Tropical Soulvangelical's wondering how he could have missed the fact that the vote to try to override Eric Adams's veto on the How Many Stops Act was scheduled for Tuesday 1/30. He thought it was scheduled for Monday 1/29 according to how he listened to newsradio earlier the morning of this latter date. The focus was on how that one councilman was stopped by a cop on his way to an exercise that Eric Adams encouraged the councilpeople to take to ride with the cops to see just what the cops have to do and how they have to do it on a daily basis to drive home the point that How Many Stops -will- at least in TSV's view also present a burden on cops. Subsequently the councilman abruptly decided to not to take part in the exercise solely because he was stopped, and TSV appreciates the fact that the councilman was one of the Exonerated. That said, TSV sees there being unanswered questions about the stop, regardless of what the councilman told newsradio. The conventional thinking is that the cop didn't tell the councilman why he stopped him, but that's not TSV's takeaway from the audio playback from the bodycam footage he heard on newsradio. TSV insists that the cop was going to tell him why he stopped the councilman with respect to the tinted windows of his car, but that the councilman interrupted the cop before the cop could get a word in edgewise. Otherwise the cop would -certainly- have told the councilman that he stopped him because of his tinted windows. TSV's not sure that would have mattered because he's pretty sure the councilman would still take it out on the exercise he was driving to and say, I'm not doing the exercise. TSV's fully expecting that to be the -sole determinant- of the city council successfully overriding Eric Adams's veto, thereby affecting the entirety of all cops everywhere in the city based -solely- on that one incident, and possibly indefinitely going forward without even so much as input from the city residents. Though TSV is an Eric Adams supporter, he encourages the councilman to throw his hat in the ring to challenge the Mayor in next year's election if the councilman believes by conviction that he's in the right in his version of leadership of the city over that of Eric Adams. TSV wants to hear why the councilman believes he's better than the Mayor, because TSV's impression that Eric Adams, whether at 28% or 0% approval, cares more about the city than the city does about itself. Because TSV sees strong leadership as paramount in the city, he wants to hear sincere convictions from those who either disbelieve in strong leadership or don't believe it should be a priority. TSV wants to hear them try to defend humanity's inherent inability to take care of itself, and why you can't have an apparently select few who are the collective shepherd. TSV doesn't want to hear the Ed Snowden types try to play a game of Tu Quo Que as a weak non-argument for why such a shepherd has to be a 'perfect' person. TSV doesn't see such a leader as having to be perfect as much as sincere and pursuing the concept of principle as closely possible, specifically in a world that's apparently forsaken such a righteous path. By the way, TSV doesn't want to keep dumping on the protest groups, because it's like beating a dead horse at this point. But he's faith-restored to hear Biden's supporters drown out the Palestine Protestors trying to crash Biden's write-in victory party in New Hampshire. This victory was against a challenger that TSV sees as progressives seeing as the Ed Snowden candidate trying to tell Biden how he's wrong about everything -almost- as much as Trump wants to do, possibly using the same arguments. Just a little side note.