INFO: What is the case at hand?

I mean, if a guy posted the same stuff about Joe Biden, tried to break into the White House with a pistol, but was stopped before he could pull the trigger, would you call that an assassination attempt? I sure would - he wanted to kill the guy so he went there to do the deed. What other reason would someone have to hide in the bushes on someone else’s property with a gun for 12 hours?

Dude was apparently waiting in the bushes for 12 hours. You don’t do that if you’re not waiting for someone or something. The Second Amendment doesn’t give you the right to camp out on someone else’s property with a gun.

If by “democracy” you mean the broad philosophy of people having a right to decide the law for themselves in some way, then I would argue that it’s better than even a “good” dictator. Dictators can be fickle, capricious, manipulative, and more while appearing to be utterly golden individuals outwardly. What happens when culture changes but the dictator doesn’t like where it’s going and refuses to change his ways? Is he still “good”? And as others have mentioned, how do you quantify “good” anyhow? You’re appealing to a moral standard presumably outside the law, so what happens when that standard doesn’t match what the people believe?

So like Facebook?

I used to wear KN95s every day as a cashier during the height of the pandemic. It was noticeably more difficult to breathe through them, especially when I was working carts duty in the dead of winter. It also doesn’t help that masks like this would need to be replaced pretty frequently for maximum effect because the moisture of my breaths will make them wet after a period of time. I could feel the condensation building in my mask throughout my 4-6 hour shifts.

Oh yeah, and if you want your mask to work properly, don’t have a beard. Those will impair the filtration because air will get through your beard instead of your mask.

I feel the same way. The cost of getting sick for a week (however one measures that) is considerably less than that of getting a new batch of N95s or even just surgical masks every so often and wearing a new one every day.

Socially responsible, not criminally responsible. If I’m a parent and my kids are hanging out with another family, and I find out that my kid keeps getting smacked around by the other family’s kids, then I’m not gonna bring my kid over to that family any longer. Sucks to be them. Same deal here. If we start discouraging people from atomizing into the smallest possible family units so they can spend more time together, it’ll reduce demand for real estate, power consumption, all sorts of things. It’s how we’ve lived for centuries, fleeing your state the minute you turn 18 isn’t something that was done much until recently.

Mostly I’m just annoyed at books that are inaccurately titled and people who expect schools to teach children absolutely everything.

I do want a better experience for children, and I will gladly support them. This is partly a cost of living problem, but just as much a problem is people tuning out and deciding not to raise their kids any longer; you can see this from the entire genre of videos online where teachers talk about how Gen Alpha is barely literate, if that.

Oh, I know I want good parents. That much is painfully obvious. If my worst problem was that I was bored with my life, that would be great.

But again, where does it end? We need to draw the line somewhere and start holding people accountable for how they raise their kids. We need families to unite and provide for children however they can, even if that just means grandma watches them play when they’re home. Any little bit helps. We’re so atomized in America that maintaining a healthy family structure, much less raising children effectively, is difficult. The end result is that teachers are struggling to keep up and becoming burnt out. It would be better for everyone if people could just teach their children non-academic stuff instead of expecting someone else to do it for them.

Actually, I don’t want everyone to have parents like me. My parents divorced when I was too young to remember why and neither has explained why it happened. I want parents to actually teach their children how to live healthy lives. School has its place, but if you want school to teach children everything, then you might as well send them to boarding schools the minute they can string together coherent sentences.

How is it biased to call out people who don’t raise their children right? I probably should have mentioned the role that extended family can and should play in raising a child, but still. They can pick up the slack; we shouldn’t expect schools to have to do so. We as a society should stop accepting that families will just throw their kids in an institution, leave it at that, and hope for the best.

Schools should be very defined in what they teach people. Parents, or more broadly, families, know the kids best and how they learn. They should be able to give the kids a much more individualized education on the wisdom aspects of life. If we broaden the scope of schools to include pretty much everything children need to know, then we’d be better off shipping off our kids to boarding schools and washing our hands of the whole parenting problem.

I said “should,” not “will.” This post is more an indictment of idiots, abusers, and sloths who decide to become parents, than it is a jab at this particular genre of nonfiction. It’s more popular to say “school should have taught me this” than “my parents should have taught me this.”