Family, Friends, Sports, and habitually trying to stomach the daily news cycle. Regrettable 3x Trump Voter, (Democrats are still terrible and dangerous.)
Weird reply… But whatever, you do you - and enjoy hacking forever.
I could say anything here, with no real way to prove it up or down. Even if I shared an image of my GHIN - you could just incorrectly scream, “AI!” - like a little girl.
I could lie to you and say, that “I’m a scratch Golfer”, or that “I routinely break 80.”
But instead, I’ll just tell you the truth - which is that the above is a quick summary of what I did over the course of the last 3 years, without ever having a formal Golf Lesson - and I haven’t shot over 90 in my last 6 rounds.
If you’re ever in San Diego, DM me - and I’ll play from the tips with you at the Ladies Red Tee box, and I’ll humble you really fast. 🔒
To be clear, my use of the word, “heartless” - was in reference to how you likely perceive my views on the topic. Whereas, the use of the term - “virtue signaling”, you correctly indicated as that being directed towards you.
Typically, comments which a person takes a large level of exception towards - are those which inherently they know have at least some degree of truth.
That said, I do wholeheartedly agree with your last comment. As this problem - most certainly warrants a sustainable and humane solution.
Little, can tangibly be accomplished by spending a lot of mental calories - on analyzing all the contributing factors which allowed the problem of “homelessness”, to worsen and expand as it has…
I do wonder though: What society and especially highly impacted communities, such as L.A.; would look like today - if one of the two major political parties, hadn’t spent countless decades on promoting “victimhood” of certain groups, cultivating and exploiting members of communities - based on race, economics, drug addictions, etc., by advocating for never ending social services in exchange for a locked-in voting constituency. While also, demonizing the thought of “personal accountability”…
If only….
@micaela2481@RonPlacone Just as one cannot argue effectively with someone, who isn’t intellectually honest or objective enough - to alter a held and faulty position.
The fact that this post: was published nearly 3 hours ago - (at the time of writing this reply), and embarrassingly has under 400 likes with barely over a 100k views, authored by the Mayor of the nation’s second largest media market - within a state which sits within the World’s 7th largest economy; says everything about how badly you’re going to lose.
I do hope you remain a resident of LA, so you can witness first hand - what effective mayoral policies can do to positively impact a city.
Congratulations in advance @spencerpratt 🫡 👏
Genuinely curious what made you believe I am, “Happy to force others to live there.” 🧐
I can chew gum and walk at the same time. As I can have empathy for those who are homeless, especially for those who are trying to get out of that situation by doing the right things - such as having employment.
While at the same time, have compassion and empathy for families such as my own, who understandably do not want to live near homeless encampments along with the activities and types of people; which always degrade the environment and community in which they are allowed to occupy.
You may also care to a degree, for the average functional member of society and their families, who don’t want to encounter tents and shopping carts / “closets”, or avoid certain Parks - as the majority of parking spots are occupied by those living in their cars as their permanent residence; irrespective of what circumstances brought them there.
But if that emotion even exists, it appears to be outweighed by your own projected guilt and virtue signaling, regarding this particular minority group of the homeless population; which does nothing to actually focus on an actual solution to the overall problem.
Your approach is to concentrate on the minority and how best to serve them. My focus and those Candidates which I support, typically focus on the needs and issues which affect the majority - to maintain or improve society as a whole.
You likely view that mindset as “heartless” and “unsympathetic”. When in reality, it’s pragmatic and rational.
Not a huge surprise based on your logic and sightings, that those traits of a reasonable person are not in your vocabulary. 🫳 🎤
@grok@TheOtherKinds@MiddleOfMayhem No, what I meant through using the term; “means” in reference to the Government agencies, is to say - those entities have the supreme ability to either create / forge, or discredit conflicting pieces of documentation or testimony - which run counter to their objective.
To continue: How are you factoring into your equation, the motivations and executable means - on behalf of the DoD, CIA, AATIP, etc. to discredit Elizondo’s statements and related evidence.
Once done, and performing any recalculation as you see fit - please score your judgement on a 1-5 scale of confidence, with digestible commentary explaining how you arrived at this conclusion.
Just to be absolutely clear @grok , regarding the understandings and grounds; in which you appear to be exclusively basing your “Final Judgement” on:
Please either positively affirm - any or all, of the points listed below, as made evident through your initial response; or detail and provide commentary when necessary.
- Calculated a “High” level of favorable credibility, being attributed to any physical
artifact, documented findings / opinions. Etc. via organizations such as the DOD, AAWSAP, and AATIP.
- Calculated a “Low” to “Moderate”, level of favorable credibility rating to Elizondo - and presented associated evidence.
- Leveraged some form of consensus data, (either directly stated or calculated) - regarding the optics and published opinions, from either the general public and/or viewed “subject matter experts”, on the question of Elizondo’s credibility.
- In retrospect, was all available information and evidence - from all concerned parties: Was truly thoroughly and independently reviewed by you. And with respect to the aforementioned Government Organizations: A sincere and highly detailed examination on their historical records of “truth telling” - was conducted, in order to justify your decision.
Specifically, in regards to the last bullet: if such research was not performed, why are they deserving of what looks to be a, “benefit of the doubt” - approach, given to one party over the other.
If your answer to the introductory question, either alters in response, or any change in the degree of confidence (up or down) - as generated in the initial response:
Please provide those details as well, in an easily understandable digest.
@micaela2481@RonPlacone Nope. Just thankfully not in a position where that is a need, and adhering to standards.
Same reason why when I vacation, “Hostels” are not under consideration. 🤣
I don’t have to experience something, which I know would suck going into it. 🔒