But from what I saw, Steinbach does not deserve to lose her job and did not lead the protest – after some chaos, she stepped in and addressed the students, as their adult. As much as anything it was a head-on collision of a culture clash – kind of like when Bill O’Reilly appeared on The View and behaved like people did on The McLaughlin Group. He and they had very different understandings of normal behavior on a political talk show . The Judge came expecting one event and found himself in the middle of something fueled by completely different assumptions. Steinback was fulfilling her designated role and using standard methods in that context; she was trying to defuse the situation.

If people expected her to come in as the heavy, shaming and scolding the students, they didn’t understand her job. Even if you think her job is stupid, the point is that she was never in a position to be the Heavy.

“Kim Jong Un puts entire city under lockdown after soldiers lost 653 bullets – and refuses to lift it until every single one is found”

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11906013/Kim-Jong-puts-entire-city-lockdown-soldiers-lost-653-bullets.html

Now to understand this properly it must be stated that North Korea is neither Socialist nor is it a “Democratic” thugocracy like Russia. North Korea is essentially a Kingdom that poses as some kind of Communist authoritarian state that employs the appearance of a judicial system. It is really a feudal state with missiles topped with nukes.

North Korea government structure: “The leader must work through various agents and their institutions, which has the power to delay, modify, or even resist the leader’s orders. These institutions may set the overall tone and direction for North Korea’s foreign and domestic policy, make suggestions, offer policy options, and lobby Kim himself.”

The key term in that previous paragraph is *Make Suggestions* to President (King) Kim.

And what is the greatest threat to the King and his authority? 653 bullets in the hands of the populous.

And now you understand why there is such a push while in power by our own government at this time (D) to blame inanimate guns for criminality and deaths caused by their use and not those individuals who misuse them.

Why is there that illogical strawman argument employed? Because an armed populous is a direct threat to all governmental authority should government become abusive of their power against the people. And the Constitution which is unique in this regard is designed with that exact hovering threat as the second most important item listed after the first most important item, which is guaranteed Right to free speech whether the King likes it or not.

This is just reminding every American where our unique country comes from, black, white, brown or otherwise and that it was designed with these simple tenets of freedom in mind. Never allow those in politics who seek authoritarian power on either side of the political divide to convince you otherwise.

And that is what terrifies the King of North Korea, and any other politically empowered government entity who seeks to go over and above their politically empowered authority and abuse their power. That is the nature of the beast whether it be Left or Right, Progressive or Conservative.

“ITS THE FINGER, NOT THE TRIGGER”

And political party aside this is what everyone in America MUST understand in order that we come together as neighbors with mutual respect no matter how contentious things may become. Whether we see eye to eye or not so we can ultimately move together successfully in our own self-interests into the future.

Authoritarians (D or R) and those who naturally will abuse their power need you in chaos and divided.

https://mms-images.out.customink.com/mms/images/catalog/colors/116243/views/alt/front_medium_extended.png?design=tzw0-00cq-q2jx&pblegacy=1&pblegacysize=small&pblegacywm=1

https://mms-images.out.customink.com/mms/images/catalog/colors/116248/views/alt/front_medium_extended.png?design=tzw0-00cq-q1gj&pblegacy=1&pblegacysize=small&pblegacywm=1

Yup.

The founding of America was an idea – an unprecedented one, in the history of Homo Sapiens.

As Ayn Rand reminded/admonished, “reason must be man’s only absolute.” The reasoned idea of the individual’s right to his/her own life is, therefore, not an “absolute.” As such, it is an idea that must be understood only in context.

As you understand, the idea was never universally embraced. Within context, however, if you wish to be rational, you can compare its context following our founding, through whatever period of time you wish to cite, and then compare it to the context of the present time.

My own “answer” is, our founding only partially politically embraced the idea (NEVER embracing it morally), largely maintained that embrace for the first 100 years or so, and beginning a little over one hundred years ago, began to rapidly abandon this unprecedented ideal. I call this abandonment our “flight from reason.”

You remain free – at least for the present, to agree, disagree, or “feel strongly both ways,” dependent, of course, on whether you are a passenger aboard this doomed flight!