KaKRA🇻🇦

Catholic, husband, father, 🇺🇸 patriot, cook, aspiring Saint, golfer, welder, grammar enthusiast, most aggressive driver I know, accidental burner of bridges

[Coddled Affluent Professional @feelsdesperate]

You can just have normal opinions about the Iran war and the Middle East:

You can think on balance the Iran war
wasn’t a good idea but also understand why it was reasonable for Trump to take the shot he did.

You can be pro-Israel and supportive of our business relationships with the Saudis and Emiratis while taking the position that the Islamic Republic is fundamentally a problem for them to solve and not us.

You can think all of these things without becoming unwell and losing focus on important domestic political objectives.

[KaKRA🇻🇦 @KaKRA____]

@TheAliceSmith Touché

[KaKRA🇻🇦 @KaKRA____]

@BjornLomborg Panic is a poor guide for public policy. Yep.

[IMPERATOR @IMPERATORAUS]

There is no way a religious person can win a debate with an atheist person, purely because the atheist cannot coherently defend objective, ontological truth when his worldview denies any objective ontological ground of being from which truth is contingent.

Whenever the atheist appeals to rationality, intelligibility, objective truth, or moral normativity, he is actually borrowing theistic metaphysics which are concepts that only make sense if reality participates in transcendental and ontological truth and is ordered by an objective Logos.

Without that grounding, the atheist's claims about "truth" collapse into subjective constructs or personal preferences.

More than this, if truth is not objective, then the atheist has no non‑arbitrary basis for claiming that the "truth of science" is a better framework for reality than the "opiate of religion".

So, if objective, ontological truth is real, then the atheist must concede that a transcendent ground of truth – which is God – exists.

But if there is no objective, ontological truth and only personal preference, then I choose religion, since religion gave us Western civilisation and atheism gave us the Holodomor.

[Jack Posobiec @JackPosobiec]

God bless @TulsiGabbard

[Alice Smith @TheAliceSmith]

The Left: “Believe All Women!”

British Women: “250,000+ of us were systematically raped and tortured by mostly Pakistani men from the 1950s to now with help from our police, social workers, NHS staff and politicians.”

The Left: “Yea, not you.”

[KaKRA🇻🇦 @KaKRA____]

Universal suffrage is an obvious mistake. It creates the incentive structure to allow one party to promote unlimited immigration of people likely to end up on the government dole. It creates the incentive structure to harvest votes on skid row for the LA mayoral election. Only productive members of society should vote. If I were in charge of these things, the practical version of that is that you have to pay at least a little bit of taxes, and not be on any kind of government assistance to vote. Otherwise, politicians are incentivized to benefit the 51% at the 49%, who happened to be the ones doing all the work that creates value in society, and to increase the portion of the population depending on the government. Those are the wrong incentives. We need to change the incentives. Sure, if women need to stop voting to fix this mess, then yeah, let's do that.

[KaKRA🇻🇦 @KaKRA____]

Universal suffrage is an obvious mistake. It creates the incentive structure to allow one party to promote unlimited immigration of people likely to end up on the government dole. It creates the incentive structure to harvest votes on skid row for the LA mayoral election. Only productive members of society should vote. If I were in charge of these things, the practical version of that is that you have to pay at least a little bit of taxes, and not be on any kind of government assistance. I believe that would solve many of our issues. Otherwise, politicians are incentivized to benefit the 51% at the expense of the most productive 49%, and to increase the portion depending on the government. Those are the wrong incentives. We need to change the incentives.

[Perry E. Metzger @perrymetzger]

In the ancient world, the way many people gained great wealth was by forming gangs of strong men, beating up their neighbors, and taking their stuff.

People still speak with admiration of men like Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar, but they were little better than gangsters who enriched themselves through armed robbery.

This was a negative sum game, and assured that people remained poor and unhappy for thousands of years.

Eventually, however, we figured out that respecting each other’s rights, building things, and trading meant that we could play positive sum games instead. We could increase the amount of wealth, and all would benefit. As a result, we moved from living in unheated shacks to living in what our ancestors would’ve thought of as paradise in only a few hundred years.

However, there are still people out there who think that beating someone up and taking their stuff is a really great idea.

It is the great task of our civilization to shun such people, as they are not fit to be part of society.

[Bret Weinstein @BretWeinstein]

No, it’s not “Pride Month.” Not for me, and not for millions of others.

You’re welcome to be proud of whatever you want, in any month you like—because this is America. But what started in 1969 as a rebellion against persecution, morphed into a license for public depravity, and then morphed again into a weapon aimed at families and innocent children. Along the way it went from a day, to a week, and then a month and became official, and thereby effectively mandatory for all.

Enough!

If you’re gay and wondering why you are facing resistance now, the answer is that, with few exceptions, most of you didn’t stand up against the expansion and weaponization of “pride,” and the coercion that went with it. In that failure to resist, the gay community compromised any expectation that the rest of us should support “pride” at all, but especially the obscene display of hostility toward civilization and the families of which it is built, and for whom it exists.

If your hackles are raised by the idea that civilization is about families, realize that families are how civilizations persist through time. Not everyone needs to form one, but we all must respect and protect them—It is the foundation of what it means to be civilized.

For the small fraction of gays and lesbians who DID courageously stand up and resist expansion, coercion and the weaponization of “Pride,” I stand with you, and I have all along. But I won’t be celebrating, and I won’t be silent.

It’s not too late to join the voices of reason and to confront the insanity of what “pride” has become.

[Jarvis @jarvis_best]

Alex Soros is interesting because he’s a billionaire heir who dedicates his life to making cities less safe. He’s like a Reverse Batman.

[Kyle Tibbitts @KyleTibbitts]

I’ll take the trillionaire creating thousands of millionaires over the millionaires creating trillions in debt.

[Jared Dillian @dailydirtnap]

I have many more issues with Ilhan Omar being worth $30 million than Elon being worth a trillion.

[Jarvis @jarvis_best]

I don’t understand why we have to have jobs and paychecks and everything when we could just trust Elizabeth Warren to give us what we need.

[wanye @xwanyex]

Boy oh boy did I used to love stuff like this when I was younger. As I’ve grown older I think I’ve come to realize that the whole game is illegitimate. This whole approach to the world, to ethics, is broken and wrong and a waste of time. You genuinely will get further in the world as a moral actor just by going, “nah people are people and pigs are pigs.”

[Allie Beth Stuckey @conservmillen]

I really wanted to believe the group defending Karmelo was a limited fringe of radicals. But the show of mainstream support and utter delusion from many black politicians, celebrities & activists quickly dashed that hope. It’s one thing when we’re talking about a black person who was killed - you can at least understand sympathy for George Floyd or Michael Brown, even if the facts are disputed. But we are talking about an undisputed murderer. To defend him, one has to be so far outside of reality and the realm of moral truth that they can no longer tell up from down. It’s so extremely dangerous for people who think this way to have any say whatsoever in matters of law and justice.

[wanye @xwanyex]

Absolutely nobody:

Ethicists: “we’ve been working on a list of humans it’s OK to kill. Babies, sick people, stuff like that.”

[KaKRA🇻🇦 @KaKRA____]

It says a lot that one side tries to appeal to being a good person on the issue of economic migrants from the third world. We can't even agree on what a woman is or what constitutes fascism vs just disagreeing or how moral infancticide is. We don't even have common ground on what should be the easy stuff. I don't care what you people think what it means to be "a good person."

[Rock Chartrand @RockChartrand]

Socialists aren't against work. They're against working. The work still needs to be done, they just prefer that someone else does it while they claim a right to the results.

[X Freeze @XFreeze]

The media has stretched "far-right extremism" so far that it now covers almost anything they disagree with

They’ve changed the definition. It used to mean neo-Nazis. Now it means parents at school boards, people who want secure borders, or anyone who rejects modern progressive orthodoxy

Real far-right extremism... the violent, fringe kind....is extremely rare. But the media inflates the term so aggressively that actual extremism gets buried under mountains of propaganda labeling normal opinions as dangerous

This isn’t sloppy journalism. It’s a deliberate strategy: expand the definition of "extremist" until half the population is in the category. Then you can justify censorship, deplatforming, and social punishment while turning people against each other