The Moderate Case

No amount of money, influence, or power will ever buy my voice, or make me stand behind something I do not truly believe.

Politics and I have such a love-hate relationship.

Fathers Matter. The evidence showing the impact of a father is remarkably consistent: - Young men raised with their biological father are more than 2× as likely to graduate college (35% vs. 14%). - Young men raised without their biological father are about 2× more likely to spend time in jail by age 30, even after controlling for family income, race, maternal education, and cognitive ability. - They’re also significantly more likely to end up out of school and out of work in early adulthood (19% vs. 11%). - Children with involved fathers are 43% more likely to earn A’s and 33% less likely to repeat a grade. - Research consistently links active father involvement to better mental health, fewer behavioral problems, lower delinquency, and stronger emotional development throughout childhood and adolescence. - Nearly 1 in 4 American children grow up without a biological, step or adoptive father in the home. Some of the older, widely cited figures are also striking: - 71% of high school dropouts are reported to come from fatherless homes. - 85% of youth in prison are reported to come from fatherless homes. - 90% of homeless and runaway children are reported to come from fatherless homes. - 63% of youth suicides are reported to involve children from fatherless homes. - 75% of adolescents in substance abuse treatment are reported to come from fatherless homes. A loving, present, engaged father is one of the greatest gifts a child can have. Fathers matter. Happy Father’s Day!

Hey @ggreenwald why don’t you address the real facts and nuances of history?

No man is free is who not master of himself.

Hezbollah and Iran are one. Iran signed a deal saying that all allies on each side must stop the fighting. That would include their “ally” or proxy — Hezbollah. Hezbollah violated it. You are super slow, dude.

Yes, I can. Israel is justified morally and legally to invade Lebanon because of hezbollah’s attacks from the southern part of the country. Their presence in southern Lebanon directly contradicts Resolution 1701, which called for Hezbollah’s attacks to end and for the area south of the Litani to be free of unauthorized armed forces. This was 20 years ago and nothing has changed. This stems all the way back to the PLO in the 1970’s after Black September when they were kicked out of Jordan, so they “invaded” Lebanon and turned it into a terror launch pad. Israel fought the PLO then, and now Hezbollah. Somehow, to you people, armed groups can turn Lebanon into a launchpad for attacks and never be called “invaders,” but the country responding to those attacks always is. As for the soldiers who were killed inside Lebanon: yes, Israeli troops engaged in combat are lawful military targets. Nobody serious disputes that. But Israel responding militarily after Hezbollah kills its soldiers is not “complaining.” That is what nations at war do. What kind of retarded question is this? Every country responds to its troops and service members being killed in conflict. Sovereignty cannot be invoked only after you have allowed an independent militia to use your territory as a launchpad for terror. Hope this helps.

Israel cannot violate an agreement they didn’t sign. That makes no sense.

This is what Karmelo Anthony used to stab and kill Austin Metcalf. Can someone tell @JasmineForUS this isn't a "Swiss Army‑style multi‑tool"? It's a deadly weapon.

Hezbollah violated the ceasefire outlined in the MoU… an arrangement Israel was never going to accept indefinitely in the first place. Israel then struck Lebanon, and Iran responded by closing the Strait of Hormuz again. So, once again, can someone explain why America should allow Iran to call the shots over what happens in Lebanon? Iran’s proxy violated the very conditions Iran outlined. Israel responded. Iran pointed the finger at Israel. That’s the sequence. Hezbollah breaks the agreement, Israel answers, and Iran punishes the global economy for it. Why should America reward this behavior by giving Iran even more leverage over Lebanon?

“Israel’s opinions are separate from America’s” is what makes a candidate lose the American right? 😂 Dude. Stop.

However genuine the growing hostility between Trump, Vance, Netanyahu, and Israel’s governing coalition may be, this rupture would not have happened without America’s capitulation to Iran, whether that capitulation is real and lasting or repackaged as “strategic restraint.” That is the central fact. America changed course, pulled back from the pressure campaign on Hormuz, and embraced an arrangement that has ensured Iran political survival, breathing room, and a path back to legitimacy without fully resolving the nuclear threat that started the conflict in the first place (said to be done within 60 days, though this is almost certain to not occur.) Israel was then expected to accept American retreat as victory. When Netanyahu and his coalition refused to play along with this, the disagreement became personal. The Trump admin now sees Israel as obstructing a diplomatic success, at least this is the public messaging, and Israel sees Washington as abandoning the very objectives it had previously encouraged, with Trump saying nothing short of “TOTAL AND COMPLETE SURRENDER” would be acceptable. The insults, accusations, and public feuding between America and Israel are not the cause of a breakdown. They are the result of it. America created the fracture the moment it decided that managing Iran was preferable to defeating the threat they claimed it posed, and set out to destroy with multiple “objectives” of the war outlined that are not even addressed in the MoU, such as the ballistic missile program and proxy network. Everything since has been fallout. I love America, but a lot of people, specially “influencers” and “creators” need to set their political biases aside and dare to say something critical that might upset their followers, and that is that — as it currently sits, if nothing changes with the MoU and a deal with Iran, strategically speaking, Iran has come out on top. And what message does this send to our adversaries globally? Surely not a good one.