Stu Pidity

[Stu Pidity @StuPidityStu]

Well, the felony will not be a felony once the appeal process is done because all his court cases were political hachet jobs where democrat DAs, Democrat Judges, and Democrat Juries all worked together to try and stop Trump from running.

They lost everything, and they will also lose the appeals and you wont be able to say shit after that, and then everyone will be able to attack you forever about how gullible and stupid you.actually are

Yah! Thats it, just wait, wont be much longer.

[Stu Pidity @StuPidityStu]

Lol, hard time dealing in facts I guess?

Can't handle it when new eyes from an outsider sees through your lying scrappy understanding of things, right.

Guess it would pass anyone off and proves the old adage as right, The Truth Hurts.

You must feel But-Fuc$@d

But then again, that's what you like, so, bit an insult I guess.

Too funny. People like you cant argue facts, so you use the only thing left, insults.

But that just proves how StuPid you actually are.

Myself, I can defend anything I believe in facts, you, insults.

Don't worry, I love insults, just proves im right over the target.

:)

Does it hurt to be so stupid?

If I spend 19.23 cents and thete is no cash register because the power is out, how much chane do tou give someone that gives you 20 dollars and 23 cents?

Are you even that smart? I doubt it.

[Stu Pidity @StuPidityStu]

So, let’s talk about “climate change,” CO2, and the environmental problems people barely talk about.

First, carbon dioxide is not the same kind of pollution as lead, mercury, PFAS, sewage, smog, pesticides, industrial waste, or poisoned drinking water. CO2 is part of the natural life cycle. Trees and plants take in carbon dioxide, use sunlight and water, and turn it into plant growth while releasing oxygen. We breathe out CO2. Plants use it. It is part of the carbon cycle.

That does not mean every question about CO2 is meaningless. But it does mean CO2 should not be talked about as if it is the same thing as actual poison in our water, air, soil, and food.

The real-world environmental crisis people can see, smell, test, and suffer from right now is pollution.

Poisoned water.

Poisoned air.

Poisoned soil.

Chemical waste.

Sewage.

Plastics.

Heavy metals.

Toxins in the food chain.

Those are not abstract future projections. Those are real problems harming people, animals, rivers, lakes, farmland, and communities right now.

So why does pollution get less attention?

Maybe because real pollution is harder to turn into one neat global narrative.

Pollution is specific. It has locations, names, pipes, factories, farms, landfills, cities, regulators, companies, and politicians attached to it. If a river is poisoned, someone may be responsible. If land is contaminated, someone may have to pay. If drinking water is unsafe, a real system failed.

That kind of problem forces accountability.

Climate messaging is different. It is broader. It can be used for taxes, regulations, subsidies, investment schemes, carbon credits, electric vehicle mandates, energy policy, global agreements, and political campaigns.

It is much easier to build a massive political and financial system around “carbon” than around the dirty local work of cleaning poisoned rivers, sewage systems, industrial sites, contaminated farmland, chemical spills, and polluted drinking water.

And then look at what happens around cities.

Trees, fields, wetlands, and green spaces are cut down. Everything gets covered with asphalt, concrete, rooftops, parking lots, subdivisions, and more development. Then those same areas become hotter, drier, more flood-prone, and less livable.

Trees and vegetation cool the air, provide shade, absorb water, support wildlife, and help clean the environment. But instead of protecting those natural systems, governments and developers keep building more and more concrete, then blame the consequences on a broad climate narrative.

That is why many people are skeptical.

Not because they hate clean air.

Not because they hate clean water.

Not because they want pollution.

But because the things that are literally poisoning people right now are often pushed aside while politicians, corporations, investors, and special interests make fortunes from climate-related policies and products.

Carbon becomes a market.

Carbon becomes a tax.

Carbon becomes a credit.

Carbon becomes a subsidy.

Carbon becomes a political weapon.

Meanwhile, the water is still dirty, the soil is still contaminated, the air is still polluted, and the food chain still carries toxins.

So yes, climate language may be technically valid. Climate does change. It always has.

But the term is often stretched into a political catch-all while the dirtier, more direct, more measurable pollution problems get ignored.

If people really cared about the health of the planet and its inhabitants, the first priority would be obvious:

Clean the water.

Clean the air.

Clean the land.

Protect the trees, fields, wetlands, rivers, lakes, and farmland.

Stop poisoning the places we live, breathe, drink from, and eat from.

That would do more immediate good for real people than turning every weather event into another excuse for taxes, subsidies, mandates, and political control.

[Stu Pidity @StuPidityStu]

A $51-million-equivalent Reflecting Pool project under Obama develops algae, and it is an unfortunate maintenance problem.

A roughly $15-million project under Trump develops algae, and it becomes Watergate with pond scum.

Obama-era cages were a difficult but necessary response to a migrant surge.

Trump-era cages became a crime against humanity.

Obama-era fencing was border security.

Trump-era fencing became racism.

Obama’s record deportations were law enforcement.

Trump’s deportations became fascism.

Obama’s executive actions were leadership.

Trump’s executive actions became dictatorship.

Obama’s Justice Department obtained reporters’ records.

Trump called reporters dishonest, and suddenly freedom of the press was supposedly hanging by a thread.

The issue is not that Trump must never be criticized.

The issue is that many of the people attacking him would defend, excuse or completely ignore the same thing when their preferred president did it.

The algae is not the real story.

The cages were not the real story.

The fence was not the real story.

The executive orders were not the real story.

The only consistent standard appears to be this:

If Obama did it, explain it.

If Trump does it, condemn it.

But please, lecture everyone again about objectivity, fairness and the importance of applying one consistent standard.

[Stu Pidity @StuPidityStu]

It is amazing how the exact same action can completely change its moral character depending on whether the president’s last name is Obama or Trump.

During the Obama administration, the federal government spent approximately $35 million rebuilding the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. In today’s money, that is roughly $51 million.

The pool reopened, and algae quickly returned.

No endless national scandal. No daily television panels demanding accountability. No comedians devoting entire monologues to Obama’s green-water catastrophe. Nobody acted as though Barack Obama had personally grabbed a bucket of algae and dumped it into the pool.

Now Trump’s administration spends roughly $15 million on coating, sealing and filtration work, and suddenly every reporter in Washington has become a world-renowned authority on pool construction, algae, concrete, water circulation and government procurement.

Obama’s project cost the equivalent of approximately $51 million today.

Trump’s work has cost roughly $15 million so far.

But Trump is the reckless spender.

Naturally.

This is hardly the first time we have watched this routine.

Remember “kids in cages”?

The chain-link holding enclosures and major processing facilities later presented as uniquely Trumpian inventions were constructed and used during the Obama administration. Obama’s own White House announced the opening of a 1,000-bed processing center in McAllen and facilities used to detain adults with children.

So, the cages did not suddenly materialize on January 20, 2017.

Under Obama, they were temporary processing enclosures created during a difficult humanitarian emergency.

Under Trump, they became proof that America had transformed overnight into Nazi Germany.

Then there is the border barrier.

Obama’s own White House proudly announced that the government had completed 651 miles of fencing along the southwest border and had made “unprecedented” investments in border manpower, technology and infrastructure.

Under Obama, it was called border security.

Under Trump, barriers became racist, xenophobic and an assault on America’s values.

Apparently steel fencing can detect which political party occupies the White House.

Deportations followed the same rule.

ICE removed a then-record 409,849 people during fiscal year 2012 under Obama.

That was described as enforcement, prioritization and the responsible administration of immigration law.

Under Trump, enforcing the same immigration laws suddenly became cruelty, hatred and fascism.

Then we were told that Trump’s use of executive authority proved he wanted to become a dictator.

Obama openly bragged that he had “a pen and a phone.” His own White House later celebrated taking more than 80 executive actions during 2014 alone.

Under Obama, bypassing a deadlocked Congress was bold leadership.

Under Trump, executive action became the death of democracy.

We were also told that Trump’s criticism of journalists represented an unprecedented attack on press freedom.

Meanwhile, Obama’s Justice Department obtained records connected to more than 20 Associated Press telephone lines and obtained a warrant involving a Fox News reporter’s emails while investigating leaks.

Under Obama, that was a complicated national-security investigation.

Under Trump, saying that a reporter is dishonest is apparently more dangerous than the government obtaining reporters’ communications records.

None of this means that every Obama and Trump policy was identical. They were not.

It means that the reaction is often decided before the facts are even known.

When Obama did something, the public received context, explanations, nuance and reminders that governing is complicated.

When Trump does something similar, the public receives outrage, dramatic music, Hitler comparisons and another breathless warning that democracy may not survive until Friday.

Rest in reply....

[Stu Pidity @StuPidityStu]

Once Trump supported expanding them, similar barriers were suddenly described as immoral, racist and uniquely un-American.

Then there are deportations.

Official Department of Homeland Security statistics show that 340,056 people were removed from the United States in fiscal year 2016 alone, during Obama’s final full year in office.

Large-scale immigration enforcement clearly did not begin with Donald Trump.

Yet when it happened under Obama, it was generally treated as government enforcing immigration law. When Trump enforced immigration law, it was regularly presented as something unprecedented and authoritarian.

The point is not that every Obama policy and every Trump policy were identical. They were not.

The point is that detention facilities, chain-link holding enclosures, family detention, deportations, border barriers and expensive Reflecting Pool repairs all existed before Trump.

The facts did not suddenly change.

The president’s name changed, and so did the outrage.

Obama’s Reflecting Pool reconstruction cost the equivalent of roughly $50 million or more today, and the algae returned within weeks.

Trump’s work costs far less, and suddenly algae is treated as a presidential scandal.

Obama-era facilities held migrant children behind chain-link partitions.

Trump inherited the same basic detention system, and suddenly they became “Trump’s cages.”

Obama, Biden, Clinton and Schumer supported hundreds of miles of border fencing.

Trump supported border barriers, and suddenly walls became immoral.

Obama’s government removed hundreds of thousands of people in a single year.

Trump enforced immigration laws, and suddenly deportation itself was presented as fascism.

But please, tell us again how everyone is being judged according to exactly the same standard.

https://t.co/fvRGZDIoPV

[Kim "Katie" USA @KimKatieUSA]

Over 13 years ago CNN covered Obama's $34 million renovation of the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool.

That work is widely blamed for CASUING the ongoing algae issues.

Adjusted for inflation, Obama's project cost nearly $50 million. Trump's renovation comes in at $16 million.

The selective outrage from CNN shows exactly how they cover presidential spending depending on who is in office.

[Stu Pidity @StuPidityStu]

Weird how the rules completely change depending on who is president.

During the Obama administration, taxpayers spent roughly $34 million rebuilding the Reflecting Pool. Adjusted for inflation, that is about $50 million in today’s money.

Then, within weeks of the pool reopening, the algae was back.

Back then on CNN, people were complaining about the smell likening it to wet dodge, and it looked horrible, but now, its a blessing?

Was Obama personally ridiculed and attacked every day? Was the $50-million-equivalent project treated as proof that he was incompetent, corrupt and unfit to be president? Did every television panel suddenly become an expert on algae, water circulation and concrete pool construction?

Of course not.

Now Trump spends roughly $14 million addressing the same problem-plagued pool, and suddenly it is a national scandal. The same people who barely cared when the Obama-era project cost the equivalent of approximately $50 million are now acting horrified over a project costing less than one-third of that amount.

Even CNN acknowledged that the massive Obama-era reconstruction experienced an algae bloom shortly after the pool was refilled. Their apparent explanation for the difference in treatment was that Obama did not personally involve himself or talk publicly about the project as much as Trump did.

Oh, well, that certainly explains everything.

Apparently, spending the equivalent of $50 million and having the algae quickly return is perfectly understandable—as long as a Democrat is president. Spending about $14 million trying to repair the problem becomes waste, vanity and presidential incompetence—as long as the president’s name is Donald Trump.

This is the same routine we see over and over again.

When Democrats do something, we are told it is complicated, necessary, inherited, misunderstood or simply part of governing. When Trump does something similar—or spends considerably less trying to correct an existing problem—it becomes corruption, chaos, dictatorship, vanity and somehow another threat to democracy.

The outrage was never really about algae, the Reflecting Pool or government spending. Those are merely today’s excuses.

One president received context, patience and protection after spending the equivalent of about $50 million.

The other receives ridicule, blame and wall-to-wall outrage for spending roughly $14 million.

But please, tell us again how everyone is applying exactly the same standard.

So, yah,

Weird how the rules completely change depending on who is president.

During the Obama administration, the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool underwent a reconstruction officially projected at $33 million and later listed by the Interior Department at $40 million.

That is roughly $50 million or more in today’s money.

Within weeks of the pool reopening, the algae was back and the pool had to be drained and cleaned.

Now Trump is attacked relentlessly over work costing roughly $14 million, as though algae in the Reflecting Pool was a problem personally invented by Donald Trump.

But this is hardly the only example.

Remember the photographs of migrant children behind chain-link partitions that were repeatedly used to condemn Trump?

Those types of chain-link holding enclosures were already being used during the Obama administration in 2014.

The Obama administration also opened a large new family detention facility in Dilley, Texas, to hold adults with children.

Apparently, detention facilities and children behind chain-link partitions only became evidence of unspeakable presidential cruelty after Trump became president.

Border barriers provide another interesting example.

Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer all voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006, authorizing hundreds of miles of physical barriers along the southern border.

Physical barriers were bipartisan border security then.

[Stu Pidity @StuPidityStu]

My new Bible Understanding group on Facebook.

https://t.co/KLaCT4dKo6

[Stu Pidity @StuPidityStu]

@ITnurse4u @rushtheband @RushCon

[Stu Pidity @StuPidityStu]

So, from the bible, we see that there are “many antichrists,” and the term applies to anyone who opposes Christ, denies the truth about him, pretends to represent him, persecutes his followers, or claims to serve him while practicing deception or lawlessness.

[Stu Pidity @StuPidityStu]

Who is the Antichrist?

Is he over here? Is he over there?

Thia subject can sound confusing because many people think the antichrist must be one mysterious future person.

But the Bible explains it plainly, please look these scriptures up in your own bible.

Next.....

[Stu Pidity @StuPidityStu]

So, this scripture helps us see that the antichrist can include religious deceivers. A person may sound religious, but if he teaches lies about Jesus, he is not helping people come to Jehovah.

Next......