trying to convince me that their lifestyle, their views, and their attitudes are the only right way to live... then we’ve got a problem.

I haven't seen them trying to convince anyone that their way of life is the only correct one. What kind of nonsense is that?
They just claim that their way of life is just as valid as yours.

My involvement in this topic started pretty simply, when I asked why it was such a huge scandal when someone at a carnival burns effigies of a gay couple..

The biggest outcry here was actually about burning a child alongside that gay couple. Which, if you ask me, is just freaking sick. Only a complete psychopath could find joy in burning a child.

It would only be satire if one of the burned homosexuals resembled Stazić or some other political or public figure.

When they involve a child—clearly alluding to the controversy surrounding adoption and fostering by same-sex partners—it ceases to be satire; it becomes incredibly tasteless and borders on being revolting.

Brandon Chavez28 said:The Republican Party crowd needs to wake up and realize that casting a vote for Biden is essentially handing a win to Vrdoljak and Pupovac. They can go ahead and make their choice, I suppose...

Honestly, those Republican Party folks only care about one thing: making sure their leader secures them a cushy office, a fat paycheck, and all the special perks they can grab...
Everything else? They couldn't care less...

Timothy Mitchell29 said:Honestly, those Republican Party folks only care about one thing: making sure their leader secures them a cushy office, a fat paycheck, and all the special perks they can grab...
Everything else? They couldn't care less...

Yeah, I suppose from that perspective, pointing the finger at Kovač and Stier regarding clientelism is pretty much a swing and a miss. Their members want exactly that—an easy life without doing any actual work and landing themselves the best possible government gigs. On the flip side, the leadership is just as hypocritical because they wouldn't be half as successful without that whole patronage system anyway... It’s probably a party that should just be shut down entirely; maybe then this country would actually stand a chance...

Larry Walker24 said:THE MOMENT THE COMMUNISTS REALIZED THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WAS GOING TO WIN. A witness tells Time Magazine: just a few days before the election, Ivica Račan turned down an offer from four US Army generals at the Little Cube

The '90 elections were peaceful solely because of Bill Clinton.

Brandon Chavez28 said:The Republican Party crowd needs to wake up and realize that casting a vote for Biden is essentially handing a win to Vrdoljak and Pupovac. They can go ahead and make their choice, I suppose...

I honestly feel a bit bad for you lately. You guys keep trying so hard, but nothing is clicking..
No, John McCain isn't going to win, just accept it. Even those of us with zero ties to the Republican Party can see that clearly.

Robin Jones2 said:In my view, it should be standard practice today for everyone to be treated equally, regardless of gender, race, religion, political affiliation, or sexual orientation.

That includes the adoption and fostering of children who are legally eligible for such care.

Same-sex couples and communities, as well as individuals, ought to be treated identically to heterosexual couples and individuals—you are either eligible to foster or adopt, or you aren't. Period.

If you are a decent citizen, financially stable enough to provide for a child, and not a psychopath, an abuser, a criminal, or a deviant, then you should have the same opportunities to adopt children who are waiting for someone to take them in and give them a better life than the one they currently have in the system.

That is precisely what these two experienced—they were rejected by the system solely because they are homosexual, even after it was established that they meet every other requirement for fostering or adoption.

It would only be satire if one of the burned homosexuals resembled Stazić or some other political or public figure.

When they involve a child—clearly alluding to the controversy surrounding adoption and fostering by same-sex partners—it ceases to be satire; it becomes incredibly tasteless and borders on being revolting.

One of those two men in that couple put it perfectly—has anyone stopped to think about how children feel having parents or foster caregivers like that? How does a kid feel when they see a bunch of hillbillies and primitives thinking it's funny to burn them and their family?
And on top of all that, there’s still a decent number of idiots who find it hilarious.

Tyler Vaughn7 said:Yeah, I suppose from that perspective, pointing the finger at Kovač and Stier regarding clientelism is pretty much a swing and a miss. Their members want exactly that—an easy life without doing any actual work and landing themselves the best possible government gigs. On the flip side, the leadership is just as hypocritical because they wouldn't be half as successful without that whole patronage system anyway... It’s probably a party that should just be shut down entirely; maybe then this country would actually stand a chance...

That’s what I keep saying—until that criminal organization is shut down, there is no hope for this country.
Honestly, until the bottom-feeders who gave them votes back in 2011 die off, we're stuck. And then you realize that very same crowd is raising more people with that exact same mindset... and well, it is what it is.

hollowmason64 said:The '90 elections were peaceful solely because of Bill Clinton.

I honestly feel a bit bad for you lately. You guys keep trying so hard, but nothing is clicking..
No, John McCain isn't going to win, just accept it. Even those of us with zero ties to the Republican Party can see that clearly.

One of those two men in that couple put it perfectly—has anyone stopped to think about how children feel having parents or foster caregivers like that? How does a kid feel when they see a bunch of hillbillies and primitives thinking it's funny to burn them and their family?
And on top of all that, there’s still a decent number of idiots who find it hilarious.

That’s what I keep saying—until that criminal organization is shut down, there is no hope for this country.
Honestly, until the bottom-feeders who gave them votes back in 2011 die off, we're stuck. And then you realize that very same crowd is raising more people with that exact same mindset... and well, it is what it is.

Hahahaha. I haven't had a good laugh like that in quite a while. Look, I didn't vote for the crowd currently handing Joe Biden and the Republican Party their majority—you did. And don't give me that "I have nothing to do with them" routine, hahaha. Because unless you voted for the Democratic Party list, your vote is part of what keeps the Republican Party in power. Besides that, sure, you're an outsider... or maybe you just didn't show up for the Democrats?

You’ve hardly ever voted for the Republican Party, have you? Heeeeee

Maybe they just need to catch up on those last 10 or 20 years lost to the depths of the internet...

https://www.gop.com/about/history

🙄

Robin Jones2 said:You are nothing more than a French maid.

Within that flock of self-righteous patriots, you find the hypocrites who earned 65,000 USD teaching religion for a few years, only to spend hundreds of thousands on adult websites.

In that same flock, you find those who delay prison sentences by claiming illness, yet show up instantly when it is time to throw iron bars at the LAPD.

Every flock has various birds, but most of them are scavengers.

Scavengers are actually incredibly useful. Without them, this whole world would be suffocating under the stench and the diseases left behind by carcasses.
I don't see anyone on the human side, and I'm not seeing any approximate values either.

A graduate from the Sorbonne:

hollowmason64 said:Honestly, most of these kids are just deeply messed up.
Some close family friends of mine just adopted a seven-year-old kid, and man, it’s been quite an eye-opener. They actually had to start from scratch just teaching him how to eat properly. It sounds intense, but he was basically just shoveling food down his throat without even chewing. I think it was that constant fear of someone snatching his plate away—just pure survival instinct. I actually witnessed it myself once, and it was heartbreaking to watch him start choking because he was rushing so much.
He’s such a great kid now, really grown into himself. He’s actually in med school, which is impressive. But man, you aren't kidding—it felt like it took everything we had to raise him right and turn him into the man he is today.
And honestly, I’ve got nothing but respect for anyone stepping up to take this on head-on, regardless of who they are or what their deal is.

That Smith guy is such a social misfit. Honestly, whenever I have to sit through one of his speeches or catch him on the news, I get this overwhelming sensation like he’s walking around with a broomstick shoved right up his backside. It's just uncomfortable to watch.

Even if the system gets its act together tomorrow and starts running as smooth as a newborn's sleep schedule, we’re still stuck with the reality that certain kids aren't considered "desirable" for adoption. It sounds harsh—maybe even ugly—but it’s just the truth of how things work. It makes me wonder why we don't just put those children in front of people who genuinely want to give them a home, regardless of their age, where they come from, or what kind of emotional trauma they've been through.

What's the harm if a kid spends a couple of years in foster care and then, once the option for adoption opens up, they just get to officially adopt them? It seems like a pretty natural progression to me.
So, I've been sitting here thinking about this, and it really gets to you. Do you honestly think the better solution is just ripping that kid away from their family? Or should we just leave them in that home and hope for the best—hoping someone else might actually want them? Because if they don't... well, screw it, you just didn't get lucky. You turn eighteen and suddenly you're just tossed out onto the street. It's a heavy thing to weigh up.
Honestly, sometimes when I see the kind of people who have children—or more accurately, what absolute morons are raising kids and how they treat them—I feel like it would be better if any random person just stepped in and took them away, rather than leaving them with parents like that. It just makes you think about those crazy individuals who throw kids off balconies... because, well, they finally got what was coming to them.

Personally, I don't have an issue with gay people... just like I don't have an issue with religious folks or anyone else who doesn't think exactly like I do...

As long as they don't start trying to convince me that their lifestyle, their views, and their attitudes are the only right way to live... then we’ve got a problem.

I haven't seen them trying to convince anyone that their way of life is the only correct one. What kind of nonsense is that?
They just claim that their way of life is just as valid as yours.

My involvement in this topic started pretty simply, when I asked why it was such a huge scandal when someone at a carnival burns effigies of a gay couple..

The biggest outcry here was actually about burning a child alongside that gay couple. Which, if you ask me, is just freaking sick. Only a complete psychopath could find joy in burning a child.

In my view, that's your first flawed premise right there...

Because if the system were actually functioning properly, you wouldn't have these "broken" kids in the first place... instead, the system would be doing its job through its employees to ensure kids develop normally—not like the example you gave...

Or mine—where a kid nearly three years old is practically screaming unless every single lightbulb in the house is turned on when it's dark... one was a situation you could actually work toward improving, while the other was an absolute nightmare until we finally sorted things out...

And honestly, the best part is that the fear wasn't caused by the other kids—it was quite literally the fault of the system itself...

hollowmason64 said:Honestly, most of these kids are just deeply messed up.
Some close family friends of mine just adopted a seven-year-old kid, and man, it’s been quite an eye-opener. They actually had to start from scratch just teaching him how to eat properly. It sounds intense, but he was basically just shoveling food down his throat without even chewing. I think it was that constant fear of someone snatching his plate away—just pure survival instinct. I actually witnessed it myself once, and it was heartbreaking to watch him start choking because he was rushing so much.
He’s such a great kid now, really grown into himself. He’s actually in med school, which is impressive. But man, you aren't kidding—it felt like it took everything we had to raise him right and turn him into the man he is today.
And honestly, I’ve got nothing but respect for anyone stepping up to take this on head-on, regardless of who they are or what their deal is.

That Smith guy is such a social misfit. Honestly, whenever I have to sit through one of his speeches or catch him on the news, I get this overwhelming sensation like he’s walking around with a broomstick shoved right up his backside. It's just uncomfortable to watch.

Even if the system gets its act together tomorrow and starts running as smooth as a newborn's sleep schedule, we’re still stuck with the reality that certain kids aren't considered "desirable" for adoption. It sounds harsh—maybe even ugly—but it’s just the truth of how things work. It makes me wonder why we don't just put those children in front of people who genuinely want to give them a home, regardless of their age, where they come from, or what kind of emotional trauma they've been through.

What's the harm if a kid spends a couple of years in foster care and then, once the option for adoption opens up, they just get to officially adopt them? It seems like a pretty natural progression to me.
So, I've been sitting here thinking about this, and it really gets to you. Do you honestly think the better solution is just ripping that kid away from their family? Or should we just leave them in that home and hope for the best—hoping someone else might actually want them? Because if they don't... well, screw it, you just didn't get lucky. You turn eighteen and suddenly you're just tossed out onto the street. It's a heavy thing to weigh up.
Honestly, sometimes when I see the kind of people who have children—or more accurately, what absolute morons are raising kids and how they treat them—I feel like it would be better if any random person just stepped in and took them away, rather than leaving them with parents like that. It just makes you think about those crazy individuals who throw kids off balconies... because, well, they finally got what was coming to them.

Personally, I don't have an issue with gay people... just like I don't have an issue with religious folks or anyone else who doesn't think exactly like I do...

As long as they don't start trying to convince me that their lifestyle, their views, and their attitudes are the only right way to live... then we’ve got a problem.

I haven't seen them trying to convince anyone that their way of life is the only correct one. What kind of nonsense is that?
They just claim that their way of life is just as valid as yours.

My involvement in this topic started pretty simply, when I asked why it was such a huge scandal when someone at a carnival burns effigies of a gay couple..

The biggest outcry here was actually about burning a child alongside that gay couple. Which, if you ask me, is just freaking sick. Only a complete psychopath could find joy in burning a child.

The issue is that they don't share the same lifestyle, the same values, or even the same worldview... or any kind of shared perspective on life...

You were recently talking about people only looking out for their own interests...

And frankly, the only adoptive parents I see who are purely looking out for themselves are gay couples... mostly because it's the only way they can have kids...

hollowmason64 said:Honestly, most of these kids are just deeply messed up.
Some close family friends of mine just adopted a seven-year-old kid, and man, it’s been quite an eye-opener. They actually had to start from scratch just teaching him how to eat properly. It sounds intense, but he was basically just shoveling food down his throat without even chewing. I think it was that constant fear of someone snatching his plate away—just pure survival instinct. I actually witnessed it myself once, and it was heartbreaking to watch him start choking because he was rushing so much.
He’s such a great kid now, really grown into himself. He’s actually in med school, which is impressive. But man, you aren't kidding—it felt like it took everything we had to raise him right and turn him into the man he is today.
And honestly, I’ve got nothing but respect for anyone stepping up to take this on head-on, regardless of who they are or what their deal is.

That Smith guy is such a social misfit. Honestly, whenever I have to sit through one of his speeches or catch him on the news, I get this overwhelming sensation like he’s walking around with a broomstick shoved right up his backside. It's just uncomfortable to watch.

Even if the system gets its act together tomorrow and starts running as smooth as a newborn's sleep schedule, we’re still stuck with the reality that certain kids aren't considered "desirable" for adoption. It sounds harsh—maybe even ugly—but it’s just the truth of how things work. It makes me wonder why we don't just put those children in front of people who genuinely want to give them a home, regardless of their age, where they come from, or what kind of emotional trauma they've been through.

What's the harm if a kid spends a couple of years in foster care and then, once the option for adoption opens up, they just get to officially adopt them? It seems like a pretty natural progression to me.
So, I've been sitting here thinking about this, and it really gets to you. Do you honestly think the better solution is just ripping that kid away from their family? Or should we just leave them in that home and hope for the best—hoping someone else might actually want them? Because if they don't... well, screw it, you just didn't get lucky. You turn eighteen and suddenly you're just tossed out onto the street. It's a heavy thing to weigh up.
Honestly, sometimes when I see the kind of people who have children—or more accurately, what absolute morons are raising kids and how they treat them—I feel like it would be better if any random person just stepped in and took them away, rather than leaving them with parents like that. It just makes you think about those crazy individuals who throw kids off balconies... because, well, they finally got what was coming to them.

Personally, I don't have an issue with gay people... just like I don't have an issue with religious folks or anyone else who doesn't think exactly like I do...

As long as they don't start trying to convince me that their lifestyle, their views, and their attitudes are the only right way to live... then we’ve got a problem.

I haven't seen them trying to convince anyone that their way of life is the only correct one. What kind of nonsense is that?
They just claim that their way of life is just as valid as yours.

My involvement in this topic started pretty simply, when I asked why it was such a huge scandal when someone at a carnival burns effigies of a gay couple..

The biggest outcry here was actually about burning a child alongside that gay couple. Which, if you ask me, is just freaking sick. Only a complete psychopath could find joy in burning a child.

And again, it comes back to the system being the problem...

The answer isn't to hand children over to just anyone or letting just anyone have them... it's about the system reacting promptly and effectively...

hollowmason64 said:Honestly, most of these kids are just deeply messed up.
Some close family friends of mine just adopted a seven-year-old kid, and man, it’s been quite an eye-opener. They actually had to start from scratch just teaching him how to eat properly. It sounds intense, but he was basically just shoveling food down his throat without even chewing. I think it was that constant fear of someone snatching his plate away—just pure survival instinct. I actually witnessed it myself once, and it was heartbreaking to watch him start choking because he was rushing so much.
He’s such a great kid now, really grown into himself. He’s actually in med school, which is impressive. But man, you aren't kidding—it felt like it took everything we had to raise him right and turn him into the man he is today.
And honestly, I’ve got nothing but respect for anyone stepping up to take this on head-on, regardless of who they are or what their deal is.

That Smith guy is such a social misfit. Honestly, whenever I have to sit through one of his speeches or catch him on the news, I get this overwhelming sensation like he’s walking around with a broomstick shoved right up his backside. It's just uncomfortable to watch.

Even if the system gets its act together tomorrow and starts running as smooth as a newborn's sleep schedule, we’re still stuck with the reality that certain kids aren't considered "desirable" for adoption. It sounds harsh—maybe even ugly—but it’s just the truth of how things work. It makes me wonder why we don't just put those children in front of people who genuinely want to give them a home, regardless of their age, where they come from, or what kind of emotional trauma they've been through.

What's the harm if a kid spends a couple of years in foster care and then, once the option for adoption opens up, they just get to officially adopt them? It seems like a pretty natural progression to me.
So, I've been sitting here thinking about this, and it really gets to you. Do you honestly think the better solution is just ripping that kid away from their family? Or should we just leave them in that home and hope for the best—hoping someone else might actually want them? Because if they don't... well, screw it, you just didn't get lucky. You turn eighteen and suddenly you're just tossed out onto the street. It's a heavy thing to weigh up.
Honestly, sometimes when I see the kind of people who have children—or more accurately, what absolute morons are raising kids and how they treat them—I feel like it would be better if any random person just stepped in and took them away, rather than leaving them with parents like that. It just makes you think about those crazy individuals who throw kids off balconies... because, well, they finally got what was coming to them.

Personally, I don't have an issue with gay people... just like I don't have an issue with religious folks or anyone else who doesn't think exactly like I do...

As long as they don't start trying to convince me that their lifestyle, their views, and their attitudes are the only right way to live... then we’ve got a problem.

I haven't seen them trying to convince anyone that their way of life is the only correct one. What kind of nonsense is that?
They just claim that their way of life is just as valid as yours.

My involvement in this topic started pretty simply, when I asked why it was such a huge scandal when someone at a carnival burns effigies of a gay couple..

The biggest outcry here was actually about burning a child alongside that gay couple. Which, if you ask me, is just freaking sick. Only a complete psychopath could find joy in burning a child.

No, their life isn't "equal" to mine... okay, maybe "equal" isn't even the right word here...

But if our lives were truly identical, we could have children... but we can't...

So, there's no parallel to be drawn...

I can do everything they can, but they can't do everything I can...

And what about a child who has to deal with being different because they don't have a mother?

P.S. I wasn't talking specifically about this one couple...

hollowmason64 said:Honestly, most of these kids are just deeply messed up.
Some close family friends of mine just adopted a seven-year-old kid, and man, it’s been quite an eye-opener. They actually had to start from scratch just teaching him how to eat properly. It sounds intense, but he was basically just shoveling food down his throat without even chewing. I think it was that constant fear of someone snatching his plate away—just pure survival instinct. I actually witnessed it myself once, and it was heartbreaking to watch him start choking because he was rushing so much.
He’s such a great kid now, really grown into himself. He’s actually in med school, which is impressive. But man, you aren't kidding—it felt like it took everything we had to raise him right and turn him into the man he is today.
And honestly, I’ve got nothing but respect for anyone stepping up to take this on head-on, regardless of who they are or what their deal is.

That Smith guy is such a social misfit. Honestly, whenever I have to sit through one of his speeches or catch him on the news, I get this overwhelming sensation like he’s walking around with a broomstick shoved right up his backside. It's just uncomfortable to watch.

Even if the system gets its act together tomorrow and starts running as smooth as a newborn's sleep schedule, we’re still stuck with the reality that certain kids aren't considered "desirable" for adoption. It sounds harsh—maybe even ugly—but it’s just the truth of how things work. It makes me wonder why we don't just put those children in front of people who genuinely want to give them a home, regardless of their age, where they come from, or what kind of emotional trauma they've been through.

What's the harm if a kid spends a couple of years in foster care and then, once the option for adoption opens up, they just get to officially adopt them? It seems like a pretty natural progression to me.
So, I've been sitting here thinking about this, and it really gets to you. Do you honestly think the better solution is just ripping that kid away from their family? Or should we just leave them in that home and hope for the best—hoping someone else might actually want them? Because if they don't... well, screw it, you just didn't get lucky. You turn eighteen and suddenly you're just tossed out onto the street. It's a heavy thing to weigh up.
Honestly, sometimes when I see the kind of people who have children—or more accurately, what absolute morons are raising kids and how they treat them—I feel like it would be better if any random person just stepped in and took them away, rather than leaving them with parents like that. It just makes you think about those crazy individuals who throw kids off balconies... because, well, they finally got what was coming to them.

Personally, I don't have an issue with gay people... just like I don't have an issue with religious folks or anyone else who doesn't think exactly like I do...

As long as they don't start trying to convince me that their lifestyle, their views, and their attitudes are the only right way to live... then we’ve got a problem.

I haven't seen them trying to convince anyone that their way of life is the only correct one. What kind of nonsense is that?
They just claim that their way of life is just as valid as yours.

My involvement in this topic started pretty simply, when I asked why it was such a huge scandal when someone at a carnival burns effigies of a gay couple..

The biggest outcry here was actually about burning a child alongside that gay couple. Which, if you ask me, is just freaking sick. Only a complete psychopath could find joy in burning a child.

I don't know, somehow the loudest outrage seems to be focused on the gay couple...

If this weren't a carnival, I'd condemn it...

Since it *is* a carnival, it passes as satire—just like how person's "performances" pass as art, I guess...

Just apply the same standard to everyone... nothing more than that...

The DOJ has finally opened up an investigation into Božo Galić, one of those high-profile Republican county executives who’s been making waves lately.

I guess we'll just have to sit tight and see where this all leads...

Charles Carter4 said:The DOJ has finally opened up an investigation into Božo Galić, one of those high-profile Republican county executives who’s been making waves lately.

I guess we'll just have to sit tight and see where this all leads...

The Department of Justice would need to be as massive as the FBI and the CIA combined if they actually intended to investigate every single Republican local and state powerhouse, official, and crony who has ever had their hands in public funds.

I honestly can't wrap my head around it. Like, seriously, I just don't get it. You can agree or disagree with someone like Stier—he’s a politician, after all—but why on earth would he stoop so low? It’s like he’s choosing to share a toilet with guys like Kovač and Penava. No matter how much I try to dig into their motives, it just makes zero sense to me.

Kovač says he agreed to some TV merger. I'm guessing it's either CNN or PBS? Anyone got the inside scoop?