Staff Reports
In the latest eyebrow-raising twist from the world of intergalactic travel, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy has proposed an out-of-this-world idea: building a nuclear reactor on the moon. While some might call it ambitious, Duffy’s plan has predictably drawn criticism from those who never seem to miss an opportunity to shout ‘racism’ at the moon – quite literally now.
As Duffy waxes lyrical about a future where we inhabit distant planets – because, why not – he suggests the moon might serve as a functional base for humanity. He muses on the need for energy while racing to the moon with China, as if we are back in the Cold War era, but this time with celestial ambitions. For Duffy, the moon isn’t just a hunk of rock spinning in tandem with Earth, but a stepping stone to the stars.
While Duffy outlines his grand plans, the liberal media has found its strange angle of criticism. Attempting to find racism in colonizing the moon, commentators have somehow likened it to colonialism on Earth – even though, last checked, there aren’t lunar inhabitants with land rights to protest. It seems that even the concept of extraterrestrial real estate can’t escape the grasp of political correctness.
The conversation takes a humorous twist with the absurdity of “moon beings” and the possibility of a lunar treaty with whoever – or whatever – might eventually populate its craters. As the issue of colonization on a lifeless celestial body gets paraded around, some analysts sarcastically note that the moon isn’t even a planet, poking fun at the overblown rhetoric surrounding the debate.
Finally, the broader point of whether hefty national resources should fund lunar escapades or focus on more earthly concerns emerges. Critics argue for energy independence closer to home, highlighting desires for reduced electric bills instead of a nuclear glow from the night sky. For now, the priority for many remains a functioning infrastructure and economy on Earth, over a prospective colony on the lunar surface.
