Woke = Sin?

 When you drill down into all of this woke-business....what it really comes down to....is that you feel some type of sin, and some type of guilt.  At that point, if you were a religious guy truly feeling a sin-trip....you'd ask for forgiveness, and get all religious-ified.  

Well....normal people would.

Assholes?  Skeptics?  Jerks?  Pricks?  No....you could dump a ton of sin and guilt on them, and they frankly don't care.  They'd even laugh in your face.

The more you review this entire discussion over woke.....it just looks like some 15th century Catholic Church 'drill', and you confess everything to feel good.  The skeptics and jerks?  They are just grinning....they've committed no sin and feel no regret/pity/sorrow.  

What eventually happened around the 1520s/1530s?  They lost around fifty-percent of their 'team' because of Martin Luther and his exodus from the church.  The woke crowd will eventually find the Martin Luther character confronting them, and a anti-woke crowd will appear. 

Biden and the Nukes Chatter

 I'm kinda surprised by the amount of general coverage over the Democratic Party suggestion to President Biden, to give up sole discretion over nuclear warfare, and allow a 'committee' to process the situation and leave the President out of the situation.

There are generally five issues here if you think about it:

1.  This idea comes out of thin air, and no journalist can say where this suddenly developed.  

2.  If you said a committee of five were created for this 'purpose'....you'd also require each of the five to have Secret Service protection around the clock, and have a attaché-case (the codes) guy always within close proximity to the committee members.

3.  The fact that all five members might not be in the same room, same building or same city when the threat occurs?  It begs the question how they would react, or 'vote'.  What if you had one of the five on some camping trip in rural Idaho, and the emergency came up....would the guy even be able to vote 'nuke' or would you just sit on a 2-2 situation for nuke use?  

4.  Picking people for this purpose?  If the President is so untrustworthily for the job presently....then you can't let him select the five committee members.  Then who would select them?  The House/Senate? 

5.  Why would you limit this committee thing to only nuclear weapons?  Once you open up this discussion.....you could have fifty different jobs that the President typically does.....run by committees.  We could have a whole 4th element of the government....just called 'Committees'...which function and the President would just be there to hand pens out, attend funerals, make speeches, wave at people from the White House, and do interviews on comedy shows.

The more they openly discuss this....the more likely there's a whole list of things that President Biden probably can't do in his present state of mind, and it just begs the question....when exactly did folks wake up to this?

My suspicion?  I think after VP Harris called around to foreign folks in the last two weeks....they all voiced some secret report that they'd read....that President Biden isn't all there mentally, and they want some assurance that things will be managed in a safe way.  

It's just a funny discussion and you wonder if President Biden himself realizes the game being played.  

Footnote:  If I ran this situation, I'd arrange a 7-day shift situation and have five House/Senate members flown to some secretive underground bunker, with no booze, no TV, etc.  You pull a seven day shift....'nuke-team-duty'.  I'd make this as dull and boring as possible....requiring Republicans and Democrats to mingle for seven days straight.