... and if you're 70 then the world's population has tripled during your lifetime.

Concerns about global warming, preserving our resources, and what conditions will be like in the future all seem to be based upon the assumption that the population will somehow stay fixed, but there's no reason to expect that. I'm not aware of any serious movement to reduce the rate of human population growth around the world, let alone stop it, nor is there even speculation about how either might be accomplished. We are animals, and here's something that Richard Dawkins wrote that applies to humanity just as much as it applies to other animal species:

“The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease. It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population until the natural state of starvation and misery is restored.”

That's what's happening to humanity and there's nothing we can do about it. Even some far-fetched, hypothetical, breakthrough to somehow limit births would only be seen as favoring some subset of humanity and discriminating against another, and those who resist would survive while those who submit would die out.

No, I don't see any way out. The average human being is experiencing an extremely miserable life, and because of the limited capacity of Planet Earth to support us, it can only get worse.

50 Watt Megaphone with Safety Siren

What does that mean? I don't know but I have one just like it.

I'm considering switching from Kamala Harris to Elizabeth Warren, largely due to this:

‘I Believe in Capitalism’: Kamala Harris Courts Big Donors in the Hamptons. And...

Kamala Harris raises over $1 million at Hamptons and Martha's Vineyard fundraisers


On the other hand,



But maybe I'm just reluctant to accept something that's an inescapable, political, reality.

Trump's idiotic, immoral rhetorical attack on Denmark

Trump’s ‘disloyalty’ comment about American Jews who vote Democrat was disgusting and worrisome

To claim that an old white man should be nominated simply because he's the most electable is to say that he resembles Trump enough to lure a sufficient number of Trump supporters. But I find it hard to believe that there will be enough Trump supporters in existence to matter after what Trump has, and continues to, put us through. We shouldn't need to accept such a compromise. If it's not true that ANY of the Democratic candidates on the list are electable then our nation has hopelessly lost its way and we might as well give up.

Speaking as an old white man myself I favor a candidate who is the "Anti-Trump", and by that I mean as opposite to Trump as possible, including not an old white man. We need a young, female, liberal, intelligent, knowledgeable, honest, altruistic, amiable, and rational candidate to face and defeat the old, male, right-wing, idiotic, ignorant, dishonest, insensitive, crude, and irrational incumbent. Electing such a polar opposite is necessary to help us convince the rest of the world that America's inexplicable insanity was only temporary and we have finally come to our senses.

The smallest 25 states in the continental United States collectively have a total area less than the area of Greenland.

Just knowing that Fox News watchers were seeing and hearing it made it so much better!

Now Fox News is trying their best to change the subject, with the ironic chyron "Great Distractor" still on their screen, so back to MSNBC...

Trump just admitted something he probably shouldn’t have about the census citizenship question



Trump is arguing that the GOP needs the data for more effective gerrymandering.

He's not immoral, he's amoral. He doesn't even grasp the concept of morality.

The probably unspoken, almost instinctive, group strategy is to gang up on Biden and get him out of the way first, then concentrate on battling each other afterward. And I predict that's exactly how this is going to play out.

All of the candidates had portions of their messages rendered unintelligible by moderators talking over them to say that their time was up. That has to stop.

Perhaps some sort of clock visible to the candidates can be arranged to warn them that their microphones will go dead when their time expires, or even more sophisticated, allot each candidate an equal share of time for the entire debate and let them portion that time the way time is budgeted by chess opponents using a chess clock.

But however it's done, let the candidates themselves take responsibility for fitting their messages into the time allotted to them. It serves the interest of no one on our side to truncate sentences and turn them into unclear fragments.