• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Trump’s Domestic Use of Military Set to Get Worse, Leaked DHS/DoD Memo Shows: LA "hasn't been perfect" but indicates what's coming "for years to come"

eclipsenow

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works
Dec 17, 2010
10,169
2,691
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟215,912.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Look out Democratic cities.
He's going to be in a bad mood today - what happened was far worse than getting shampoo in his eyes!

They gave the Nobel Peace prize to someone else!
But he's the very definition of it!

It goes to ... “the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”

And they refused Trump? Can you imagine!?

All Trump has done is:-
* break the law and become America's first convicted felon President,
* defraud New York City of real estate taxes to the tune of nearly half a billion dollars,
* harass and assault women,
* hang out with Jeffrey Epstein and then repeatedly promise to release the Epstein files the moment he got into office,
* and then stubbornly, repeatedly refuse to release the Epstein files the moment he got into office,
* dog whistle to the "Proud boys, stand back and stand by",
* paint every immigrant as being either insane, a criminal, or a rapist,
* inflame racism across the USA with his constant harping on about immigrants - even using the phrase 'poisoning the blood of the nation',
* deny due democratic process in the 2020 election,
* shout this Big Lie so loud and wide and often across the land it incited an attempted insurrection on Jan 06,
* attack free speech and call any critical media article 'fake news',
* demand comedians get banned from their networks,
* reduce access to the Press Room for balanced objective media like Reuters,
* threaten NATO, threaten to let Putin do 'whatever the hxxx he wants',
* largely defund Ukraine trying to defend itself,
* embarrass America and what it stands for with that sulky tantrum with Zelenskyy in the Oval Office,
* completely misread Putin and think their 'bromance' would result in peace,
* but instead he gave the dictator and war-monger the red carpet treatment - which resulted in NOTHING,
* threaten 'vengeance' on political opponents,
* weaponize the DOJ with a tinfoil hat conspiracy theorist at the top & the same for sub-departments like the FBI,
* put an anti-vaxxer in charge of health,
* pull out of any climate agreements,
* lie about climate science and climate scientists - and spread conspiracy theories that result in climate scientists getting death threats,
* threaten to invade Greenland if necessary, absorb Canada, invade the Panama Canal, and generally act like an entitled bully on the world stage,
* whack illegal and vengeful tariffs on any nation he felt was 'unfair' (not understanding that buying cheap products was its own reward),
* appoint Hegseth as head of the military to fire any 'woke' Generals and Admirals who would not swear allegiance to their domestic political agenda,
* fire missiles on Venezuelan boats - whether they knew precisely who was in those boats or not,
* lie about Democrat cities being 'on fire' and 'looking like something from WW2.'
* illegally invade US cities with the National Guard!
* support Israel over the Palestinians for a disproportionately long time, enabling tens of thousands of deaths to occur under his watch,
* threatened to 'abolish' Palestine - as if Trump is the ultimate power in world affairs! He threatened to move ALL Palestinians out of Gaza into neighbouring countries, ignoring that Palestinian Muslims, Christians and Jews had lived peacefully together for 4 Centuries under the Ottoman Empire (1517 to 1917). (It just sounds so racist. Why not just say "They all look the same to me - so 'just' send them all over the place into neighbouring countries!")
* could only think of the Palestinian territory as one of his real estate cons, “the Riviera of the Middle East.” Forget all this international law stuff! (The UN established there should be two states on 29th Nov 1947 - so Israel went to war the next day and took 60% of the allocated Palestinian land!)
* Sulked as international will bent in sympathy to the Gazans, and said that the UK, France, Canada and Australia were all rewarding terrorists when we recognised Palestine as a state,
* Finally caved in to international will and developed a 20 point ceasefire plan as the images of ethnic cleansing and starving children finally caught his attention. *
* But the 20 point plan is not a durable, long term PEACE plan because it ignores the West Bank where illegal Israeli settlement-occupation and persecution is turning that area into the world's largest concentration camp - holding 3.4 MILLION Palestinians hostage in their own land!

Other than that - he's a great guy! He said he is!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

bèlla

❤️
Site Supporter
Jan 16, 2019
23,326
19,406
USA
✟1,133,346.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
In Relationship
Hegseth Asked About Reported Memo Detailing 'National Guard Response Force' Trained In Crowd Control

During a press conference on Thursday, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth was asked about a reported memo calling for the establishment a national guard response force trained in crowd control.

~bella

 
Upvote 0

eclipsenow

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works
Dec 17, 2010
10,169
2,691
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟215,912.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
If they replaced the JAG lawyers who were fired? Aren't these lawyers the ones that tell the military yes or no on whether or not orders from the president are legal?
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
43,932
46,941
Los Angeles Area
✟1,048,483.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Just a note that there are still active National Guard in Los Angeles. And several other cities, obviously.

Given the justification that there 'is crime' in these cities, there is no sign of an end of these deployments.

Tennessee governor predicts lengthy Memphis crime fight

Gov. Bill Lee says federal presence could “last forever”​

Lee has said repeatedly the mission will continue until Memphis streets are safe.

At a Memphis press conference, Lee said the operation’s success will be measured by the reduction of violent crime but gave no specific targets.

Memphis Crime Drops to Historic 25-Year Low Across Major Categories

The Memphis Police Department reports historic crime reductions, with decreases across all major categories in the first eight months of 2025 compared to the same period in previous years.
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
43,932
46,941
Los Angeles Area
✟1,048,483.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)

Trump warns he will send ‘more than National Guard' to some U.S. cities ‘if we need'

The president did not specify what he meant by "more than the National Guard" and did not name particular cities, though his comment came just after he spoke about Chicago.​

" Whether people like that or not, that’s what we’re doing," he said.

"What we are doing is we are going to make it totally safe. It'll be very safe, very soon. And we are going to do that with all of our cities that are in trouble."
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
43,932
46,941
Los Angeles Area
✟1,048,483.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)

Supreme Court wants more time and information before deciding if Trump can send National Guard to Chicago

The Supreme Court on Wednesday took the rare step of asking for additional briefing in a high-profile, emergency case challenging President Donald Trump’s deployment of the National Guard to Chicago, questioning whether those troops can be used under the federal law at issue to augment immigration officials.

“Although we can’t know for sure, the order certainly seems like a bad sign for President Trump,” said Steve Vladeck, CNN legal analyst and professor at Georgetown University Law Center. “There would be no need for the Supreme Court to ask the parties to address this question if five justices had already agreed to vote for the federal government on one of the other two possible grounds.”

The call for additional written arguments is almost certainly a response to a brief submitted in the case by a Georgetown University Law Center professor, Martin Lederman, who suggested the law Trump is relying on to deploy the Guard to the Chicago area doesn’t apply to civilian law enforcement agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Rather, Lederman argued, the National Guard can only be called forth under that law to augment regular military forces. In its order Wednesday, the Supreme Court asked the Department of Justice and officials in Illinois to address that very issue in a series of new briefs due through mid-November.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eclipsenow
Upvote 0

eclipsenow

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works
Dec 17, 2010
10,169
2,691
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟215,912.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married

Supreme Court wants more time and information before deciding if Trump can send National Guard to Chicago

The Supreme Court on Wednesday took the rare step of asking for additional briefing in a high-profile, emergency case challenging President Donald Trump’s deployment of the National Guard to Chicago, questioning whether those troops can be used under the federal law at issue to augment immigration officials.

“Although we can’t know for sure, the order certainly seems like a bad sign for President Trump,” said Steve Vladeck, CNN legal analyst and professor at Georgetown University Law Center. “There would be no need for the Supreme Court to ask the parties to address this question if five justices had already agreed to vote for the federal government on one of the other two possible grounds.”

The call for additional written arguments is almost certainly a response to a brief submitted in the case by a Georgetown University Law Center professor, Martin Lederman, who suggested the law Trump is relying on to deploy the Guard to the Chicago area doesn’t apply to civilian law enforcement agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Rather, Lederman argued, the National Guard can only be called forth under that law to augment regular military forces. In its order Wednesday, the Supreme Court asked the Department of Justice and officials in Illinois to address that very issue in a series of new briefs due through mid-November.
What's your gut feel on this?

Also - what do you make of the mass firing of the top legal / JAG across the military?
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
43,932
46,941
Los Angeles Area
✟1,048,483.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
What's your gut feel on this?
IANAL, so my gut isn't worth much, but it seems to me that there has to be an emergency to call out the Guard, and there just isn't one in any of these cities.

It reminds me of a story (largely true) about Abraham Lincoln.

Abraham Lincoln faced with some thorny issue that could be settled by a twist of language, or a slight abuse of power, asks his questioner how many legs would a dog have, if we called the dog’s tail, a leg. “Five,” the questioner responds confident in his mathematical ability to do simple addition.

“No,” Lincoln says. “Calling a dog’s tail a leg, doesn’t make it a leg.”
Also - what do you make of the mass firing of the top legal / JAG across the military?
The firings of lawyers at DOJ and in the military is terrible. Particularly in the DOJ where Trump's chosen replacements are unqualified.

As I've said elsewhere...

The only qualification for a federal job right now is passing a political litmus test to support Trump.

Competence is not needed.
Having appeared on television is a big plus.
We want lawyers to seek Justice and uphold the law; Trump wants them to get the result he wants. If you say there's not enough evidence to charge Letitia James, you're fired and Trump will find someone who will do it.
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
43,932
46,941
Los Angeles Area
✟1,048,483.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)

'Quick reaction' National Guard forces to be trained for civil disturbances by 2026, US officials say

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The National Guard is planning to train hundreds of troops in each state to be part of a rapid-response force focused on civil disturbance missions by the start of next year, two U.S. officials said on Wednesday.

President Donald Trump has increasingly embraced using the military to support his domestic agenda, including deploying troops to Democratic-led cities like Los Angeles; Portland, Oregon, and Washington, D.C.

The latest move follows an executive order signed by Trump in August, which called for each state to have National Guard troops who could be quickly deployed for "quelling civil disturbances and ensuring the public safety and order."

It is unclear how the force would be different from existing quick-reaction forces already available to each state.

During a trip to Japan earlier this week, Trump told U.S. troops he was prepared to send "more than the National Guard" into U.S. cities if needed.
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
43,932
46,941
Los Angeles Area
✟1,048,483.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)

National Guard troops briefly deployed to Portland despite judge’s order, federal trial reveals

“At 11:35 PDT today, a force of nine MPs arrived at the ICE facility in downtown Portland, Oregon where they assumed their first support mission,” wrote Col. Jeff Merenkov at 3:28 p.m. on Oct. 4.

The email included a schedule that showed the troops’ “shift conclusion” was set for midnight.

Jean Lin, special counsel for the Justice Department, confirmed the deployment to the U.S. District Court Judge Karin Immergut on Wednesday but provided few specifics — minutes before the trial began.

“We’ll talk later about whether that’s contempt,” the judge responded to Lin Wednesday.

During opening statements, the city of Portland’s Caroline Turco told Immergut the evidence at trial would show the federal government has untapped law enforcement resources that could be sent to the ICE building. She also said, so far, the local public safety system has been well equipped to handle any unlawfulness associated with the protests.

Turco told Immergut, the city of Portland “does not need the National Guard.”

Those sentiments were echoed by the Oregon Department of Justice’s Scott Kennedy, who said the military cannot perform the same role as domestic law enforcement and told Immergut the case “is a test of the outer bounds of presidential authority.”

California Deputy Attorney General Jane Reilley argued the rights of the state were infringed on when the Trump administration pulled 200 of her state’s National Guard soldiers “out of California and sent them across state lines to Portland over the objections of both states’ governors for no other reason than to contravene this court’s temporary restraining order.”
 
Upvote 0

eclipsenow

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works
Dec 17, 2010
10,169
2,691
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟215,912.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
IANAL, so my gut isn't worth much, but it seems to me that there has to be an emergency to call out the Guard, and there just isn't one in any of these cities.

It reminds me of a story (largely true) about Abraham Lincoln.

Abraham Lincoln faced with some thorny issue that could be settled by a twist of language, or a slight abuse of power, asks his questioner how many legs would a dog have, if we called the dog’s tail, a leg. “Five,” the questioner responds confident in his mathematical ability to do simple addition.

“No,” Lincoln says. “Calling a dog’s tail a leg, doesn’t make it a leg.”

I love a good Winston Churchill quote and a good Abraham Lincoln story!

But sadly this brings to mind a New York Times piece about what America has done to itself by electing Trump a second time. Now that the world is dealing with Trump unleashed, this New York Times article said America could elect Abraham Lincoln himself for the next administration, and the rest of us would still be reluctant to engage America because how long until they reelected another Trump?

The firings of lawyers at DOJ and in the military is terrible. Particularly in the DOJ where Trump's chosen replacements are unqualified.

As I've said elsewhere...


We want lawyers to seek Justice and uphold the law; Trump wants them to get the result he wants. If you say there's not enough evidence to charge Letitia James, you're fired and Trump will find someone who will do it.
I cannot think of another modern OECD leader who has revolted me as much as this man and his petty vindictive malignant narcissism. When Australia had an election this year and reelected our labour leader, Trump's comments were not about the great alliance between these two nations, or trade, or anything of material importance to the normal way great statesman speak about each other. It was the usual self-congratulatory assessment that America's relationship with Australia would be great because... Wait for it... "Anthony has said nice things about me!"

I know in my head it's an incurable disorder - but I just find it so revolting. He's constantly seeking his next heat of narcissistic supply. It's like he's reporting to us - the audience - "See Mum and Dad? That man said nice things about me!"
 
Upvote 0

bèlla

❤️
Site Supporter
Jan 16, 2019
23,326
19,406
USA
✟1,133,346.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
In Relationship
The rapid response National Guard deadline is January 1st.

The Trump administration has ordered states to create rapid-response National Guard units, or "quick reaction forces," trained specifically for civil disturbances, with a January 1, 2026, deadline. These forces will be capable of rapid nationwide deployment, will receive 100 sets of crowd control equipment and training support from the National Guard Bureau, and will be required to participate in a specialized "Interservice Nonlethal Individual Weapons Instructor Course" focused on crowd management. The order has faced legal challenges regarding deployments in cities like Chicago and Portland.

Key details of the rollout
  • Deadline: January 1, 2026, for each state and territory's force to be operational.
  • Personnel: The goal is to have 500 personnel assigned to each state's quick-reaction force.
  • Purpose: This initiative is an attempt to prepare for potential rapid deployment to address civil disturbances across the nation.
  • Existing forces: It is not entirely clear if the new "quick-reaction forces" are in addition to or a larger version of existing rapid-response forces already used for natural disasters and other emergencies
Why would you need that unless you’re anticipating a problem or creating one.?

~bella
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Hans Blaster
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
24,861
5,579
46
Oregon
✟1,115,840.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
The rapid response National Guard deadline is January 1st.

The Trump administration has ordered states to create rapid-response National Guard units, or "quick reaction forces," trained specifically for civil disturbances, with a January 1, 2026, deadline. These forces will be capable of rapid nationwide deployment, will receive 100 sets of crowd control equipment and training support from the National Guard Bureau, and will be required to participate in a specialized "Interservice Nonlethal Individual Weapons Instructor Course" focused on crowd management. The order has faced legal challenges regarding deployments in cities like Chicago and Portland.

Key details of the rollout
  • Deadline: January 1, 2026, for each state and territory's force to be operational.
  • Personnel: The goal is to have 500 personnel assigned to each state's quick-reaction force.
  • Purpose: This initiative is an attempt to prepare for potential rapid deployment to address civil disturbances across the nation.
  • Existing forces: It is not entirely clear if the new "quick-reaction forces" are in addition to or a larger version of existing rapid-response forces already used for natural disasters and other emergencies
Why would you need that unless you’re anticipating a problem or creating one.?

~bella
So much for freedom in our country.

"Soon, your ability to mock the President will be revoked permanently", etc.

"Because the President's ego, should (and very soon will) take precedents over everything", etc.

"All will submit to the President's ego, or be declared enemies of the state", etc.

What a fragile man, etc.

The right to criticize or be critical of anyone, is supposed to be a protected right in this country, etc.

But, sadly, it soon won't be, etc.

And that's what this is really about here, so don't fool or kid yourself or anything.

God Bless.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
24,861
5,579
46
Oregon
✟1,115,840.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
So much for freedom in our country.

"Soon, your ability to mock the President will be revoked permanently", etc.

"Because the President's ego, should (and very soon will) take precedents over everything", etc.

"All will submit to the President's ego, or be declared enemies of the state", etc.

What a fragile man, etc.

The right to criticize or be critical of anyone, is supposed to be a protected right in this country, etc.

But, sadly, it soon won't be, etc.

And that's what this is really about here, so don't fool or kid yourself or anything.

God Bless.
Really, he needs to learn how to ignore all of the criticism really, instead of letting them all live in his head rent free, as it/they don't really matter ultimately anyway, and just focus on doing his job, or the task at hand really, etc.

But I think we all know he can't do that ultimately, which just shows his big, huge ego really, and how ultimately fragile he is as a human being really. But all of the critics don't really ever matter really, which is something he hasn't learned yet ultimately, etc.

But if he ever does, he could maybe even laugh with them really, etc, because nothing of what they ever say or do ever really matters in the end ultimately anyway, etc.

They don't make the decisions, but you do, so what then are you really genuinely concerned about really anyway? They've never decided any of the decisions ultimately, etc.

Our President just needs to chill the heck out and learn how to relax just a little bit really. Their opinions are always "here today, gone tomorrow" when you learn how to ignore them properly, etc.

Focusing on all of your critics, especially when you occupy the highest seat in the land, is never really ever very beneficial to anyone really, and is also not very realistic, etc, because anyone in that position is always going to have critics, etc. But they are also like the wind, and never get to decide not one single thing ultimately, but only you get to do that ultimately, which is why you shouldn't give them so much of your attention really, etc.

Or maybe let me put this another way maybe? When you give that much attention to all of your critics, which you're always going to have BTW, it's almost like you're putting them in the driving or deciding seat, and are letting them make your decisions for you really, etc, and do you really want to be doing that all of the time really, etc?

So, don't let them at all influence you or make all of your decisions for you really, etc. They're going to talk, so let them talk, because none of it really matters in the end anyway, etc, unless you make it matter, etc, but which is the same thing as letting them make all of your decisions for you really, etc.

All of your decisions then become "reactions" instead of "actions" ultimately, which is letting them dictate or decide for you ultimately, which won't ever be good for anybody, etc.

You need to learn to say "No" to all the temptations/urges that put them in the driver's seat or deciding seat IOW's, etc, and this would be my advice for anybody who ever has had/does have any kind of opposing voices or critics always, etc. Don't yield that seat, but keep it for yourself, etc. Only then can you make a decision that is solely yours, etc.

God Bless.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Site Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
24,861
5,579
46
Oregon
✟1,115,840.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
Really, he needs to learn how to ignore all of the criticism really, instead of letting them all live in his head rent free, as it/they don't really matter ultimately anyway, and just focus on doing his job, or the task at hand really, etc.

But I think we all know he can't do that ultimately, which just shows his big, huge ego really, and how ultimately fragile he is as a human being really. But all of the critics don't really ever matter really, which is something he hasn't learned yet ultimately, etc.

But if he ever does, he could maybe even laugh with them really, etc, because nothing of what they ever say or do ever really matters in the end ultimately anyway, etc.

They don't make the decisions, but you do, so what then are you really genuinely concerned about really anyway? They've never decided any of the decisions ultimately, etc.

Our President just needs to chill the heck out and learn how to relax just a little bit really. Their opinions are always "here today, gone tomorrow" when you learn how to ignore them properly, etc.

Focusing on all of your critics, especially when you occupy the highest seat in the land, is never really ever very beneficial to anyone really, and is also not very realistic, etc, because anyone in that position is always going to have critics, etc. But they are also like the wind, and never get to decide not one single thing ultimately, but only you get to do that ultimately, which is why you shouldn't give them so much of your attention really, etc.

Or maybe let me put this another way maybe? When you give that much attention to all of your critics, which you're always going to have BTW, it's almost like you're putting them in the driving or deciding seat, and are letting them make your decisions for you really, etc, and do you really want to be doing that all of the time really, etc?

So, don't let them at all influence you or make all of your decisions for you really, etc. They're going to talk, so let them talk, because none of it really matters in the end anyway, etc, unless you make it matter, etc, but which is the same thing as letting them make all of your decisions for you really, etc.

All of your decisions then become "reactions" instead of "actions" ultimately, which is letting them dictate or decide for you ultimately, which won't ever be good for anybody, etc.

You need to learn to say "No" to all the temptations/urges that put them in the driver's seat or deciding seat IOW's, etc, and this would be my advice for anybody who ever has had/does have any kind of opposing voices or critics always, etc. Don't yield that seat, but keep it for yourself, etc. Only then can you make a decision that is solely yours, etc.

God Bless.
And these don't always have to be opposing voices either, but they can all just only be voices that are just only made to always agree with you ultimately, etc, but you have to be able to silence them all to make a decision that is solely yours, etc.

And, yes, I have a lot of experience with a lot of different voices all of the time of all kinds of different kinds, etc.

And they always want to be making all of the decisions instead of me all of the time, etc.

And they put tremendous pressure on me when I leave the house, or when I am out in public all of the time, etc.

And, yes, after trying to deal with this when I was working for a long time, I was eventually hospitalized, and was put on disability for it after a time, and I take meds, and still go to therapy for it a lot of time, in case anyone was worried about me when I said this just now, or was wondering, etc.

But, I have help now, and it's as good as it can probably get right now, and so, for the most part, I'm fine, etc. Without those things though, I'd probably be a wreck, or end up hospitalized again though, but for the most part right now though, I'm fine, ok.

So, I'm not lazy, don't want to work, or all of the other accusations people like me get accused of all of the time, but I am being forced to do this basically because of circumstances I can't control, or that are beyond my control a lot of the time, ok, and that might still be there for a while still, ok. In case any of you were wondering that also, etc. If you don't have it, or don't deal with it, you just don't know/don't have a clue, or don't have any kind of idea a lot of the time, ok.

In any other kind of government or system, I probably wouldn't be here to talk to any of you like I am right now doing right now, etc, as suicide attempts are in my history because of this also, etc, but are not anymore right now currently, so don't worry about me, ok. I haven't thought about that in a really long time anymore now actually, so don't worry about me, ok.

God Bless.
 
Last edited:
  • Friendly
Reactions: DaisyDay
Upvote 0

bèlla

❤️
Site Supporter
Jan 16, 2019
23,326
19,406
USA
✟1,133,346.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
In Relationship
So much for freedom in our country.

Many voted for the persona not the man and that was their mistake. That’s who we’re seeing now.

~bella
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neogaia777
Upvote 0