Over at The Daily Sheeple: When the SHTF, These Cheap Items Will be Worth Their Weight in Gold. – H.L.
o o o
?FBI director wants access to encrypted Apple, Google user data, demands law ‘fix’. – RBS
o o o
Some interesting advice and discussion for those under the Virginia Circuit Court: Reboot Your iPhone Before Being Detained by Police to Disable Touch ID – RLH
o o o
Water is always of concern when making alternative plans: These Maps of California’s Water Shortage Are Terrifying. – T.P.
o o o
Refusing to Vote for ‘the Lesser of Two Evils?’ A Thought Experiment for You. – B.B.
I have posted this link only after considerable thought. This is not an easy decision and requires that a person is able to define exactly what their convictions are and that they be able to stand by those convictions. In the case of “refusing to vote for the lesser of two evils”, the introspection was not about what I believed. That I already knew. It wasn’t even about having the guts to stand up; I’ve repeatedly done that in the past. No, the introspection was about how best to convey the seriousness of compromise. Ultimately, I answer to God. How can I stand before my Maker on judgment day proclaiming that I almost stood for what was right? The situational ethics premise that the article stands on is wrong. You don’t do what is almost right, you must do what is right. No third party candidate will ever gain traction until enough people make that same decision. No established party will reliably put forward moral candidates when they know we will vote for “almost right”. This is the election wherein I make my stand. I will not vote for a candidate that does not stand for the Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution. “All men” means everyone, including the unborn, the elderly, and the terminally ill. If the established parties cannot put forward a candidate that meets that criteria, I will write in my own candidate, but I will not compromise. – HJL