The appropriate response to Israel’s current actions is and should be simple.

The decisions as to where the Israelis should live once extreme appropriations have been rendered to Palestinians however, is not very simple.

There are still 6 million Israelis and while it would be satisfying to do to them what they have been doing to Gaza, I don’t believe in my heart that doing so would be the best we are capable of or be seen as the correct response by future generations. Some of those 6 million people (not a lot, maybe like 30% from what I understand) are actually good people who were just born onto stolen land under an authoritarian government, and they genuinely have nowhere else to go at this current moment.

I think a two state solution with neither one getting the most desired places and those places instead being rendered to a U.N./International body to oversee equal, fair, and open use is be the best interim answer my uneducated ass can currently imagine.

If someone has a better answer not rooted in frustration and revenge, please lift me up. Tell it.

So he vetoed the “You can’t hunt down doctors across state lines because they gave trans people health care” law, because it… “sets a bad precedent”.

How about the precedent of not hunting down doctors for… being doctors…???

How about the precedent of not being insane fascists???