 |
|
Libs won't refute or dispute the following analogy. Mat
Posted on: April 12, 2025 at 06:38:51 CT
hokie VT
Posts:
67390
Member For:
9.50 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
will respond on an exciting lecture about Plato's Republic or the Pythagorean theorem. The idiots will reply with a succinct but meaningless and unfocused "LOL".
Imagine a family has a home in a decent middle class neighborhood. The family is reassigned for four years to Europe for work. Upon their return, they find the house inhabited by homeless junkies and criminals. Windows are broken, walls are damaged, bricks have been broken away from the home and the lawn has weeds 3 feet high. There is graffiti all over the house, valuable furniture has been stolen or broken and much of the kitchen and electrical work has been destroyed.
The authorities come and begin the removal of bums, junkies and criminals and begin repairing all the damage. The squatters are arrested.
The returning family, the media, and anti-government NGOs begin to complain loudly that the repairs are taking too long. The family cannot move into its house and is effectively homeless.
The neighborhood is in disarray, and one of the people arrested was not guilty of any theft, destruction or drug dealing while on the property.
The neighbors are very angry as many of them had befriended the homeless encampment and were supplied with drugs by the drug dealers and were profiting from the retail drug selling. They want the people restoring the place to go away and leave everyone alone.
It turns out that the family while working overseas was involved in government corruption, graft, money laundering, influence peddling, and selling really schitty artwork for hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The ACLU and a federal District Court judge from the other side of the country are filing lawsuits against the government for illegal eviction of squatters and suing for false arrest as one of the people arrested did not steal anything.
Many people said they approved of what the government was attempting to do, but didn't like the way they were going about it. They needed to go more slowly, more carefully, and make sure that no one was improperly arrested for only squatting, and that no one should be inconvenienced in any way when they return a now dilapidated home in a decomposing neighborhood to its original status.
Cleaning up a mess that took four years to ruin a home and degrade a neighborhood should be done slowly, cautiously respectful of the rights of the criminals and not inconvenience anyone. Is that too much to ask?
Edited by hokie at 07:53:52 on 04/12/25
Imagine a family has a home in a decent middle class neighborhood. The family is reassigned for four years to Europe for work. Upon their return, they find the house inhabited by homeless junkies and criminals. Windows are broken, walls are damaged, bricks have been broken away from the home and the lawn has weeds 3 feet high. There is graffiti all over the house, valuable furniture has been stolen or broken and much of the kitchen and electrical work has been destroyed.
The authorities come and begin the removal of bums, junkies and criminals and begin repairing all the damage. The squatters are arrested.
The returning family, the media, and anti-government NGOs begin to complain loudly that the repairs are taking too long. The family cannot move into its house and is effectively homeless.
The neighborhood is in disarray, and one of the people arrested was not guilty of any theft, destruction or drug dealing while on the property.
The neighbors are very angry as many of them had befriended the homeless encampment and were supplied with drugs by the drug dealers and were profiting from the retail drug selling. They want the people restoring the place to go away and leave everyone alone.
It turns out that the family while working overseas was involved in government corruption, graft, money laundering, influence peddling, and selling really schitty artwork for hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The ACLU and a federal District Court judge from the other side of the country are filing lawsuits against the government for illegal eviction of squatters and suing for false arrest as one of the people arrested did not steal anything.
Many people said they approved of what the government was attempting to do, but didn't like the way they were going about it. They needed to go more slowly, more carefully, and make sure that no one was improperly arrested for only squatting, and that no one should be inconvenienced in any way when they return a now dilapidated home in a decomposing neighborhood to its original status.
Cleaning up a mess that took four years to ruin a home and degrade a neighborhood should be done slowly, cautiously respectful of the rights of the criminals and not inconvenience anyone. Is that too much to ask?
Edited by hokie at 07:53:52 on 04/12/25
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
Libs won't refute or dispute the following analogy. Mat - hokie VT - 4/12 06:38:51