High School senior Sabrina Steffans is taking on Grand Island High School in New York for her parking space. The school said that graduating students could do their own designs for their parking spaces for a $50 fee so Steffans did a religious theme. However, Assistant Principals Adam Hernandez and Jaime Peld hit the brakes on the effort as unacceptable religious imagery in a public school.
They reportedly told Steffens, “if we had to approve your cross, we’d have to approve a satanic symbol and [we] wouldn’t want to attend a school like that.” They allegedly told her that she might get away with it if she “disguised” the cross as the letter “T.” So Steffans did that and resubmitted a design with “let your light shine” with a cross for the letter “T” in “light.” However, it still included a reference to the Bible’s Jeremiah 29:11.
That was also rejected. So Steffans resubmitted a new design without the Jeremiah reference, but included the phrase “He is King,” which eventually was approved by Principal Kretz-Harvey, who reportedly said that he made the decision after consulting with lawyers.
I do not believe that the earlier designs would violate the First Amendment under current Supreme Court precedent.
Steffans is now pushing back on the earlier denials. She is now represented by one of the nation’s leading religious rights groups, First Liberty. It has sent a notice letter to the school of a possible lawsuit.The letter warns:
“Any restrictions on expression for the parking space design activity must not discriminate on the basis of viewpoint. But here, the school’s denial of Ms. Steffans’ designs containing references to Scripture constitutes viewpoint discrimination because it prohibits specific religious messages while permitting a wide variety of secular speech.”
It notes that the guidelines “prohibit only ‘offensive language, pictures or symbols,’ ‘negative or rude language, and ‘gang-style tagging.’”
First Liberty is citing violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments and demanding a reversal of the original decision. I wonder what the school lawyers would rule if Stephanie painted the space with lyrics from Carrie Underwood’s song and the declaration “Jesus Take the [Space].”
We have previously discussed such decisions by schools, including banning vehicles with political statements.
First Liberty has a long history of prevailing in such fights and this could make for an interesting challenge.
In the end, Stephanie may have been better off choosing Jeremiah 6:16 rather than Jeremiah 29:11: “Stand by the roads, and look, and ask for the ancient paths, where the good way is; and walk in it, and find rest for your souls.”
Hey there all. Just catching up on some missed blog posts and don’t have time to read all the comments, but I do not see any mention of the Shurtleff case, which to me is much more instructive than the back and forth comments here over Zobrest?
*. The dissent in Zobrest?
Can the religious parking space decoration be released from 1A?
It’s disturbing in some awful way to imagine a dirty parking space decorated with chalk graffiti is a religious exercise or seeks to establish a religion by the State? I find scribbles on a cake sort of far fetched, too.
I suppose I’m too used to the smells of frankincense and myrrh with cantors singing, marble and such.
A person can scribble whatever they choose anywhere , anytime with chalk? The Christian chalk doodles club.
Park your gas guzzler on Jesus? What car would Jesus drive? He rode a donkey.
I’m done.
Has anyone here ever seen Gigi and Nicole Wallace in the same room?
Just sayin’….
Stupid F
OT
“PEACE IN OUR TIME”
– Donald “Chamberlain” Trump
__________________________________
Hitler invaded and lied; Putin invaded and will soon have lied.
Ergo, Putin is Hitler 2.0.
The U.S., UK, France, and Germany just gave Europe peace…
or not.
_________
“My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Prime Minister has returned from Germany bringing peace with honor. I believe it is peace for our time….”
– Neville Chamberlain, September 30, 1938
Maybe learn a bit of History.
Chamberlin and Hitler signed the document BEFORE Hitler invaded the countries.
Putin ALREADY invaded Ukraine – and got stuck btw – before this peace meeting even started, this peace meeting is BECAUSE he invaded Ukraine.
You are trying to sell oranges for apples just to be able to put the blame on Trump.
I am Dutch, I do not care about Trump or Putin. But I hope this endless war ends. But I do like the people who discuss things with facts in stead of TDS.
And – contrarily to Hitler – I think Putin has learned his lesson as he still is not able to concur Ukraine.
Something Hitler had no problem with.
Our resident nut jobs are reacting to a little girl saying “God is love” and “Let your light shine” by saying, “Mommie! The Crusades, the Inquisition!” They’re making wildly ahistorical claims about Christianity being responsible for most of the murders that have ever happened in the world (ignoring the atheistic systematic mass murder of hundreds of millions of people in the 20th century). What is it about a little love from a little girl that brings out the lunacy and psychosis in these hateful people?
And Millhouse, you answered others on here but ignored by question about Zobrest. What gives?
You didn’t mention Zobrest until after I’d finished. I only just saw it now and responded.
No one is saying Christianity is the only bloodthirsty ideology, or the one with the worst history, but the fact is that Christians have been just as bloodthirsty as Moslems, Marxists, and just about everyone else. So a message that doesn’t say “God is love” but that “Christ is love” is inherently militant. That doesn’t mean she shouldn’t have been allowed to have her parking space say that, but don’t pretend it isn’t what it is.
Could you please list the atrocities done this century done in the name of Christianity, and do the same for atrocities done in name of Islam?
And do the same for Buddhism and the other religions.
Let me know who stands out.
Many thanks
“. . . done this century . . .”
When you cherry-pick centuries, you’re not doing history. You’re doing intellectual dishonesty.
You forgot there was something called ‘The Enlightment’ in Christianity?
No, there wasn’t. The Enlightenment was not a Christian movement.
Grok dares to differ:
“The Enlightenment” in the context of Christianity refers to an intellectual and philosophical movement in Europe, primarily in the 17th and 18th centuries, that emphasized reason, science, and individual freedom over tradition and religious authority. In relation to Christianity, the Enlightenment had a significant impact because it challenged the traditional authority of the church and dogmatic beliefs. Here’s an overview of what this means:Rationalism and critique of dogmas: Enlightenment thinkers like Voltaire, John Locke, and Immanuel Kant promoted the use of reason and skepticism. They questioned the infallibility of religious institutions, such as the Roman Catholic Church, and literal interpretations of the Bible. This led to a more critical approach to Christian doctrines.
Deism: Some Enlightenment thinkers embraced deism, a belief that God created the universe but does not intervene in the world or personal lives (the “clockmaker theory”). This contrasted with the traditional Christian belief in an active, personal God.
Freedom of religion: The Enlightenment emphasized individual freedom, including the right to choose one’s religious beliefs. This led to calls for the separation of church and state and tolerance for other faiths, which sometimes clashed with the dominant position of Christianity in Europe.
Science versus religion: The rise of science during the Enlightenment, with figures like Isaac Newton and Galileo Galilei, created tensions with Christianity. New discoveries, such as the heliocentric theory, challenged traditional church views about the universe.
Influence on Christianity itself: The Enlightenment also led to reforms within Christianity. Some movements, such as Pietism and Methodism, placed greater emphasis on personal spirituality and ethics rather than strict dogmas, partly in response to rationalist critiques.
In short, the Enlightenment brought a shift from blind faith to a more rational and individual approach to religion, forcing Christianity to adapt and modernize. It led to both tensions and innovations within the Christian tradition. Would you like to dive deeper into a specific aspect, such as the impact on a particular denomination?
Did you read what you cut and pasted? The Enlightenment was not a Christian movement. It was a movement that challenged Christianity. That’s what the AI bot you quoted literally said. “In the context of Christianity” does not mean “in Christianity”. You might as well say that the Holocaust happened in the context of Jews, so it was a Jewish thing!
“You forgot there was something called ‘The Enlightment’ [sic] in Christianity?”
You can’t forget that which never existed. The Enlightenment was in essence a pro-reason, pro-this-world movement, and thereby a *rejection* of Christianity.
If you’re searching for Religion’s historical era, look at the Dark/Middle Ages.
P.S. Learn how to spell.
You are trying to ‘pick’ on me for my spelling?
While not understanding history..
I am not native English speaking, so go for it 🙂
*. Are you from Arkansas, anon? ☺
*. Conversion therapy is an atrocity. Passing judgment about heaven and hell is an atrocity.
“Conversion therapy” is harmful and doesn’t work, but it’s not an atrocity. And passing judgment about anything can’t be an atrocity. Everyone is entitled to judge everything.
*. Emotional scars aren’t atrocities? Au contrere, they can change the path of a life.
Buddhism has a principle of right thinking. Try it, milhouse. Words define life. Thoughts define life. You are quite mistaken.
Milhouse.
Have you been around teenagers lately? I would guess less than .005% would even see that sign on the parking space. They are far to busy being kids and looking at their cell-phones.
This it typical tail hurt libs, finding anything to cry about.
Some folks need to grow up!!
PS
Christians have been just as bloodthirsty as Moslems, Marxists,
Yes we did at one time…. but Islam & Marxists never quit.
Thanks for the history lesson.
This it typical tail hurt libs, finding anything to cry about.
Huh? It’s the girl who’s suing, and Christians who are looking for something to cry about.
*. The dissent in Zobrest is worthy and wise.
Ultimately the girl was allowed the graffiti on the 3rd effort. There is no case. I liked the 1st drawing best. The snake in the third was just unnecessary.
John Say says: The school created a forum for public expression, by allowing the decoration of parking spaces.
The moment they did so they were bound by the first amendment.
Not so fast. Who is doing the decorating here? The student, or the school? Is the student paying $50 for the privilege of doing her own decoration (subject to school approval)? Or is she paying $50 for the school to decorate the space, in line with a design that she submits? That is a vital distinction, one the Supreme Court has drawn between vanity plates and specialty plates. While vanity plates may be private speech (the court didn’t determine that), specialty plates are the state’s own speech, and it can’t be compelled to say something it doesn’t agree with.
Alito’s objection that the state allows contradictory specialty plates, so how can they be its own speech, doesn’t work. The fact that the state will say almost anything you want doesn’t mean it’s not actually speaking. It just means the state is like a celebrity, willing to endorse almost any product for a fee; or like a prostitute, willing to **** almost anyone for a fee. But celebrities and prostitutes are still entitled to have standards, and to turn down clients because they’re not willing to say that, or to do that. And so is the state. It may be willing to endorse rival football teams, or rival sports, because it has no objection to either of them, but draw the line at something it actually does object to.
Here too, if it’s the school doing the decorating, it can tell the student “We’ll do it to your liking and design, so long as it’s something we’re comfortable saying, but not otherwise”.
Millhouse – where are you getting these principles, since you don’t cite any Supreme Court cases? And how do you reconcile your assertions with Zobrest v. Catalina Foothills School District, 509 U.S. 1 (1993)?
I cited the license plate case, but there are dozens of other cases over the course of decades, all focused on the same distinction between government speech and private speech, and all consistent with each other. The jurisprudence on this hasn’t changed, as far as I can see, in at least a century.
I don’t understand how you see an issue with Zobrest. The interpreter in that case was clearly not speaking for the government. They were speaking either for the school or for the child. The government’s only role was to pay for them, and under current SCOTUS jurisprudence that no longer raises an establishment clause question. Not only may the government provide a deaf child with an interpreter to facilitate his religious education, it can even provide the deaf with full-time interpreters who may accompany them everywhere, including going to church and interpreting the service and sermon. The interpreter is being provided on a completely neutral basis.
Now if the interpreter were a government employee that would be very different. In that case it would be the government itself interpreting religious teaching, rather than merely paying someone else for neutral services. I think it would still pass muster, because the interpreter is still merely transmitting private speech, not speaking on their own behalf or the government’s. But the interpreter might object to the speech they are being asked to transmit, and ask to be replaced.
I don’t see anywhere in Zobrest where a distinction is made between a government employee and a government contractor. The government was paying the sing-language interpreter, who was therefore acting in an employed-by-the-government capacity. The details of that employment contract – W-2 versus 1099 – were irrelevant. I attended oral argument in that case and the school district’s argument was that the Establishment Clause prohibited a government employee from doing sign-language interpretation in a theology class. The Court rejected that position. So you can have government agents – employees or contractors paid with public money – doing the actual religious expression, as long as its pursuant to a religiously neutral program and the choice of what to express is not made by the government actor.
A government employee is a much closer case, but it still boils down to government speech v private speech. And that distinction is absolutely fundamental and has not changed in forever. The government is allowed to have its own opinions and express them, and to refuse to express opposing opinions, but it is not allowed to have religious opinions, let alone to express them. Private people can say whatever they like, and the government may not prevent them regardless of whether it’s religion or anything else, and of whether the government agrees with them or not.
Again, you claimed I had not cited cases, but I did cite the license plate case, as well as the flag cases.
*. Did the drawing cause an additional pay out by the taxpayer? Was money diverted away from non-religious pupils? Was any taxpayer forced to pay for the religious drawing?
If my taxes are paying for it they must be paid only to Islamic schools. I cannot be forced. Btw lgbt is not a religion. It has no public school protection unless you demand free speech and press of my viewpoint. I’ll need to leave public education and I’ll need a full voucher. Hand me my 20 thou? I’ll spend it at a private islamic school. Thanks for the cash. I get a kickback of 10 thou. Cool
*. It’s the cart before the horse. The primary was IDEA without need for a Constitutional question.
They used Lemon in Zobrest.
It’s a step away from sectarian ed. That’s fine unless you’re the only religion X within 300 miles? Btw Alan Dershowitz son Elon passed away on Sunday. 64? Stroke.
*. It falls under IDEA and wasn’t a constitional question. It’s outdated.
*. Zobrest is old, there are computers now that translate spoken words into text. One time purchase and not 7 thousand per year. Zobrest also used Lemon. It was faulty anyway.
*. Lin pointed out Shurtleff, 2022. The public forum was established and freedom of speech, millions so John Say is correct.
It’s SPEECH — Jesus, take the wheel, parking lot, cake!!! Smacking my forehead. It’s intuitive. Talk about Jesus anywhere, anytime for God’s sake. AND btw it doesn’t have a time or a place! Time and place are rented for 50 bucks …
What about the truck in school parking lot with repub elephant? Private PROPERTY. I’m not driving your doggone truck.
I already cited the flag case. Exactly as I said, it turned entirely on whether the flag was government speech or private speech. And that depends entirely on the city’s policy. Hence the city in Massachusetts that changed its flag policy two years ago, making the flag government speech rather than private, so that it could exercise control over which flags were flown. Completely in line with the SCOTUS decision.
So the key question here is whether these parking space designs are government speech or private speech. Is the school allowing the student to decorate her space, or is the school offering to decorate it to the student’s design? If the former it’s private speech and she can have a religious message; if the latter then it’s government speech and it may not endorse a religion, or religion in general.
The real offense was when the school told her the reason she had to tone down her Christianity was “if we had to approve your cross, we’d have to approve a satanic symbol and [we] wouldn’t want to attend a school like that.”
In other words, we’re all Christians here, and we don’t want those people advertising their religion, so we have to tone ours down in public; please cooperate.
A school that actually respected the religious diversity that the first amendment represents would have no objection to a Satanist student (or even one merely pretending to be one, as all so-called Satanists do) displaying a symbol of his (purported) religion, so long as it was not offensive, negative, rude, or gang-style.
“Offensive” would of course have to be determined from a viewpoint-neutral perspective; a symbol could not be deemed offensive merely because it represented Satanism.
No dim dum, the school was testing her resolve in determining her sincerity. Was she a trouble maker? By the 3rd drawing they agreed. There is no case. It’ll be thrown out.
“‘Offensive’ would of course have to be determined from a viewpoint-neutral perspective; a symbol could not be deemed offensive merely because it represented Satanism.”
Hurt most by that statement: Satan. He’s lost his mojo.
If a symbol dedicated to the worship of the Prince of Darkness isn’t ipso facto offensive then what is? Is it possible to have viewpoint neutral perspective on Evil?
I suppose if Martians landed on Earth and they saw a picture of Baphomet then they wouldn’t be offended. They know nothing of the symbol or its meaning. But once they learn that it’s the symbol for a church that supports the universe’s principle source of pain, death, and corruption — is it possible for the Martians to remain viewpoint neutral?
If, for example, I don’t know that I a triangle is an object with three sides then I suppose my ignorance would lead me to being viewpoint neutral on the issue of whether circles, squares, octagons, or triangles have three sides. But once I know then I know. Neutrality isn’t possible. Once you know that Satan is evil is it possible to feel un-offended by a symbol of that represented Satanism?
Freedom of speech for me; STFU for thee…
The school created a forum for public expression, by allowing the decoration of parking spaces.
The moment they did so they were bound by the first amendment.
Not only are they in violation of their own rules, but had the studen complied with those rules they STILL would have a problem – the only restrictions allowed on free expression in government created forumns for free expression are the NARROWEST that SCOTUS and the constitution have allowed.
This would NOT be judged under the tinker standard – which is essentially disruption of class – because this is NOT in the classroom. It would mostly NOT be judged under the normal school standards – because in this instance the school CREATED a forum specifically for free expression – they are toast.
“the school CREATED a forum specifically for free expression – they are toast.”
The only way the school can prevent said expression is to get rid of the privilege of decorating the parking spaces. The students have to pay for the privilege of having a parking space and decorate it. Students don’t have a constitutional right to a parking space and to decorate it however they wish. There are limits the school can impose for that privilege.
John Say the Stupid
“The school created a forum for public expression, by allowing the decoration of parking spaces”
Completely and deliberately false statement.
The school most definitely did not create a public forum, and they did not “allow” the decorations.
The “public” were not involved in this school activity, therefore there was no public forum.
Indeed, thanks to security risks, access to school property is now strictly limited and controlled.
The school sold permission to decorate for a fee of $50.
There was no “right” to decorate, and there was no “public forum”.
There was a financial arrangement, whereby students purchased permission to decorate.
As a condition of this purchase, the school required that students submit their designs for approval, a perfectly reasonable requirement for how any government entity manages its property.
Your objection is almost right, but not quite. A public forum need not be open to the general public. It may be open only to students of a school, or employees at a government office, etc., but it is still a public forum so long as it is designated for their speech and not for the government’s own speech.
We see this distinction between trademarks, which the Supreme Court has said are private speech, and specialty license plates, which it has said are government speech. We see the same distinction in the case of city flagpoles. Some cities have a policy that they will fly any flag you like, if you merely submit it in advance and pay a fee; those cities may not discriminate against flags that convey messages they don’t like. But other cities have a policy that they are the only ones to determine which flags to fly, and while they solicit ideas from the public, with accompanying fees, it is their decision which suggestions they wish to accept and which they don’t. If they don’t like your idea they can refund your fee and decline to convey the message you wanted. There was a town in Massachusetts that changed its policy about 2 years ago for this precise reason; under its old policy it had no choice but to fly a “Palestinian” flag, but under the new policy it could choose to fly the Israeli flag and not the “Palestinian” one.
Isn’t really free speech with a religious theme?
Decorating parking spaces with chalk drawings isn’t exactly a known exercise or practice of religions. Is this a holy parking space and if it is her car is protected by God no less?
It falls to speech. While the lgbt high schoolers will squawk and are offended so too the lgbt rainbows are offensive as speech in reverse.
Welcome to freedom. Shouldn’t people know what offends others? Is that a moral principle? Knowing what offends others?
Offensive was stated in the rules. Shouldn’t a person consider their words and the offensiveness of what is said? If secular offensive words have been used then offensive words are due in return? Isn’t that the purpose of rules for chalk drawings in parking spaces in public schools?
Sure, file a lawsuit and then there’s another law and no longer a child’s rule of decorum and polite restraint.
Such BS
This is more of a free speech than a free exercise case, but the real issue is the school’s understanding of the establishment clause, and the question whether this is private or government speech. If it’s government speech then it’s not allowed to endorse any religion. If it’s private speech then the government must treat all religions equally, which the school seems to understand, but it also must treat religion in general equally with non-religion, and the school seems not to understand that.
Plus John.
It’s in a parking lot. Not on a school wall for everyone to see.
Jezzzz
*. Look what happened to little Bebe and her inclusive picture the entire family had to move to Florida because of BLM oppression. A little scribble picture. Sabrina was lucky? Lgbt might have torched her car?
*. So John, is it speech with a religious theme or is it free exercise or is the school establishing a religion? Much easier with speech. This includes political speech. All kinds of speech and religious speech is one type.
What about anti religious speech. Can a person speak for murder or theft or lies? Yes, rap songs speak of such. Sold everywhere. Lil Wayne has some specialty songs. Kids buy it.
It’s speech with a religious theme. As soon as there are Islamic schools for 300 miles in all directions and taxes pay for it a religion has been established by the State. 😂 voucher or no voucher.
Just get rid of public schools and the problem goes away – only government can violate the first amendment.
Do you want to keep the requirement that children attend school?
Oooo good one
This is true.
As to the requirement that children attend school, that does not require the government to provide one. At most it would require the government to provide vouchers for those who can’t afford school for their children.
That’s what they have now. A collective voucher provides poor children with a basic education and that is a very tall order. Whatever. .
Public schools are for the poor, John Say, and no, no one is giving anyone a check signed by John q. Taxpayer to do as they want. What would that look like John Say?
It would look like vouchers, which is something that already exists in many states, and which we on the right have advocated for most of the last century. If you are so ignorant that you don’t know about them then you need to stop commenting and educate yourself.
Oh, and public schools are not for the poor. Ask their advocates and they will denounce private schools and declare that it is for everyone, and that it’s wrong for those who can afford it to abandon them. If they had their way they would ban private schools.
Oh thanks millhouse for the the ad hominem. You don’t understand vouchers. AT BEST a portion only is distributed. Public ed is a hand-me-down. Crunch the numbers. You actually think fertile Frida with 10 children in public school at some fantastic number per child will get a blank check for how much? Yearly? Seriously…Frida the fertile is costing John q. Taxpayer a fortune yearly and she’s on public assistance?
The problem in public ed is children don’t have listening skills. Somehow they skipped the listening portion and went directly to rap music while twirling on their heads.
Sure, 100 bucks per year for online classes.
When atheists are sincere and honest, they usually prefer a society governed by Christian principles (see Christopher Hitchens or Douglas Murray).
To illustrate, someone – I forget who – proposed the following thought experiment: imagine you’re walking in a dangerous part of the city late at night and are approached by a group of men who look menacing in the dark. Would you feel better if you found out they were just coming from a Bible study?
That’s an example of a question that answers itself.
Absolutely not. The best way to test that theory would be under a Rawlsian “veil of ignorance,” where you evaluate principles of justice without knowing your place in society. As there are groups of people in society that are disfavored by many Bible Group – goers (whether that be other religious groups, LGBTQ etc.), this would not be a group that I would want to subject myself to under a veil of ignorance.
You’re an idiot. Let me know the next time a Bible Group gives a beatdown to literally anybody.
It may be uncommon now for Bible students to beat people they don’t like, but historically that has not been the case at all. Historically it is far more common for people coming from church, stirred up by an insightful and inciteful sermon, to immediately go and massacre the infidels, or to beat and rob them, or set fire to their places of alien worship. Jews still have the memories of those times.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/pittsburgh/news/bible-chapel-ministries-lawsuit-sexual-assault/
Let me Google that for you… Sexual assault of a teen with Down syndrome
What’s that got to do with it? The assault in that case had nothing at all to do with religion. It’s pure coincidence that it happened at a church. It’s like those “school shootings” that you find out happened at 2 AM in a school parking lot, or even half a block away from the school altogether, but are counted in order to inflate the numbers and make them look scary.
*. They get a deadly beat down in hades by the swaggart Klan and others. They’ve waited and it’s your fault.
If that’s the best you got, then you’ve lost the argument. Thanks for proving my point.
Its better than what you have provided.
You asked a political philosophical question and got a response using a very well known political philosopher. Not sure what you were expecting.
The point is that the Bible (and all religions for that matter) are exclusionary of others. That’s literally the meaning of the Bible verse that is the subject of Turkey’s article.
No group which builds up some at the expense of others should be considered to be morally superior than society writ large.
All that to somehow put forward the patently absurd notion that you would not feel a bit relieved to know that the men on the street at night just came from a Bible study? And that’s the best you got?
I would, but only in this century, and only in the USA, not historically or globally. For most of history Bible students were just as likely as anyone else to get violent, or more likely. And with the resurgence of antisemitism in Christianity it may not be true much longer.
*. Am I alone wearing a yellow star? Yep, scared.
“….As to the Court’s invocation of the Lemon test: Like some ghoul in a late night horror movie that repeatedly sits up in its grave and shuffles abroad, after being repeatedly killed and buried, Lemon stalks our Establishment Clause jurisprudence once again, frightening the little children….”
The full quote:
https://www.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-2024.ZC.html
404 error, GW
sorry left out the most important part.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-2024.ZC.html
That is the type of hilarious turn-of-a-phrase that Justice Scalia was famous for.
Many times a great mind does not live to see the fruits of its work. The “Lemon test” was abandoned in 2022, six years after Nino’s passing. On so many issues, with his brilliant mind he blazed the way out of the foggy morass Scotus had gotten itself into.
PRIVATIZATION
The best corporations are private.
The best schools are private.
Public schools were presumed to provide complete basic educations in the same manner that police, fire, and utilities provide complete basic services and commodities.
Public schools went far afield into the bizarre and the anti-American, anti-Constitutional, and communist teachers union “Re-education Camp” curricula.
Privatization of public schools must be mandated, and they must be primarily and acutely responsive to the requirements of the public they serve.
Unions must be denied any relationship whatsoever with schools or students—no contracts and no contact.
Hilarious, as own Dear Leader wants to nationalize US private industry.
Hilarious, as own Dear Leader wants to nationalize US private industry.
I don’t think he does, but if he does then he’s wrong. Do you seriously think anyone on the Republican side literally worships the President, and thinks he’s right about everything?! We support him because he’s mostly doing things we like; we don’t like those things just because he’s doing them. And we don’t hesitate to object on the few occasions he does something we don’t like.
He wants to nationalize Intel.
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/the-nationalization-of-intel-a59fb635?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=ASWzDAgJa6k5ZNWpOQ27QC-PBz9xnHNxh33lLDVv90I2h-Y55Aa2nb7kcpiylJn_aZk%3D&gaa_ts=68a67bfa&gaa_sig=yLulPksWwjaPdkBKTDxddL-JHQvQ5diVh7Fw6ePyuMMUlDzLFnvrTggicFsw14Zz2NrGOiFUf5uTKKYkNT0m3g%3D%3D
A 10% stake is not nationalization! And he wants to buy it in a free market transaction, not to seize it by force.
It’s not such a great idea, but it’s not terrible, and it’s certainly not nationalization, which inherently requires the use of force, and the seizure of at least a controlling stake if not the whole company.
Anonymous – one of the reasons that schools MUST be private is specifically so that questions like this one AND yours regarding unions, are dealt with PRIVATELY.
What expession a private school allows – is up to the school who are answerable to the parents who PAY for the education.
Whether teachers are union or not is up to the school – who again is answerable to the parents.
Schools that make wise choices – attracts students and can charge higher tuition.
Schools that make poor choices – FAIL – and we all learn what does not work.
Free markets do NOT dictate much TOP DOWN.
Those running businesses and enterprises make decisions – and the free market – bottom up judges those decision.
John Say, PAY? Pay only happens if the money has been earned. Public schools are charity. It’s money given and quite unevenly btw.
Nevermind.
That’s just not true. Charity recipients (whether they’re receiving money from the government or from a private charity) who shop at a commercial supermarket are PAYING for the goods they buy just as surely as any other customer is. The supermarket must compete for their business just as it does for anyone else’s. And the market incentives work the same way. The key is that the money is now theirs, and if they don’t spend it they’ll have it for future use, so their incentive is to spend it wisely.
*. Are you saying vouchers are paying for online classes outside of brick and mortar? Those are also unionized now.
Computers have changed education and for the better. Old school was labor intensive and impossible with paperwork per pupil for mastery. Computers provide no paper, instant evaluation, specific skill for work on, reinforce mastery and enrichment per pupil at the speed of light.
Unfortunately it’s rife with corruption. It has potential but where there’s money there’s corruption.
Sorry Milhouse, no blank check vouchers signed by John q. Taxpayer unless it saves money returned to John q. The money is sucked out of States to the ed mogul in another State hub or out of county as gerrymandering education.
The DMV of all places has computerized for mastery DL testing. It’s fun and easy and teaches for mastery.
Public education isn’t free. The worst thing ever said has to be that phrase. Parent x gas 2 children in public school, NY at 20 thou per. Is that 40 thou in parent x pocket every year? How many years? It’s doubtful most people pay taxes that are greater than 40 thou per year? It’s charity from the wealthy.
Will they spend it wisely? Doubtful. If that weren’t true they’d purchase 100 dollar online remedial classes for children available now. What they will do is spend 20 thou for a 100 dollar purchase. It was never their money.
The school is wrong to censor a peaceful American stance, the Christian religion shall not be abridged.
What does that mean?
It means the school was wrong. Do you have trouble understanding the English language?
No, the second half. What does that mean? I’m genuinely puzzled, and wondering what the poster thinks the word “abridged” means.
1st Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;….
Looks like a public school may not deny behavior based on any religion, while it may curtail behavior based on direct disruption or disorderly conduct.
You are loosely correct – IN THE CLASSROOM.
But this is a case about parking spaces – not classes.
Worse still the school deliberately created a public forum for free expression.
In this instance the fact that this is a school is not relevant.
It would be relevant if this was tshirts in a classroom.
That position seems contrary to the “bong hits for Jesus” case. It was not in a classroom either. Yet the court held the school could prohibit students from doing what they did.
Bong Hits is a very strange case, and I can’t explain it.
John, there is no distinction between the classroom and the parking lot. If the Tinkers’ armbands had been disruptive their schools could have banned them not just inside classrooms but also in the lunch room and the playground.
As for whether this is a public forum, see my separate comment.
Her proposed painting said “God is love” and “Let your light shine.” How are those messages militant?
*. Of the 3 examples I prefer the 1st drawing. In sample 2 and 3 it’s unclear what those tulip shapes are and is that a snake in the right corner?
PT, Jimmy Swaggart was a good singer, too.
Overall God is love is a wonderful choice for Sabrina’s afterlife and underappreciated in this life.
The school didn’t object to those parts of her drawings. It objected to the cross and the Bible citations, which are militant. You can tell me God is love, but the addition of the cross tells me “My god is love, and if you reject him you’ll burn in Hell”. I don’t mind if you tell me that; I know it’s what you believe anyway. But it’s not a friendly message.
I believe you’re conflating militant and subjectively offensive. I can understand that if someone tells you they believe you must reconcile with God through Jesus, or suffer eternal separation from God, you would find that offensive. But if they sincerely believe that, then their telling you that is clearly meant to be a loving effort on their part . . . and even more important, they are not threatening any physical actions against you.
That, incidentally, is consistent with the way Christianity initially spread and spreads today: primarily through persuasion rather than conquest. (Islam by contrast historically spread through conquest and that is its dominant mode today.)
oldmanfromkansas
Talk about sanctimonious revisionist history.
Christians have been the greatest source of violence and suffering in history.
Have you never heard of the Inquisition or the Crusades????
Just a very few examples:
The Crusades, particularly the First Crusade and the Baltic Crusades, involved military campaigns aimed at conquering land and converting people to Christianity by force. The Sacking of Jerusalem in 1099, the Albigensian Crusade, and the Baltic Crusades illustrate the brutality and forced conversions that occurred during these periods.
The Reconquista: The long period of Christian reconquest of the Iberian Peninsula from Muslim rule involved significant violence and religious intolerance, forcing Muslims and Jews to convert, leave, or face death.
Charlemagne’s wars against the Saxons: Charlemagne forcibly converted the Saxons in the 8th and 9th centuries, including the massacre at Verden where thousands were killed for refusing to convert.
Persecution of “Heretics” and Minorities: Throughout the Middle Ages, the Church and secular rulers persecuted and used violence against those considered “heretics” or other religious minorities, such as Jews, to enforce religious uniformity.
Colonialism: During the period of European colonialism, Christian missionaries sometimes worked alongside military and governmental forces, leading to forced conversions and cultural destruction in colonized lands, particularly in Latin America and Africa.
I suggest you take your sanctimonious holier than thou attitude and shove it where the sun don’t shine.
And I suggest you stay on topic. A school girl wants to say “God is love” and “let your light shine.” She quotes a Bible verse. And you’re hot under the collar about “militant” Christianity? Pshaw!
P.S. I referenced the way the Apostles spread the faith versus the way Mohammad spread his faith. Persuasion and prayer versus conquest by the sword.
So you claim that Christianity was INITIALLY spread by persuasion, as it is today.
You conveniently ignore hundreds of years of bloody persecution of Jews and Muslims who were forced convert or be tortured, burned at the stake or executed.
How convenient.
Christianity has been the greatest cause of death and suffering in history.
You are a sanctimonious hypocrite of the worst kind.
The fact that you are a member of the Christian cult explains why you are also a member of the MAGA cult
You have a typical cult personality that does not allow you to see reality
You live in a self-deluded fantasy world completely disconnected from reality.
Okay, so basically you’re a bigot. You make ridiculous assertions and then accuse me of being in a cult. For your information, I’m Jewish. The greatest murderers of all time have been atheists. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.
I don’t deny that some bad people have used Christianity as a cover to commit evil acts. But you can find bad men using almost any belief system to do so. By contrast, death and destruction are built into other systems, including Communism and Islam.
All this over a little girl saying “God is love” and “let your light shine.” What a joke.
You are the one making ridiculous assertions and trying to minimize the reality of the hundreds of years of suffering, death and destruction by Christians.
You say that “some bad people” in the past may have used Christianity as a cover for evil acts
NO !!!!
It wasn’t just “some bad people”.
You are again trying to minimize reality.
It was the leaders of the church and the kings and emperors of the time. It was the official position of the church as promulgated by Popes and other church leaders who instigated the Inquisition. It was the normal state of affairs in a huge organization of religious zealots. It was the official position of the kings and emperors who led the Crusades.
The suffering and death occurred over hundreds of years. The suffering under Hitler, Stalin and Mao pales into insignificance.
The fact that you are Jewish is irrelevant.
All religions are cults.
“And I suggest you stay on topic.”
Seriously?!
You’re the one who introduced the topic he responded to: “. . . with the way Christianity initially spread . . .”
He demolished your absurd assertion. And your reply is to attack him and to demand that we talk about something else.
Your evasions are getting worse by the comment.
Oh dear. Christians have been a significant source of violence and suffering in history, but certainly not the greatest. Not even close. Your history is true but highly selective.
No, Old Man, I don’t find it offensive. It’s what your religion tells you, and you sincerely believe it to be the truth, so how can I be offended. If you truly believe I’m about to drive off a cliff, and you warn me to turn around before it’s too late, you’re my friend, not my enemy. Even if I know that you are deluded, and the cliff exists only in your imagination, I still appreciate your good will in trying to save me.
So no, it’s not offensive. But it is militant. They are not the same thing.
“. . . the way Christianity initially spread . . .: primarily through persuasion rather than conquest.”
That is laughably false. As just two examples, see Constantine and Charlemagne — the latter a particularly brutal Christian despot.
Prison, torture, and death for “blasphemy” are not persuasion. Or do you also wish to evade the countless Cristian Inquisitions?
When it comes to religion, you lose all objectivity and intellectual honesty.
*. Pardon , I thought it was the artwork itself. What are those things?
Nevermind
The school purportedly according to Turley said that if they allowed christian expression – they would have to allow pagan expression.
That is correct. Free expression is close to all or nothing.
Yes, I agree. Despite what I wrote above about it not necessarily being a public forum, if it’s not a public forum then it can’t allow a Christian message at all, because the government is not allowed to have religious opinions. The government can endorse non-religious ideas, such as “black lives matter” or “lgbtqwerty pride”, and refuse to display opposing messages, but it can’t endorse religions. The only way to allow an overtly Christian message is to make it a public forum, in which case it must treat all religions equally.
I would have just taken the accommodation exhibited in the second go round without the bible verse. We all need to take a step back from militant religion. You can live religiously without religiosity which is just a low key dimension of the harangues on TikTok. A pain in the behind for the rest of us be not.
@Robert
I hate to agree, given my previous comment, but yes. Why? This is really not that big a deal, and I comprehend the narrowness of view of a high schooler, but court? Come on. Why are we wasting our time on this kind of thing? It is a major pain in the behind. I think a lot of us are just over it, no matter what side particular views fall on. Seriously: spare us.
This is why.
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Government infringement on individual rights ALWAYS starts with those at the fringes – that are NOT really a big deal.
The most rights you have are the rights you allow those you care the least about.
This. It’s important because it’s our liberty, and it’s the only thing that makes America truly great.
*. Speech and press with religious themes can’t be denied. What are the SCOTUS precedents regarding juveniles and 1A? 14? Schools as authority?
Of course it’s fine to park you car on religious themes. How novel.
“Militant Religion?” — Your advice misses the greater point: the extreme-left NEVER “steps back” from their own “militant” responses to religion or “religiosity,” and that is a clear and severe warning that can never be left to the “low key” approach [or rather, the watered down approach]. It isn’t “religiosity” to quote scripture and to publish it in the context of personal liberty (extant freedom of speech): Turley’s article points to a serious reminder that NO LAW shall be made prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
Agnostics and atheist hate that. They started the religious fight and are now losing that battle on a constitutional basis. Of course woke Nazi principals will push it as far as they can so no one should back down.
Even former godless Communists Putin realized that and restored the Orthodox Church in Russia.
“. . . restored the Orthodox Church in Russia.”
Apparently you do not know that that revival began under Stalin.
Despots like a combined power of religion and state. It’s a more effective way to control the individual’s mind and body.
Her proposed painting said “God is love” and “Let your light shine.” How are those messages militant?
(I accidentally posted that question above to another unrelated comment)
No, it quotes John 14.6, which states that “No one comes to the Father except through me.” This emphasizes the exclusive nature of salvation, that salvation is not attainable through any other means, ideology, or religious practice.
Quoting John 14.6 is intended to ostracize those of other faiths.
Don’t take my word for it, take Christianity’s word for it.
Here is “knowing-jesus.com” which clarifies that “No other religion, no other faith, no other philosophy, and no other gospel leads the sinner to God the Father…”
https://dailyverse.knowing-jesus.com/john-14-6
And this is really the heart of why Christianity can be peace loving, peace-practicing, and the most hated religion all at the same time. The exclusivity. Christianity is all-inclusive in that the Gospel invites everyone, but exclusive at the same time in asserting there is such a thing as truth, and that Jesus is the truth and the only way to the Father (Jesus’s words, not mine, as you point out). It’s why Islam can promote terrorism and murder worldwide, and it is still favored over Christianity (even though oddly it is just as exclusive, but it’s anti-Western so that’s its get-out-of-jail-free card).
So in Christianity Jesus is believed to be God personified on earth. If you’re not a Christian you don’t believe this. If you don’t believe this then why would it matter because your God is a different God than that described in the Bible.
RAVB – and you are entitled to that view. But you are NOT entitled to force it on others.
This is NOT about what you would have done.
This is about what restrictions govenrment can make on free expression in a governemnt created public forum for free speech.
And the answer is VERY FEW.
This is a parking space – not a classroom.
The school could have said no decoration of spaces.
But the moment it allowed free expression, it was stuck with the highest constraints of the first amendment.
JSTS
But of course the school never allowed “free” expression in any sense of the word “free”.
The permission to decorate their parking places was NOT given for free. The students had to pay $50 for the right to do the decoration. It was privilege that was purchased. There was no constitutional right to do the decoration. The parking space is government property, and the school has the right to control how it is used.
Secondly, the school made it perfectly clear that the students must submit their designs for approval, a perfectly reasonable condition attached to the purchase of permission to decorate.
They were not free to do whatever they wanted.
There are absolutely no constitutional issues here in any sense.
That has been my point all along. You articulated it much better than I.
*. Why 50 dollars? Used for what? Selling public space for what purpose? Is that like rent?
Why not? If it’s the school doing the decorating, then obviously it’s to cover the cost. But even if the students do their own decorating, with the school’s permission, there’s nor reason it shouldn’t charge a fee for that permission. It’s a good way to raise some revenue. Just like with personalized license plates.
There are certainly constitutional issues here. If the student has purchased the right to decorate her space, then it is a public forum and the school may not discriminate against religious speech. But that may not be the correct description of the transaction.
Who gets to define terms? By what authority?
Secularism isn’t neutral. It is as dogmatic as the most assertive religions. In the last four years, much of what we’ve seen is not “militant religion” militancy” but militant secularism: aggressive efforts to push religion out of public life, to enforce relativism as orthodoxy, and to delegitimize anyone who believes in divine authority.
Today’s topic is yet another example of State before individual and the equation of religion being banned by bureaucratic halfwits. The questions I have: is the parking space reserved for the individual only? Is the right formal or informal? Do the individuals having parking entitlements also have duties to maintain the space? Are their formal guidelines detailing rights?
And last: this sure is not a third world problem, heck a car in high school, who would have ever thunk, much less a reserved parking spot.
The courts have been forever lazy in their interpretation of Jefferson’s walling off church and state. If you consider the church state issue, the state compels, and the church accepts the individual. I do believe that the Supreme Court has killed all the Lemon Trees they once had, they pucker no more!
GW – I believe there are many parking spaces and that the individual pays a fee to have one reserved for himself. Regardless of maintenance duties, this seems to me like viewpoint discrimination which is prohibited by the First Amendment.
A somewhat similar case was decided 9-0 by the Supreme Court in 1993. It’s called Lamb’s Chapel v. Center Moriches School District. In that case, the school opened its facilities to invite discussions on child-raising. Numerous organizations reserved time and space to discuss that topic from different points of view. When a Christian organization tried to reserve a slot to discuss the same topic from a religious point of view, the school said, “No.” Scotus unanimously ruled that violated the First Amendment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamb%27s_Chapel_v._Center_Moriches_Union_Free_School_District
Old man jayhawk or wildcat? I agree others telling you how to!
GW
*. What other drawings were turned down or altered? Like the cake baker and Halloween, etc.
*. The primary is speech. Disallowing a religious theme is the error.
It’s perfectly fine speech if it offends Christians? The speech isn’t fine if it’s for Christians? 1A says you can’t prohibit religious speech. It’s not place specific. The State passes a law that says Christians can only worship, or preach, express in speech or press on Sundays? Is that lawful?
It has no time nor space private or public prohibition. I don’t see a limitation in 1A except congress shall pass no law for or against.
I can do my chalk drawing in parking space for sale for religion or against religion.
I do question the validity of against religion as laws permitting what is contradictory to religious principles done willfully to do harm or supplant religions with the purpose to disrupt a moral standard within a culture. That would be a planned destruction of a culture by design.
The school provided the canvas and nothing else. It’s caution is to avoid a lawsuit by an objection to the speech that would yield millions of dollars for hurt feelings.
To an lgbt student Christians have caused them to suffer irreparable harm and vice versa. Lgbt speech is considered secular. Speech with a religious theme is also secular. The girl may be an atheist. She’s parking her car on God.
Jefferson’s “wall” has no place in constitutional law. It is not part of the constitution, and consists only of his private thinking, in one letter written long after the constitution was adopted — in which he played no role. He was not in Philadelphia for the convention, he wasn’t even in the country at the time. His only contribution was to express his opinions in private letters to his friends who were involved. His “wall” was first introduced into US jurisprudence by Klansman Hugo Black.
“. . . the constitution was adopted — in which [Jefferson] played no role.”
That is wildly false.
There is voluminous correspondence between Jefferson and some of the framers (esp. Washington and Madison) during the crafting of the Constitution. He was, for example, instrumental in convincing Madison of the need to include a Bill of Rights, and was known as Madison’s mentor.
And yet no bill of rights was included. It had to be added later, because the convention didn’t do it.
Jefferson was not involved in the convention at all, because he was in Europe, and was thus unable to participate, even by letter. You do realize how long letters took to cross the ocean, don’t you? If someone sent him a letter seeking his opinion on something, the answer was unlikely to arrive before the convention was over.
“And yet no bill of rights was included.”
As you know (or should know), the Constitution was adopted *only* because of the promise to add a BoR.
Your claim that Jefferson had no intellectual impact on the creation and adoption of the Constitution flies in the face of the historical evidence.
Anything not to talk about Trump’s latest disasters. Alaska was an unqualified failure. Russian media are making fun of Trump getting rolled by Putin. Then, there’s the EU and NATO allies inviting themselves to Washington to prevent Trump from bullying Zelenskyy again. They know, even if Trump doesn’t, that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine bears eerie similarity to the start of WWII, which could have been prevented if the world stood up to Hitler. Putin has said his goal is to reacquire the former USSR. If he gets away with this, he’ll finish off Ukraine, then go after Poland and the Baltic countries.
But, IMHO, the worst gaffe is Trump giving away the store right up front, by announcing that no US troops would be “boots on the ground”, that Ukraine would have to give up territory to get Russia to stop murdering its citizens, and that Ukraine could not join NATO. Trump even said that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was Zelenskyy’s fault for saying that Ukraine wanted to join NATO. Trump just took away any incentive for Putin to do anything but continue the drone strikes and ballistic missiles, which he is deliberately sending into civilian areas. 14 Ukrainians just lost their lives in the latest bombing of a civilian target.
The only way to stop Putin is to convince him that he will lose. The only way to convice Putin that he will lose is to: 1. let him know that US troops may well join our NATO and EU allies to defend Ukraine; 2. that Putin has no right to dictate whether Ukraine joins NATO–that is the right of any sovereign nation; Putin doesn’t want Ukraine to be part of NATO because that would puncture his dreams of reconstituting the former USSR; 3. that Putin will NOT be rewarded for invading Ukraine and starting this war by being allowed to keep part of Ukrainian territory. Instead of doing these things, Trump is siding with Putin–he even said to Emanuel Macron that Putin will probably stop bombing Ukraine because he likes Trump so much. the meeting between Zelenskyy and Putin will also fail. Trump bears responsibility.
Lots of words from a moron who probably bought the joke that Biden was some kind of foreign policy “expert”. This war is entirely due to you and the idiots that you stupidly put into the White House from 2021 to 2025. Trump is cleaning up the multiple foreign policy disasters that Biden left behind. Sit down and shut up already, you have nothing to add to the discussion.
Jesus, take gigi to another space. Thank you.
Joe Biden was someone that our allies KNEW could be trusted. He built up relationships and trust over the course of several decades in public office. After Trump’s first disasterous “presidency”, in which he publicly insulted our allies by essentially calling them “deadbeats”, trash-talked NATO and threatened to pull the US out of NATO, Putin believed that the US could not pull together a united front against him in the form of sanctions. THAT’S why he invaded Ukraine. He was wrong. Biden’s reputation and the trust he built over his political career mended the damage Trump did, and he not only got our allies to join in sanctioning Russia, Finland and Sweden, which were previously neutral, decided to join NATO. NATO is stronger than ever, thanks to Joe Biden. AND, Putin is afraid of NATO, which is why he’s trying to force Ukraine not to join. Putin KNOWS that if Ukraine joins NATO, he can’t win.
Riddle me this: WHY did Russian bombing of Ukraine ramp up after Trump took office? Putin is former KGB, and he knows how to pander to a narcissist with a fragile ego, so he said things Trump wanted to hear–like the 2020 election was “stolen” with fake mail-in ballots–which has been investigated over and over and over, and proven untrue; he also said that if Trump was in office he would not have invaded Ukraine–if that’s true, then why did’t he stop and why did the bombing and attacks get worse when Trump took office?
What “foreign policy disaster” has Trump “cleaned up”? Trump is the CAUSE of foreign policy disasters–he praised Putin as a “genius”, when the rest of the world knows he’s a murderer–in factm the International Criminal Court has an arrest warrant out for Putin for murder. Then, there’s the on-again-off-again tariffs.
Was the world safer on January 20, 2021, or January 20, 2025? It’s not a trick question, and it has the bonus of being verifiable empirically.
By any standard Biden left the world in much worse shape. And no, you don’t get to blame Trump for the multiple disasters that Biden and his cast of idiots created. Ukraine, Israel, Iran, China, Afghanistan, none of these were a hot issue on January 20, 2021. Trump didn’t make Biden move up the Afghanistan withdrawal date arbitrarily just to get a photo op. Trump didn’t loosen the sanctions on Iran, giving them the money to build up Hamas in preparation for the slaughter of October 7, 2023. Trump didn’t invite Putin to invade Ukraine, provided that it was only a “minor” incursion. You should be ashamed of what you voted for, and the mess that you caused, and the now millions of lives lost due to Biden’s fragile ego.
Are these the fairy tales MAGA media is telling these days? Joe Biden caused Russia to invade Ukraine, Joe Biden caused Hamas to attack Israel, etc? Is Joe Biden the cause for Israel deliberately starving, killing and trying to drive out Palestinians so Trump can turn Gaza into the “Riviera of the Middle East”? Such nonsense. Trump left Biden with the following that caused the messy withdrawal from Afghanistan: 1. drew down our troops from 14,000 to 2,500; 2. turned loose from prison 5,000 Taliban; 3. didn’t negotiate for any land or air base from which we and our allies could evacuate; 4. Didn’t get out our diplomats, their families and our allies BEFORE turning loose 5,000 Taliban; 5. didn’t involve our Afghan allies in negotiations, so they just gave up and let the Taliban take over. These are inconvenient facts, but they are TRUE. Just HOW was Biden supposed to get people out with his hands tied like this? Just another example of what a lousy negotiator Trump is–a conclusion which keeps getting reinforced with his failures in negotiating between Ukraine and Russia.
Who was president on January 20, 2021? Joe Biden.
Who was president in August, 2021, when Afghanistan fell to a bunch of guys on horseback? Joe Biden.
Who was the complete and utter disaster of a president that had EIGHT MONTHS to reformulate whatever plan that he was handed by the outgoing Trump administration, and yet did nothing of the sort? Joe Biden.
Who moved up the withdrawal timeline, over the objection of his own advisors, just to get a photo op on September 11, 2021? Joe Biden.
Who ordered the unnecessary and premature evacuation of the Bagram Air Force Base, directly leading to the chaos of Kabul and the deaths of thirteen American serivce members? Joe Biden.
Who had his poll numbers plummet after his disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal, never to recover, eventually leading him to drop out of his own reelection campaign? Joe Biden.
Stop trying to rewrite the history of the historically awful Biden presidency. Nobody is buying it.
How do you “reformulate” a withdrawal agreement that drew down our troops to less than half of the Taliban that were released from prison, that ignored our Afghani allies, that left us without any base of operations–no air or land base, with our diplomats and their families trapped in Afghanistan, who should have been evacuated BEFORE turning loose 5,000 Taliban? What bargaining chip did Biden have, other than invading Afghanistan again? None–the damage was done, and Biden was stuck with it. Trump was a fool to pull down our troops before getting out the diplomats, their families and our allies and turning loose 5,000 Taliben before everyone was out.
YOU MAGAts are the ones trying to re-write history. Trump left Biden with a situation in Afghanistan that made the messy withdrawal inevitable. AND, that’s not the only mess Biden was left to clean up–what about COVID? Biden is the one who marshalled the assets to get shots in arms, get schools, businesses, restaurants, etc open again, to get the daily infections and death toll numbers down while Trump was busy attacking scientists, pushing fake cures, whining about losing and getting his fans to attack the Capitol. Biden is the one who reversed the worst economic recession since the Great Depression caused by Trump and mended relations with our allies.
We’re the United States of America, all the idiot Biden had to do was just STOP and make some more time if he needed it. What were the Taliban going to do? Launch their strategic nuclear missiles at us? The Taliban only won because Biden lost the war by giving up. The idiot Biden had EIGHT MONTHS to do something useful. All he did was what he always does, make things even worse. He humiliated the country over a bunch of losers on horseback, got a bunch of service members killed, and abandoned an entire country to the worst, most repressive group of inbred jackals on the planet. What a legacy. And I’m only talking about one of his many disasters!
Joe Biden is rightly regarded as simply the worst president of the 21st century. Grow up and stop making excuses for him. Even the Democrat party abandoned him when they pushed him out of his own failing reelection campaign.
I don’t know what source of information you MAGAs rely on for deciding who is the worst president in history–but historians and polling of Americans generally consistently shows that Trump is considered the worst in recent history. You can keep on repeating the MAGA media talking points all you want to that try to blame Biden for Afghanistan, but the facts speak for themselves. Trump left Biden with a no-win situation because he is a lousy negotiator. WHY on earth would you turn loose 5,000 Taliban AFTER drawing down troops from 14,000 to 2,500, and BEFORE everyone got out? WHY wouldn’t you at least get an agreement for an air base and safe passage for diplomats, their families and our allies first? That was just stupid.
Putin is mopping the floor with him right now. Trump already sided with Putin on Ukraine’s right to join NATO, on American troops not supporting our EU and NATO allies, and Putin being rewarded for invading Ukraine by letting him keep territory he murdered people to obtain. Ukraine will NEVER agree to these terms, and Trump is in way over his head with Putin, ex-KGB, who has studied psychology. Trump actually believes he has charmed Putin who will just give up because Trump wants him to. Meanwhile, innocent Ukrainians are being bombed and killed. All of this is, of course, a distraction away from the Epstein scandal. And, when the sanitized records are released, the parts that refer to Trump will have been redacted and/or removed entirely. What Trump can’t do, however, is erase the knowledge of former DOJ and FBI employees who have seen what was in there about Trump. He won’t get away with it.
It’s incredible, we actually found the last person on Earth who is stupid enough to defend the disaster that is Joe Biden. Guess what, since Biden was thankfully only able to serve on term, he’s still eligible to run again! How many votes do you think he’ll get this time?
“but historians”
Correct – and americans RIGHTLY do not trust academia anymore.
“polling of Americans generally ”
ROFL
As of today Rasmussen has Trump at 49% approval.
44% say the US is headed in the right direction – that number was just above 20% under Biden.
Joe Biden is inarguably the WORST president since James Buchannon – fronkly worse than Buchannon
During Biden’s presidency – his approval was higher than Trumps at the same time in his first term UNTIL the August Afghan disaster.
From that time on there was not a single moment in which Biden’s approval was higher than Trump’s at the same time in Their presidency.
Trump’s 2nd term approval is running approx 5pts ahead of where it was at the same time in his first term – and that is according to RCP.
Gigi – there is NO right to join NATO.
To join NATO every single NATO member MUST approve your joining.
Sweden had to change some policies to get Turkey to let them in.
This is not about Siding with Putin.
Ukraine has NEVER had a right to join NATO.
And it has NEVER been a good idea for Ukraine to join NATO.,
This current mess would not have happened but for Biden and Nuland making stupid efforts to bring Ukraine into NATO.
There are two ways to peace – the defeat of Russia by unconditional surrender – as WWII ended, or by negotiation.
Putin has made clear there will be NO PEACE DEAL that involves Ukraine joining NATO.
Unless you are prepared to send our daughters and sons to Ukraine to defeat Russia – and to risk nuclear war – then NATO membership is off the able.
I know this is hard for left wing nuts – but a “deal” requires both sides to agree.
Typically both sides give a bit. But nearly always – the weaker side MUST give more.
Ukraine is inarguably the weaker side.
As Trump told Zelensky – “you have no cards”
All the cards in this negotiation are held by Putin and Trump – Ukraine has none.
The american people want the best deal for ukraine possible.
They want the killing to stop,
They want to quit spending hundreds of billions on the war,
they do not want nuclear war
and they do not want to send their sons and daughters to fight in ukraine.
That is the cards the US is holding.
That is NOT a winning hand.
We sanctioned the crap out of Putin BEFORE Biden took office.
That hurt Russia – and they went to war ANYWAY.
We have almost nothing to threaten Putin with.
Nuclear anhilation
and US soldiers.
That is pretty much it.
and the american people are NOT allowing either.
So join the real world.
Putin will get much of what he wants.
If you do not like that
Persuade France, Germany, Poland, Spain the UK to send their sons and daughters to Ukraine.
The US DOES have some carrots.
Russia has been devestated by this war. Their energy production has tanked and that is 1/3 of their GDP. If the war ends – Russia does NOT have the skills or technology to rebuild that energy infratructure. It will take them more than a decade to do so.
The best energy engineers and workers in the world are in the US, the next best are in europe. Only the US and Canada know how to make oil and gas infrastructure work in the arctic – 60% of Russia’s energy infrastucture is in the arctic.
Russia’s economic future depends on the US helping to rebuild that infrastructure.
Please reread mine responses and those from others above.
You are repeating the same debunked garbage over and over.
Only an idiot still beleives the pee tape is real,
that Covid came from wet markets in Wuhan,
that Trump colluded with Russia
That Biden was competent as president.
And on and on.
You have been debunked over and over.
Naivete and ignroance are only an excuse until you have been informed of the truth.
Clinging to lies and hoaxes afterwords is immoral.
“How do you “reformulate” a withdrawal agreement”
Anyway you want if you are president.
“that drew down our troops to less than half of the Taliban that were released from prison,”
No, it drew out troops down to sufficient to cover Bahgram – which Trump intended to retain, and the Taliban was NOT seeking to drive us out of.
The US was leaving Afghanistan – NOT Bahgram – just like we have not left Guantanamo.
And the Castro government did NOT seek to drive the US out through my entire lifetime.
“that ignored our Afghani allies,”
Again NOT our Allies. We owed them NOTHING.
The invasion of Afghanistan by the United States began on October 7, 2001, in response to the September 11 attacks, with the goal of dismantling al-Qaeda and overthrowing the Taliban regime that harbored them
Nothing in that about the Ghani government.
“that left us without any base of operations–no air or land base”
Not true and not relevant. Trump intended to remain in Bahgram – just as the US remains in Guantanamo. There was no agreement to turn over Bahgram. Just to remove US troops elsewhere and to end fighting between US troops and Taliban.
We also were NOT seeking to remove our diplomats – though families and non-esential personel should have left.
The agreement was between the US and the Taliban – as YOU repeatedly note.
It ended fighting between the US and the Taliban. It did NOT end the US diplomatic mission to whatever government their was. It did NOT Turn over Bahgram to the Taliban.
It left the Taliban and Ghani Government to work out the future government of Aghanistan
Either through combat or negotiations. The Ghani government chose “none of the above” and collapsed more rapidly than anyone expected.
The ONLY part of that that was OUR problem – was the failure of Biden to deal with that as it happened.
“who should have been evacuated BEFORE turning loose 5,000 Taliban?”
Why ? The expectation was that the US diplomatic mission to Afghanistan would continue.
“What bargaining chip did Biden have”
The most capable military in the world.
“other than invading Afghanistan again?”
The Taliban was driven out of Afghanistan in 2001 in 90 days by 29 Green Berets and a handful of “Spooky” Gunships. There was NEVER any question of the US being able to “hold” afhanistan if it wanted too. What we were never able to do, is convert it into a stable and peaceful country.
To get it to figure out how to govern itself.
“Trump left Biden with a situation in Afghanistan that made the messy withdrawal inevitable.”
Possibly – I have no doubt that leaving would have been messy.
But it would have been FAR less messy in April of 2021 when the Ghani govenrment controlled 75% of the country than in August when it controlled 20% – and NOT Kabul.
“AND, that’s not the only mess Biden was left to clean up–what about COVID?”
Really ?
” Biden is the one who marshalled the assets to get shots in arms”
How well did that work ? Covid is STILL with us.
“get schools”
Schools did not open because the Teachers Unions did not want them opened.
Even Biden had great trouble accomplishing that.
“businesses, restaurants, etc open again”
Outside of blue states these all reopened between June and August of 2020.
My MultiState Due Dilligence business shut down in March 2020, But August 15 2020 we were back in FULL business. The last half of 2020 was extremely Busy and set RECORD growth in the US. The Data is readily available
“to get the daily infections and death toll numbers down while Trump was busy attacking scientists, pushing fake cures”
The MOST effecitve treatments for Covid were HCQ, Ivermnectin, and Vitamin D.
These were not all that effective – but NOTHING else worked better. BTW the “injecting Bleach
” thing was real – it is a real treatment used BEFORE Covid and after, but it is not injecting bleach, it is removing your blood – like in dialysis and subjecting it to a bleach treatment – Bleaching is just another name for oxygenation. Hydrogen peroxide – which is an antiseptic is also a Bleach.
Trump was NOT “attacking scientists” – Frankly one of his HUGE errors during Covid is that he BELIEVED the NONSENSE that Fauxi and the others in the government health community were shilling for TOO LONG. It is REAL doctors, and REAL Scientists who told Trump that the damage being done by the “Public Health Experts” was FAR greater than the damage done by Covid. About 6M children – MOST poor and minorities lost 18months of education.
They will NEVER catch up. That is an entire generation F#$Ked over by your so called “experts”
The Fact is that Trump listened too YOUR idiots TOO MUCH and for FAR TOO LONG.
You rant about Biden purportedly fixing things – but the FACT is that Biden did NOT do anything different from Trump. Outside of blue states the country did NOT lock down again.
Biden distributed a Vaccine that never had a chance of working – which was self evident when they officially reported that it was 97% effective with a half live of 9 months.
All it takes is a tiny bit of Math to figure out that is NOT going to work
Do you even KNOW what a half life is ?
BTW Bidens death rate per month – With the country vaccinated – a Vaccine that you think is great – that we would still be waiting for but for Trump, was as high or higher than Trump’s 11 months without the vaccine. 2/3 of US covid deaths occured under Biden,
Ultimately Covid was NOT “defeated” – not by Trump, not by Biden.
Several things happened – all predicatable.
The virus mutated to become MORE contagious and LESS deadly.
Your the one fawning over science – The principle of evolution dictates that is EXACTLY what the virus will do.
Of course absent the lockdowns and the vaccine and the masking and ….
Covid would have burned through the world FASTER – Killer more people in a short time, but less people overall, and then disappeared – because the virus itself is a VACCINE against the virus – but a more effective one than the mRNA vax.
I am personally not hard on those who developed the Vax, I think it was an incredible learning experience and the benefits of that learning will give us a medical jump on the future.
But as a propholactic for Covid – it proved nearly worthless.
It did NOT prevent infection, it MIGHT have reduced the severity of the disease. I preobably was worthwhile for those over 65, but it certainly was a huge mistake for anyone healthy and under 40 – where the death rate from the vaccine was higher than the Death Rate from Covid.
YOUR public health Nazi’s were shilling to vaccinate children who mostly did not get covid, when they did, they were 100 times less likely to die from it than the Flu, who also coluld not spread covid.
You fawn over so called science – but from end to end YOU AND YOURS were WRONG about the science – and both ordinary people and thousands of doctors and scientists were telling you that ALL ALONG.
And you are still shilling for people who KNOWINGLY LIED TO YOU.
Covid did NOT come from chinese wet markets.
It near certain came from a lab accident
Its origen was DELIBERATELY covered up by the very people you STILL fawn over who LIED to you. And who KNEW where it came from and who were CULPABLE in bringing Covid to the world.
Masks DID NOT WORK – not only do we KNOW that now, but anyone familiar with decades of studies before KNEW that MASKS would not work – no airborn virus has EVER been stopped by a mask.
The Vaccine DID NOT WORK – and for most people likely did more harm than good.
The lockdowns DID NOT WORK.
Pretty much EVERYTHING the people you are shilling for told us to do was WRONG.
Much of it came from an unreviewed science fair project from 2006 that public health experts KNEW would not work, but was essentially medical propoganda to make people – morons like you, beleive that government was doing something that would work, when all they were doing was doing something to appear to be doing something.
KI cited red vs blue states above. In the end there are ZERO differences in Covid deaths between red and blue states that can not be directly attribute to demographics and geography.
In fact through the world that is true. Developed countries had the highest death rates because
They are at higher latitudes and people get less sun.
They have older populations.
They have better overall healthcare systems – so they have Far more people still alive with diseases that are fatal in less developed countries.
They have more obese populations.
They have more diabetes. In most of the world – diabetes is a death sentence with a life expectance of 4 years. In the US diabetic can expect to live a normal lifespan – unless they got covid.
Those and a few other demographic factors predict rates of Covid deaths accross the world
NOTHING else correlates well to different death rates.
NOTHING above indicates that NAY covid treatment worked.
In fact for reasons cited above – more developed nations with better healthcare systems had MORE not less covid deaths – BECAUSE their healthcare system resulted in a larger percent of the population that had serious health problems that is EXACTLY the people most likely to die from Covid.
Most of the country has come to grasp that the public health community FAILED with respect to Covid.
But idiots like you have not yet grasped the obvious – you were LIED too, and you still buy the koolaid.
“whining about losing”
When you are prepared to conduct an honest election – you get to complain.
Right now we are learning ALL the nefarious garbage you tried to pull to defeat Trump in 2016 -and we all KNOW the crap you pulled to try to defeat him in 2024.
Why in the world would Anyone beleive the people who lied over and over – about the collusion delusion, about the hunter biden laptop about Biden’s competence, about Iran, about Covid,
about a long long list of other things, Why would we beleive the people who CLEARLY tried to rig the 2016 and 2024 elections, about the worse conducted election in the past century ?
It is unlikely we will ever know the result of a free and fair election in 2020
But it is NOT unreasonable to beleive that the people who tried to rig 2016 and 2024 also tried to rig 2020.
It is not undreasonable to beleive that the same wing nut judges who have gotten everything wrong in Trump’s first term and done even worse in his 2nd – were just as blind to election fraud in 2020.
BTW – no one “attacked” the capitol – they came to demand – as is their RIGHT that congress refuse to certify a dubious election. The right to free speech, to assemble and to petition government are ALL right in the first amendment.
We have left wing nut idiots – in 2020 and again in 2025 trying to burn down the country and at war with the law and constitution – they TOO have first amendment rights that are entitled to protection. But They are NOT petitioning government. CBP and ICE and the police are enforcing US laws – often immigration law. If you do not like that law – go to the US capital and demand that congress change the law. Do NOT attack law enforcement – who are just doing their job.
If you do not like the law – CHANGE THE LAW.
The rule of law REQUIRES that we follow the law we have, and that if we do not like it, then we change it.
When presidents – like Biden and Obama just ignore laws they do not like – that is Lawless.
When left wing nut idiots attack people who are doing their job enforcing the law, rather than seeking to get those who have the power to change the law to do so – that is LAWLESS.
You can beleive the J6 protestors were wrong – though that is an increasingly tenuous claim.
But they had the absolute right to come to the capital to protest what they likely correctly beleive was a fraudulent election.
Those of you on the left have EXACTLY the same right.
Even people like Martin Luther King brought thousands of people to the capital to protest against bad laws and for changes in the law.
What they did NOT do was attack those who were just doing their job enforcing the law.
I do not have blind faith in the police – they too are humans and make mistakes.
But the left today is NOT attacking the police for violating peoples rights, for acting outside the law. But for doing their job and enforcing laws they do not like.
You SHOULD be doing what MLK did and what J6 protestors did and come to the capitol to demand that congress change the law.
“Biden is the one who reversed the worst economic recession since the Great Depression caused by Trump and mended relations with our allies.”
It is TRUE that during Trump/covid we had the worst single qtr drop in GDP in US history.
It is also TRUE that during Trump/covid we had the greatest single qtr increase in GDP in US history. These effectively cancelled each other out – there was no recession – specifically because Trump eventually parted company with the public health Nazi’s.
It it not true that there was a recession in 2020 – not a large one, not a mild one.
It is NOT true that Biden significantly improved the economy during his presidency
Adjusting growth for inflation there was little or no growth under Biden.
There are many factors in the Biden/Harris defeat – but a very significant one is that people – particularly poor minority and working class people were WORSE off in 2024 than in 2020.
During Trump’s first term – REAL working class income increased by 4500/family.
During Biden’s first 3 years – it droped by 3800/family – it likely was worse than 4500/family after 4 years. So far in Trump’s 2nd term – it has increased by about 1500/family.
If you try to make an economic argument for Biden (or Obama) – all you are doing is proving that not only are you economically clueless – but that you have ZERO perception of reality.
You do not need to be an economic expert to KNOW that when inflation rises faster than wages you are LESS well off.
The real economic disaster was the Biden/Harris administration.
Though frankly Biden had the reverse midas touch and everything he touched turned to schiff.
“Joe Biden caused Russia to invade Ukraine, Joe Biden caused Hamas to attack Israel”
As Harry Truman said – “The Buck Stops Here” – Biden was president.
Russia invaded neighbors under Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Biden.
NOT under Trump. You have been given the FACTS as to why.
Every single time western leaders talk about adding a nation adjacent to Russia to NATO russia invades. ALWAYS – just idle talk is sufficient. This is little different from the US saying – Russia will not have missles in Cuba.
You can engage in critical thinking and grasp WHY Biden (and before Obama, Bush and Clinton) contributed to Russian agression. Or you can just rely on the FACTS – the ONLY president since Ford who did NOT invade another country or provoke a war was Trump.
The ONLY president since Bush I that did not provoke Putin to invade a neighbor was Trump.
This is not some MAGA conspiracy theory – it is a fact.
One YOU have no explanation for.
“Is Joe Biden the cause for Israel deliberately starving, killing and trying to drive out Palestinians so Trump can turn Gaza into the “Riviera of the Middle East”?”
Biden can not be the cause for something that is not happening – and even if YOU beleive it is – was happening BEFORE Trump.
Biden and Obama APEASED Iran, and the result was instability in the mideast.
Trump contained Iran and the result was an uneasy peace.
“Trump left Biden with the following that caused the messy withdrawal from Afghanistan: 1. drew down our troops from 14,000 to 2,500; ”
In Jan 2017 there wre only 8,000 US troops in Afghanistan. On taking office “the generals” convinced Trump to increase troops to 14,000 as the means to force the taliban to negotiate.
That strategy failed and was reversed.
Afghanistan was NEVER in the US interest. While Bush was justified in invading and forcing the Taliban out of power, He should have desroyed Al Qeda and the taliban and left.
He FAILED.
Obama PROMISED to get out of Afghanistan – in 90 days – instead – just like Trump – Obama INCREASED US troop levels which FAILED and then he paired them back – from 32000 to 8000.
I credit Biden with continuing Trump’s withdraw. He did not have to – he was president.
Biden DID get the US out of Afghanistan where we do not belong.
But while he deservedly gets credit for completing what Bush, Obama, and Trump promised and what Trump actually finally agreed to. He BOTCHED the withdraw and just as he deserves credit for leaving, he also deserved the blame for leaving badly.
“turned loose from prison 5,000 Taliban;”
at the end of the civil war the north and south released their prisoners.
At the end of the vietnam war – prisoners were released.
That is the NORMAL process of reaching peace.
Even when you DEFEAT an enemy – you STILL release prisoners.
“didn’t negotiate for any land or air base from which we and our allies could evacuate”
Still clueless – Trump was vocal that he has no intention of leaving Bagram Airbase.
PERIOD. He was planning on keeping it. It was Biden that chose to abandon it.
Regardless ion Jan 2021 the Taliban controlled about 20% of Afghanistan. By April when Trump planned on leaving – they controlled about 35% of the country and we no where near Bagram or Kabul. By August they controlled the entire country – Biden had abandoned Bagram which was never part of Trump’s plan. Bagram is one of the largest military bases in the world – it is also in an absolutely critical strategic location – it is in short proximity to the entire mideast, to much of Europe – particularly eastern Europe and it is in proximity to India, Pakistan and even China.
It is far more valuable than Diego Garcia – which if you think the US is ever leaving you are NUTS.
Regardless, Had Biden left in April as was negotiated – the mess we saw in august would not have happened.
“Didn’t get out our diplomats, their families and our allies BEFORE turning loose 5,000 Taliban;”
So ? The “Plan” was NOT to end diplomatic relations with Afghanistan.
“didn’t involve our Afghan allies in negotiations”
They are NOT our afghan allies. They were merely the government of the country at the time.
The Taliban was the political group challenging them for control of the country.
If the people of Afghanistan did not want the Taliban as goernment they would have stopped them.
If the Ghani govenrment wished to remain in power – it had more than two years to negotiate – or to prepare to fight the Taliban. The Taliban was OUTNUMBERED and OUTGUNNED by the official Afghan military. If they wanted a country – it was theirs to keep.
Both Republicans and Democrats have for decades operated under the delusion that you can impose democracy on people. The failure of that is self evident in the myriads of US foreign policy failures through my lifetime. Bush II promised NO MORE US NATION BUILDING – and then went on to be one of the most nation building presidents we have had – and all those nations are ash today.
The people of a country must WANT democracy, self government. They must be willing to die and kill for it.
The United States was born on April 19, 1775 – with the “shot heard round the world”. Before the declaration of independence we FOUGHT at lexington, Concord, and later Bunker Hill.
That is what is necescary to build a nation. The Afghans could have done that – they had MORE advantages than US colonists. That they did NOT is on them.
We do not owe the afghan people or the Ukrainian people or anyone else a country.
Those who want a country MUST do that on their own.
The Afghans had a chance and blew it.
“so they just gave up and let the Taliban take over.”
Right the Afghan Govenrment and the Afghan people GAVE UP and let the Taliban take over.
That is on THEM – not Trump, not Biden, not Obama, not Bush.
“Just HOW was Biden supposed to get people out with his hands tied like this?”
In April of 2021 Kabul Airport was entirely devoid of Taliban – as was Bagram.
Biden had 2500 US servicemen that he was OBLIGATED to get out – that is 10 flights of 250.
That would have been trivial.
We were NOT ending diplomatic relations with Afghanistan – so the Embassy could have stayed – but US personal should have been reduced – again NOT a huge deal.
Arguably there were about 100,000 Afghans with SOME role with the US, that we had some obligation too. But the same was true in Vietnam and other places that we left.
Regardless, if that is 400 flights – that is 2 per day from April until August.
This was never a difficult problem.
“Joe Biden was someone that our allies KNEW could be trusted.” — Still beating the dead-horse. Biden was not trusted; he was USED and mocked.
“Riddle me this: WHY did Russian bombing of Ukraine ramp up after Trump took office?” — There are many upticks and downturns in war.
“What “foreign policy disaster” has Trump “cleaned up?” — Armenia and Azerbaijan – August 2025
https://thepostmillennial.com/these-are-all-the-wars-trump-ended-so-far
Gee, isn’t it funny that all of these countries that Trump claims he saved say it isn’t true? Excerpted from “MSN”:
“The blind spots in Trump’s peacemaking record
Trump kept insisting Monday — as he tried finesse his adoption of Russia’s opposition to an immediate Ukraine ceasefire — that he was more interested in final deals.
Ironically however, some of his “six wars” deals are closer to ceasefires than peace agreements that permanently end generational disputes. And in the case of Iran and Israel, Trump’s claims to have made peace after their 12-day conflict are complicated by US involvement in strikes against Tehran’s nuclear program. While an informal truce is in place, there’s no sign a slow-boiling state of war involving all three nations since Iran’s Islamic Revolution in 1979 will end.
Trump is also conveniently forgetting his failed attempt to end the war between Israel and Hamas. And global outrage over reports of widespread starvation in Gaza and the president’s staunch support for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could thwart his hopes for a Nobel Prize — whatever happens with Ukraine.
His record is also blotted by the failure of his first-term peace efforts with North Korea. Leader Kim Jong Un now has more nuclear weapons than before Trump offered him fruitless, photo-op summits.”
From “PolitiFact”:
“The peace agreement between Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda is temporary and shaky. With Egypt and Ethiopia, there is no deal on the table. With Kosovo and Serbia, there’s little evidence he was significantly involved or that a major conflict was emerging.
India and Pakistan: U.S. influence is disputed
India and Pakistan’s leaders agreed to a ceasefire May 10 after days of military strikes between the two nuclear-armed countries. The conflict centered around the territorial dispute over Kashmir, a region in the northwestern part of the Indian subcontinent. India controls the central and southern portions and Pakistan controls the northern and western parts. The countries have fought over the territory since 1947.
Trump said the deal was reached after a “long night” of talks mediated by the U.S. Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif thanked Trump for his “leadership and proactive role.”
But Indian leaders disputed that Trump’s intervention factored into the ceasefire.
Hours after Trump took credit for the agreement, India Foreign Secretary Shri Vikram Misri announced May 10 that Pakistan’s director general of military operations had initiated a call with his Indian counterpart and both sides agreed to “stop all firing and military action on land and in the air and sea.” He did not mention the United States.
On July 30, India External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar rejected third-party mediation in the ceasefire, and said no foreign leader asked India to halt its military operations.
Israel and Iran: Ended with US bunker-busting bomb
On June 13, Israel launched surprise attacks on Iranian military and nuclear facilities that killed prominent politicians, military leaders and nuclear scientists. Iran responded with waves of missile and drone strikes against Israeli cities and military sites.
Israel’s goal of eliminating Iran’s nuclear capabilities led to U.S. involvement since it required bombing Iran’s heavily reinforced facilities at Fordo, where its uranium enrichment facility is buried deep underground. Trump authorized the U.S. military to bomb three Iranian nuclear sites, including Fordo, on June 21.
On June 24, Israel and Iran agreed to a ceasefire mediated by the U.S. and Qatar. Trump announced the deal on Truth Social on June 23: “It has been fully agreed by and between Israel and Iran that there will be a Complete and Total CEASEFIRE.”
Experts said it’s difficult to know how much influence Trump had in the talks but said his decision to bomb Iran likely ended the conflict more quickly.” Unilateral bombing that partially delayed Iran doesn’t count.
WHO ever heard of any conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan? More Trump hyperbole, driven by his insane jealousy over Barak Obama receiving the Nobel Peace Prize. Did you know that Trump keeps calling up the Nobel Peace Prize people and lobbying to receive the prize and keeps hammering allies to nominate him? It’s pathetic, really.
What you call Trump’s averting or delaying war, “hyperbole,” is beyond the pale when you compare it, in the same diatribe, to the useless and hypocritical chimera of the Obama “Nobel Peace Prize,” for which he did nothing be BE black. Obama peacefully drone-bombed more people than any other “president,” and you have the GALL to minimize a ceasefire—ask any soldier in the war pits of hell if a ceasefire is a welcome peace or not, you dolt.
“Gee, isn’t it funny that all of these countries that Trump claims he saved say it isn’t true? ”
Why do I care what people SAY is true ?
I care what is ACTUALLY True.
I certainly do not beleive anything from MSN
“From “PolitiFact”:”
ROFL
BTW every peace deal is shaky – until it isn’t
Trump told India and Pakistan to cut it out.
Neither India nor pakistan are going to risk the ire of a US president
Of course other world leaders are going to say they were not coerced into a deal.
No one admits to being coerced.
Regardless, Conflicts END under Trump.
What conflict did Biden end ? What conflict did Obama end ?
Not words, not left wing nut fact checkers or media
Actual facts.
The abraham accords are REAL.
The ending of conflicts is REAL.
The words of your sources are self serving and often just false.
Trumps words are also self serving – all politicians are.
People trust Trump’s words – not because he said them,
but because he did them.
I have little doubt there will be a peace deal with Ukraine,
it is just a question of time.
In the short run it will NOT be good for Ukraine – that is just a fact.
With there be a deal tomorow – probably not.
But soon enough.
And you know this too.
This war is not lasting 3 more years.
It is probably not lasting 3 more months.
But it is probably lasting 3 more days, 3 more weeks.
Soon enough there will be peace – and you know it.
There will also be peace in Gaza – either Hamas will be exterminated or surrender or they will strike a deal they will keep. Until that happens – the fighting will continue.
Europe is impotent – with respect to Ukraine, with respect tot he mideast.
In Gaza what matters is Iran – that Israel and the US have nuetered for the time being.
Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. The Gulf states are fed up with Hamas. They want peace,
They want their own deal with israel, they want to join the abraham accords – that is really good for all these countries. But it is politically difficult to do so with the palestinian conflict ongoing.
We all know you are a moron – and do not understand that SA as an example has excellent but mostly clandestin relations with Israel.
The Saudis Trust Trump. But they do NOT trust the US, and Trump will NOT always be president.
Iran is their threat – not Israel.
The gulf states are aligned with Israel regarding the threat posed by Iran.
When Iran launched rockets and drones at Israel – the Saudis and other gulf states helped the US and israel take them out.
The other Gulf states are privately ecstatic that the US and Israel clobbered Iran and set back their nuclear program.
These are FACTS not words.
They are also reasons that Qatar and SA are strong arming the palestinians.
Either that will work – or eventually the Gulf states will sign the abraham accords ANYWAY.
And that matters far more than anything that any EU nation says.
“Joe Biden was someone that our allies KNEW could be trusted. He built up relationships and trust over the course of several decades in public office.”
So WHERE WERE THOSE ALLIES ?
From early 2022 through late 2024 – I saw NO UK or French or German, or Polish or other EU troops in Ukraine. Some EU countries provided weapons and money to Ukraine – but with far more strings than the US attached. Poland sold Ukraine lots of old Soviet equipment in return for lots of money AND the US replacing polish equipment with modern american weapons.
The UK france and Germany provided aide – that WILL be repaid.
Do you think the US will see a penny of what we sent to Ukraine ?
If Joe thought he could trust our “allies” – he proved as wrong in that as everything else.
Europe can end this conflict in a minute just by sending troops.
Russia wins – at great cost, if it fights Ukraine alone or only with weapons from the rest of the world.
Russia inevitably uses the moment any significant western nation is prepared to send troops.
Where are significant European Troops ?
Biden was a moron and our “allies” actually thought of him as a demented clownish buffoon.
” After Trump’s first disasterous “presidency”, in which he publicly insulted our allies by essentially calling them “deadbeats”, trash-talked NATO and threatened to pull the US out of NATO”
Yes, Trump shamed NATO and he EU into paying a PART of their own defense.
“Putin believed that the US could not pull together a united front against him in the form of sanctions.”
And yet the sanctions under Trump were massive – one of Bidens problems was there were no consequential new sanctions to impose on Russia.
Regardless, Putin did not invade while Trump was president.
He invaded a full year after Biden took office – after Bidens disasterous Afghan wihdraw.
” THAT’S why he invaded Ukraine.”
Correct – Putin invaded Ukraine because Biden was Weak, incompetent and threatened things he could not pull off.
” He was wrong. Biden’s reputation and the trust he built over his political career mended the damage Trump did, and he not only got our allies to join in sanctioning Russia”
There were no consequential new sanctions of Russia under Biden. Russia was ALREADY about as isolated as a country could be. BTW that makes war MORE not less likely.
Russia invaded a neighbor when Clinton was president, when Bush was President when Obama was president and when Biden was president.
During Trump’s presidency NO COUNTRY – not Russia, not any consequential country invaded a neighbor.
Ordinary people are just not as stupid as you.
It is likely that European leaders liked Biden more than Trump – because they could roll over Biden.
But Europe and the world are better off and safer with Trump as president.
“Finland and Sweden, which were previously neutral, decided to join NATO.”
Yes – because with Russia invading Ukraine a NATO security guarantee had value.
I would note that Sweden and Finland have LONG prepared for the possibility of War with Russia.
Both have fought russia many times. Unlike most of the EU and NATO – Sweden and Finland actually have decent defense budgets and capabilities.
“NATO is stronger than ever, thanks to Joe Biden.”
ROFL
“Putin is afraid of NATO, which is why he’s trying to force Ukraine not to join. Putin KNOWS that if Ukraine joins NATO, he can’t win.”
Have you no understanding of reality ?
This war started BECAUSE The West engaged in stupid talk of Ukraine joining NATO.
Putin has invaded EVERY SINGLE neighbor to Russia that has EVER talked about joining NATO.
Putin occupied Crimea the last time that Obama, Clinton and Nuland discussed adding Ukraine to NATO.
Winning for Putin is litterally Ukraine NOT joining NATO – and the west understanding that NO nations adjoining Russia may join NATO. Putin has likely already won.
At the same time Putin has also already lost.
It will take more than a decade for Russia to recover from this war.
It probably will NEVER recover from this war.
Russia has the 2nd or 3rd worst demographics in the world – it has an aging and declining population.
It is a has been superpower and this is its last gasp.
No matter what is negotiated to reach peace – Ukraine will ultimately have the Donbas and Crimea returned to it. Russia will be too weak to continue to hold them over the next decade.
This is particularly true of Crimea. The war has proved that Crimea can not function independent of Ukraine.
Ukraine controls crimea’s water and many other critical resources. Even though there is little fighting in Crimea – Crimea has been devasted by this war – it is impoverished – Russians have been leaving Crimea in large numbers throughout the war. Crimea can not be supplied solely via the Kerch bridge – even if it was not severely damaged
“Riddle me this: WHY did Russian bombing of Ukraine ramp up after Trump took office? Putin is former KGB, and he knows how to pander to a narcissist with a fragile ego, so he said things Trump wanted to hear–like the 2020 election was “stolen” with fake mail-in ballots–which has been investigated over and over and over, and proven untrue; he also said that if Trump was in office he would not have invaded Ukraine–if that’s true, then why did’t he stop and why did the bombing and attacks get worse when Trump took office?”
The answer is that you have your facts wrong. Russia’s ability to “bomb” Ukraine has been declining – not increasing. There are BRIEF periods of increased russian (and Ukrainian) military activity – as each country looks for leverage in negotiations. But the FACT is that with a few exceptions – BOTH countries are reaching limits on supply – though this MIGHT be worse for Russia. Stockpiles have been exhausted – one of the dangers of US supply of Ukraine is that we have provided Ukraine with massive amounts of ammunition and severely diminished our own stock. Should a more important conflict arise – such as Taiwan, we would run out of lots of supplies quickly.
The good news is that Russia is similarly constrained – though Russia has huge stockpiles of many things – and greater ability to produce unsophisticated ammunition, it has expended more than it can produce and drained stockpiles – this is one of the reasons that Russia was buying amunition from North Korea.
They share a border and a rail connection and can not be sanctioned or embaroed
“What “foreign policy disaster” has Trump “cleaned up”?”
A long list.
Europe is paying much more of the cost of their own defense.
Despite the unrest in the Mideast under Biden – the nations of the mideast are QUIETLY looking for peace and looking to join the Abraham accords.
How Well did the Biden/Obama apeasement of Iran work ?
Iran is singly responsible for ALL the conflict in the mideast.
They Fund and ARM Every bad actor in the mideast.
” Trump is the CAUSE of foreign policy disasters”
You say that but you bring no real evidence to the table.
Trump’s first term saw the world move towards greater peace – Wile Obama and Biden (and Bush) all brought conflict and war.
Trump’s second term is cleaning up the mess left by Obama and Biden.
Trump is the cleanup crew for the disaster YOU made.
I would note that even Obama – after stupidity in the start of his term TRIED to reset relations wih Russia and Putin. One of the great idiocies of the collusion delusion is that Russia was in bed with the Clintons.
You forget Uranium One and the Clinton Foundation, and Bills engagements with Russia.
While the corruption involved in the Obama admin attempts to reach out to Russia is disturbing the FACT is that the US SHOULD have positive relations with Russia. There are LOTS of Evil Tyrants that we have decent relations with – Erodigan, MBS as a start. These are our ALLIES.
From the fall of the Berlin wall forward the US should have been looking for BETTER relations with Russia.
Instead we deliberately poisoned our relations with Russia – Why ? Because without a giant boogey monster most of the national security establishment has no reason to exist.
There is a very good reason why EVERYONE tied to the collusion delusion HOAX were people and agencies that BENEFITED from a hostile relationship with Russia.
Putin is not a good guy. We have LOTS of allies that are not good guys.
“he praised Putin as a “genius””
He likely is. As is Trump quite obviously.
“when the rest of the world knows he’s a murderer”
Two things can be rue at the same time.
“in fact the International Criminal Court has an arrest warrant out for Putin for murder.”
So ? Is the ICC sending a sherrif to Moscow ?
the ICC wants to arrest Netanyahu to.
Joe Biden couldn’t change his diaper!
@Gigi
At least you tried. 😔
I got a few words in and was reminded that anonymous comments are Trump derangement trash.
This is the moron who blamed Trump for Putin having invaded Ukraine in… 2014. That’s a mighty fine time machine Mr. Trump has, I wish that he would share it with the rest of us.
OldManFromKS,
Well said!! Gigi and her usual lies that amount to nothing.
Waah waah waah why can’t orange man bad Trump fix the mess that Biden created. You’re pathetic.
*. Crimea wars have always been. Kerch strait.
The Bering strait that Putin freely uses may not be available much longer?
Doesn’t look good. Putin doesn’t need any of it. What’s his motive.
War-mongers will be WAR-MONGERS….
Be wary of the man who urges action in which he himself incurs NO RISK ~ Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Listen, War-Monger, wars are deadly serious and they don’t end on arm-chair speculations or by furthering one-sided, moralistic, intrusions and offensive actions but over time. Hostilities end with diplomacy and: exploration of options and rationally-considered compromises, which can only be arrived-at via multiple sessions of compelling dialogue—this does not logically happen overnight. Your depth of analysis is barely 4th-grade level.
Thank you – but it requires MORE than diplomacy to end a war – the nations involved must WANT to end the war – or they must be defeated.
Ukraine WANTS to end the war – while they are fighting valiantly – they are losing a war of attrition.
Putin is paying a high cost – but it is a cost that he and the russian people are willing to bear.
Until that changes – any negotiated settlement MUST benefit Putin more than continuing the war.
No amount of flowery words will change that.
Russia was sanctioned to the hilt BEFORE this war started.
Saying sanctions 100 more times will not hurt Russia more than it already is.
What are we going to do – sanction the sale of monopoly peices to Russia ?
Wait we already have.
If we want a deal with Putin – he is going to get much of what he wants.
There is no deal otherwise.
it is that simple.
Putin can wait until he slowly utterly destroys Ukraine.
Ukraine can dream about getting back the Donbas and crimea
But that is not happening while Russia is strong enough to hold them.
ALL your points rational and true, but as to Anonymous-War-Monger’s accusations of hyperbole precarious ceasefires and hyperbole: diplomacy is a start, red-carpet and all [maybe even some flowery words]; no one [conservative] here, who advocates for PEACE, is dumb enough to think the crimes of war are so easily shunted aside by niceties, but these simple steps are where civility, so necessary to dialogue, begins.
YES, it requires more than “diplomacy” to end war. The point for the simplistic Anonymous-War-Monger was to help this fool see how the process of ending hostilities takes time and fast solutions [to loss of life and territory] are irrational and unrealistic—people have to be able to talk, first! The illogical push for fast solution is a ridiculous way of turning an early move in positive direction into a farce to bash Trump, a doltish response that is way out of bounds, especially in terms of the years-long Obama/Biden debacles of Crimea and the Donbas, in direct violation of the Minsk Agreements.
In what world, besides a leftist’s loony bin, does an army that has won territory have to give it back? They don’t. As Trump says [to “little” Zelensky], “you don’t hold the cards,” and Putin will get much of what he wants, but only if NATO stops funding Ukraine’s endlessly losing-campaign. A real-world deal with Ukaraine/Zelensky likely can’t happen with Europe still ready and willing to funnel money and boots to the drubbing.
BTW: I can’t tell you how proud I was to see our JETS fly over Putin’s head in Alaska, how he had to look up.
Let us unpack Gigi’s lies, shall we?
National security analyst Rebecca Grant said Trump got everything he wanted in Alaska. A meeting face to face with Putin. What they discussed is anyone’s guess but the results are clearly not a failure. Trump then arranged a meeting with Zelensky and several EU officials and the NATO secretary. During that meeting Trump paused, talked to Putin on the phone and there now appears to be a tentative three way meeting with Trump, Zelensky and Putin. Anyone with any degree of logic and common sense would call that “progress.”
You really think anyone can just invite themselves to a meeting in the Oval Office?
Based off that meeting, it was Trump who lead the EU, Zelensky and NATO around by their ears.
No American troops on the ground in the Ukraine. If it is going to be anyone, it has to be the EU and their troops as it should be. Time for them to start policing their own and stop expecting America to do it for them.
The Ukraine/Russia war has been going on three and a half years now. In those years how far has Russia advanced? At that rate it will take Russia at least another decade to take all of the Ukraine. And you think Putin is going to then march on, on Poland and the other Baltic countries?
Recent Gallup poll shows the majority of actual Ukrainians now want peace, even if it means giving up territory. And they want it now.
The Ukraine and Zelensky lost the war. IF they would of agreed to the Istanbul agreement back in March of 2022, the Ukraine would kept almost all of their territory. But no. Biden the Butcher sent Boris Johnson to squash the deal and to fight. And here we are today.
During his first term, Trump chastised NATO members for not spending 5% of their GDP for defense, like they are supposed to. Now, they are. Not for anything Biden did. No. It was Trump’s doing. Just recently Hillary Clinton even said getting NATO to spend that money on defense was Trump’s accomplishment. IIRC, in that same interview, Clinton also said if Trump could get a peace deal and end the war, SHE would nominate Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Right now, what security guarantees have yet to be determined.
However, with Trump’s proposals of backing not NATO but other EU countries to intervene on their behalf, while it may not be NATO article 5, it looks a lot like it, smells a lot like it. And he is NOT ruling out the idea of American air security. Knowing and seeing what Trump did on Iran, Putin knows this too.
Putting the responsibility on Trump for what two other people decide? What kind of logic is that? Trump is the one getting Zelensky and Putin to meet. A lot better than anything Biden did.
The problem with leftist morons like Gigi isn’t necessarily that they lying, although they certainly are liars. It’s that so many of them sincerely believe their own lies. It’s pathological.
USF – there will be a deal – not tomorow, possibly not in three weeks, but probably less than 3 months.
The deal will heavily favor Russia. As Trump told Zelensky – “you have no cards”.
Everyone – myself included hoped for a miracle in Ukraine.
We were encouraged by Ukraines early resistance.
There is no doubt that Ukraine is inflicting something like 3 times the causalties that they are taking.
But Russia is 5 times Ukraines population.
Russia will win a war of attrition barring a miracle. We have prayed for that miracle for 3 years. Those prayers were not answered.
The only thing that will change anything – is Europe committing lots of troops to fight russia in Ukraine.
That is NOT happening.
Ukraine is NOT a US interest.
But it ABSOLUTELY is a european security interest.
The US is not going to sacrifice our sons and daugthers for Ukraine.
Europe SHOULD – but they are not.
And unless they are – Ukraine loses. They either lose the war, or they get a raw deal in a negotiated peace.
John Say,
Well said and spot on! Good to see the reality of the situation and not the lies and garbage from MSM.
What nonsense !
After more than a million deaths with Biden doing nothing – beyond assuring there will be more deaths
Trump is trying to do something. The same is true in the mideast.
This is proving harder than Trump promised – but as Salena Zito noted in 2015
Trump’s supporters take him seriously but not literally.
Trumps detractors take him literally but not seriously.
The process of acheiving peace – in the mideast or Ukraine will be hard, and it is unlikely anyone will like the deal.
But it is likely to occur under Trump. While under Harris or Biden then dying would have continued endlessly.
I am not sure how you determine that the Alaska summit was a disaster. It appears to have gone well enough.
I have no idea what Russian media are saying – nor do I care. I am sure Russian media is saying whatever Putin wants them to say.
As to the EU and NATO – If they wish to offer Zelensky a better deal that Trump can negotiate – most of this country – including Trump supporters are fine with that.
The War in Ukraine will be over quickly – if the UK, Germany, France, Poland, Spain, … choose to send troops to fight the russians in Ukraine. Russia will win a war of attrition which is where we are against Ukraine – there is no magic bullet that changes that. Russia will lose a war of attrition with Ukraine the moment even a single european country with significant population agrees to put boots on the ground.
The EU and NATO can SAY anything. What matters is what they DO.
Ukraine is NOT a US interest. We are NOT going to send troops.
It is a European interest – Europe SHOULD be sending troops.
No the russian invasion of Ukraine does not bear any resemblance to WWII – it bears far more resemblance to WWI – and Germany LOST a war of attrition. Russia will win if the war is confined to russian soldiers fighting ukrainian soldiers. And it will lose if any significant part of Europe sends troops.
Further unlike WWII – NO MATTER WHAT – Russia ends this conflict WEAKER
Do you really expect that Russia is invading Poland or Finland Next ?
“IMHO, the worst gaffe is Trump giving away the store right up front, by announcing that no US troops would be “boots on the ground””
Are you prepared to send US troops to fight Russians in Ukraine ? Are you prepared to see hundreds of US soldiers returning home in caskets everyday ? This war is NOT the scale of WWI or WWII, but it is huge compared to vietnam, or Korea, or even the US civil War.
“that Ukraine would have to give up territory to get Russia to stop murdering its citizens”
Yes, that is what is going to happen. Anyone not brain dead has KNOWN that since the first day of this fight.
Ukraine has done a remarkable job fighting Russia. They have proven that Russia is a paper tiger.
But all the high tech weapons in the world and all the billions of aide will STILL result in the same thing that was true day one – that Ukraine will lose absent boots on the ground from other countries.
“that Ukraine could not join NATO.”
Correct – the US promissed Russia that NATO would not come within 1000km of Russia as the berlin wall fell.
Every single time that the west has discussed NATO admission for a country bordering Russia – Russia has invaded that country. EVERY TIME. For Russia that is EXACTLY like the cuban missle crisis in 1963,
The US threatened global nuclear war to prevent Russian weapons from going to Cuba.
This is no different.
” Trump even said that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was Zelenskyy’s fault for saying that Ukraine wanted to join NATO. ”
Actually it was Biden and Obama and Clinton, and Nuland – the same people that provoked Russia into occupying Crimea.
“Trump just took away any incentive for Putin to do anything but continue the drone strikes and ballistic missiles, which he is deliberately sending into civilian areas. 14 Ukrainians just lost their lives in the latest bombing of a civilian target.”
Trump did not take anything away that was not already gone.
If YOU wish to fight in Ukraine – you are free to go.
YOU are NOT free to send my son or daughter thousands of miles to fight in a meaningless war that has NO US interest at stake.
“The only way to stop Putin is to convince him that he will lose.”
No the way to stop Putin is to convince him the peace is better for him and Russia than War – that is much easier to sell, because it is true.
“The only way to convice Putin that he will lose is to: 1. let him know that US troops may well join our NATO and EU allies to defend Ukraine;”
ROFL – the US need not join NATO and EU allies in defending Ukraine – if the EU sends 50,000 troops o Ukraine – the war is over and Russia will lose. They are not doing that, neither is the US.
Putin KNOWS that, you are not going to convince him otherwise.
“2. that Putin has no right to dictate whether Ukraine joins NATO”
Correct, but unless you are prepared to send other peoples sons and daughters to die to defend Ukraines rights that is still meaningless.
“that is the right of any sovereign nation;”
Correct, but unless you are prepared to send other peoples sons and daughters to die to defend Ukraines rights that is still meaningless.
“Putin doesn’t want Ukraine to be part of NATO because that would puncture his dreams of reconstituting the former USSR”
That may be true – but that is just a dream and even Putin knows it. Putin has not invaded Ukraine as the first step to fullfill an impossible dream. He did so to preclude them from joining NATO.
;”3. that Putin will NOT be rewarded for invading Ukraine and starting this war by being allowed to keep part of Ukrainian territory.”
Again – unless you are sending our sons and daughter to fight russians in ukraine that is what is ALWAYS what was going to happen.
” Instead of doing these things, Trump is siding with Putin–he even said to Emanuel Macron that Putin will probably stop bombing Ukraine because he likes Trump so much. the meeting between Zelenskyy and Putin will also fail. Trump bears responsibility.”
Trump did not start this war – Biden in cahoots with the Obama idiotic foreign policy crowd did.
This are the people who screwed up in Iran, and the rest of the mideast and whose actions cost Ukraine Crimea.
These are the people at Fault.
Trump is cleaning up YOUR mess. The cleanup is not pretty – that is YOUR fault.
I have to laugh. How many high-school kids will run around looking at signs on parking places. Bet zero.
Most have their cell-phones in their face.
-Dem-o-rats just love to complain about nothing. Now you know the name KAREN came from.
@Dustoff
Yes. Precisely zero. It’s absolutely ridiculous. That said, a part of me doesn’t blame them for the a$$ covering – a lot of parents will sue a school at the drop of a hat these days, and in the former climate (remains to be seen how things would go post-Obama years), they’d win, and did, many times. It’s a more complex problem.
For years, the Left insisted that squeaky wheels like Madalyn Murray O’Hair or Jane Doe should set the standard for what is universally acceptable and what is not. If it offends them (school prayer), then banned. If it amuses them (abortion), then it’s ok. IMHO, this was not justice but rather the Justices selectively enforcing their liberal, social preferences.
Interestingly in this parking-lot case, the argument made by school officials reverses the established logic: we shouldn’t allow anything that might encourage squeaky wheels to erupt with antisocial expressions, but as usual, the effect will be to serve the sensibilities of the Left, not the Right. Religious expression, even mainstream, can be banned by school officials based on what squeaky wheels MIGHT do.
The logical extension of past rulings is that Neo-Nazis, Satanists, and gang bangers should be free to express themselves in parking lots just like anybody else. One might argue that unlimited, free expression does not apply to minors, but that argument only complicates the question. Which adults are allowed to set the standards?
And parking lots aren’t the real issue because schools are supposed to encourage creativity. Even if school officials drop this parking-lot nonsense, what about art class? Can they selectively ban certain sentiments there?
This is a complicated question, but I think the bans on religion in schools are arbitrary. Secular cults in schools have become a thing and can be as divisive as any religion.
Diogenes – your comment made me think of something I had forgotten about. My parents of blessed memory were liberal Democrats. In the 2000 election cycle they were aghast that Bush Jr. would go into conservative churches and speak, pleasing the congregation with the things he stood for as a politician. The expressed that Bush wanted a theocracy. I pointed out that Gore went into liberal churches and did the same thing. They didn’t mind that.
If the left didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have any standards at all.
Yep, as hullbobby often calls it: “doublestandardstan.”
This story is dull. Do this instead: https://nypost.com/2025/08/19/us-news/enraged-pal-of-arrested-ri-prosecutor-was-trying-to-slow-things-down-when-s-t-hit-the-fan-during-trespassing-bust-lawyer/
There is one thing that may pose a problem for the student. The only reason students are allowed to decorate the parking space is if they pay a fee to reserve it as their own. Technically that is a privilege. The school could theoretically refuse to accept the fee of they thought the student would put something the school did not think would be in the school’s interest. Parking on school property is not a right and neither is having a parking space. It’s a privilege given to students. Because a school could close it’s parking lots to students and just have parents drop them off at the main entrance. Parents could demand the school allow parking. But decorating public property could also be considered defacing public property if a student decided to decorate a space as their own. Paying the fee gives the student a privilege granted by the school.
Professor Turley never posted the school rules on the practice. That would be a key document should this issue go to court.
Ano
Professor Turley never posted the school rules
*********************
Cause just maybe, they had none. Till now.
Or maybe because Professor Turley was being lazy. If you have to pay a fee to reserve a parking space for personal use and decorate it there are going to be rules dictating what can and cannot be put on them. Common sense dictates there are rules and the professor did not cite them.
“Common sense dictates there are rules and the professor did not cite them.”
Do let us know when common sense becomes the law, thanks.
ANO
Or maybe because Professor Turley was being lazy
***********************
So with no proof, you smear Turley.
Low IQ
DustOff,
The real question is who is the lazy one? The annoy moron smears the good professor then does not provide a link to the school rules of the topic.
*. Hello dust, yes, PT did post as: prohibit offensive language, pictures or symbols.
The school officials think religious language, pictures and symbols fit the prohibition.
As a rule of thumb, when in doubt fit in BLM with a picture of clenched raised fist and no justice no peace. Then there is the great patriot Larry Flynt for everything else.
Two roads diverged in a yellow wood long I stood and looked down both to where one bent in the undergrowth and took the other…
They’re crucifying Jesus Christ again? Stephanie is innocent in such a case. People always hate it when they’re told not to steal, cheat, lie, trespass and murder. Go figure…
*. It’s ghastly that Sabrina thought it appropriate to park her car over a religious picture, biblical verse, and religious symbols.
It’s so nuts 🤪. Folks, they’re simple laws about what people will do without laws. It’s weird.
It makes no difference whether it’s a right or a privilege. If the school allows students to decorate their own parking spaces then it has created a public forum and while its regulation of that forum need not be content-neutral it must be value-neutral, and it must also not discriminate against religion — any religion or religion in general. The fact that it charges a fee makes no difference.
On the other hand if it is the school doing the decorating then it can argue that it’s government speech, and it has more leeway.