snafu
-
Posts
6,097 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by snafu
-
-
1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:
We boycotted Russia. Did it change anything? Nope!
We didn't boycott Berlin in 1934.
Appeasement sucks.
-
On 2/24/2021 at 10:48 AM, SoCal Deek said:
Not another Olympic boycott! All this does is hurt the athletes. It proves little else. If our political leaders are upset with the policies and behavior of the host country, maybe they should get off their comfortable rear ends and pass some real legislation that actually does something about the issue, instead of using innocent and unpaid athletes to make their 'statements' for them!
Sanctions have been imposed. You're right that there should be more pressure. But to dismiss a boycott of the Olympics begs the question: some actions are acceptable and other actions are less important? Whatever actions we take, or statement we make to China needs to be consistent.
Even though the Olympics have probably lost their luster, in the uniglobal world the Olympics are a big deal. To the Chinese they represent legitimacy. I see your point the opposite way. Allowing participation says "we hate your oppression and expansionism, but we will overlook that for a couple weeks to we can watch our figure skaters." What about people from other countries who ask "why isn't the US participating?" In order to answer that question, China must admit that there is an issue with what they do and it forces them to see that everyone else thinks what they're doing is unacceptable. It also forces other countries to question whether they should ignore the Chinese issues to play amateur sports. Nobody said anything in 2008 and China got bolder and bolder, and that will continue if no consistent message is sent.
-
1 hour ago, Doc said:
So people who voted for him knew he was in mental decline but ignored it just to get him elected? That's just great.
And doubling the dosage isn't an answer.
Yes, people knew Biden is fading and still voted against Trump. That isn’t too difficult to see.
-
8 hours ago, Doc Brown said:
If not boycotting the Olympics in a country that that is currently holding millions of people in camps isn't reason enough what would be? There needs to be a campaign to compare it to the Berlin Olympics before WWII. The idea that sports and politics should be kept separate is nonsense on an international stage which was the argument at the time. I doubt the US or anybody boycotts because of the potential economic impact such a move would make in international markets so there has to be political pressure to force their hand (worldwide protests would be a good start).
Concentration camps, mistreatment of Tibetans, breaking international treaty in Hong Kong, threatening Taiwan’s existence, expanding territory by land and at sea, technology theft, belt-and-road sovereignty grabs, etc., etc., etc.
There are lots of reasons to boycott.
-
1
-
-
I bet the UK boycotts.
They're still fuming over Hong Kong.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, 4merper4mer said:
Thanks Jersey and NHL. Such crap man. If his career is impacted I hope he sues the league and NJ. They were negligent.
And he was playing the best hockey on the entire team.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, K-9 said:
Forget the passing stats, Wentz has an even longer way to go before he reaches Rivers’ mental ability at the position.
Absolutely. Rivers experience and mental ability overcame the fact that he had no mobility.
Maybe a better line protecting Wentz will slow thing down for him. Maybe being back with Reich will help, too. But you’re right that Rivers >>> Wentz when it comes to experience and smarts.
-
8 hours ago, Nihilarian said:
Phillip Rivers was the #10 QB in 2020.
12 games, Wentz was #26 with a completion % 57.4 percentage.
437 attempts, 2437 yards 16 TD, 15 INTs.
Somebody will need to be a magician to get Wentz to look like a franchise QB again...
This is the way is see it, too.
I don’t think the Colts got better with this move vs. who they had at QB last year.
-
I’ve got:
My Cosino owns-a da ristorante anna makes-a some-a good ravioli!
Or:
They turned the Cosino into covfefe.
-
2
-
-
17 hours ago, Nextmanup said:
I remember 2 primary things about Crystal Beach: the homemade cinnamon suckers and riding the Comet.
The Comet had an advantage over more modern roller coasters in that it was made out of wood, and it felt like it was falling apart every time I rode on it. It had a raw element of fear going for it that the slick modern steel coasters couldn't match!
The thing really shook and vibrated as you went along the tracks.
And the comet had that one thin metal bar across your lap to hold you in.
Two friends and I went to Crystal Beach on the last day it was open. The line for the Comet was immense — to ride facing forward. No waiting for facing backward. We rode it backward, twice. I’ll never forget those two rides, had to hold on for dear life.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, BillsPride12 said:
When the Sabres are playing well this town is electric during hockey season.
This is very true.
I don't think the owners understand that.
-
1
-
-
On 2/13/2021 at 9:36 AM, Buffalo_Stampede said:
I'm not familiar with everyone's stance here but typically pro Trump people go after Cuomo. Pro Cuomo people go after Trump. I'm guessing you're a pro Trump guy.
There's always an agenda, so the topics always go together.
Or you can be neutral to either one, or both, and dislike the specific decisions they've made. And it is certainly fair to have an opinion on their respective reactions to being criticized. The politicization of Covid from both sides is really unfortunate.
Looks like Cuomo is catching a lot of heat, both for his decision to return patients to nursing homes and for his covering up a federal investigation. And he's catching a lot of political heat from members of his own party in the State legislature.
I've always maintained that Cuomo is lucky that people aren't tracking and reporting the illnesses and deaths of nursing home employees and their immediate families. His policy could easily be connected to those cases.
-
41 minutes ago, Tiberius said:
How? What’s changed?
Prior to Covid regulations, my day-to-day existence hasn't changed much.
The only dramatic and disturbing change I see in the past 15 years is a rabid political party tribalism on both sides. It used to be a fiction to think that one party was out to destroy the other. Now, not so much. And it gets worse by the month.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Doc Brown said:
I thought the House managers made a pretty good case through past comments, past tweets, showing him encouraging people to march on the Capitol building to stop the steal right before the incident, and comments made during the attack about fighting for Trump that he could be directly blamed for the insurrection on the capital building. All the senators knew it too. The case against him was MUCH stronger than the quid pro quo impeachment case. That's why you saw seven Republicans break rank which is unprecedented in modern times. Zero from Clinton's party voted to convict and only one did (Romney) on one count in Trump's first impeachment trial.
I get that McConnell doesn't want to anger Trump's fervent base so him and other Senators used the convenient rationale (unconstitutional to convict a president who is out of office which is in itself a stretch considering he was in office when this happened). That way they didn't have to defend Trump's conduct.
As far as Democrats not calling witnesses, they made the right move in not dragging this out another few months when it was clear Republican Senators weren't going to change their minds. They have an agenda they need to get to and an aid package is needed to keep the economy afloat during this pandemic. It will be more difficult now that the Republicans can scream deficit again.
The house managers connected a lot of dots, but not the important ones that actually addressed the Atricle of Impeachment. They made a great case for whomever is in charge of security to have been negligent. They made a great case for dereliction of duty, but there was no article of impeachment which addressed that. Haste makes waste. The House must have thought that the Constitutional jurisdiction question should have gone the other way because they were super hasty in banging out the one Article. This case would have been stronger if it wasn’t messed up in preparation. Haste makes waste.
The Constitution gives the government powers and the Amendments chip away at those powers. The defense was right in that the first amendment controlled. As far as witnesses, the one witness that both sides stipulated to was well known, yet the managers didn’t see fit to present her words during their 14 hours of their main case? Haste makes waste. Trump could have been convicted in my eyes, but not following the charge and the applicable law.
-
6 minutes ago, daz28 said:
The message we were talking about was the defund the police message.
...and yes, one officer did bring this to light. It would be great if it turns out he is white. The larger problem is many times fellowship takes a back seat to people doing the right thing. It reminds me of Michael J. Fox in 'Casualties of War'. It's often easier to just look the other way
NYT article got the message out abut NYC de-funding the police last year. $1Billion was transferred from the Cops to other spending.
And most major crimes were noticeably up in 2020 over 2019.
https://www1.nyc.gov/site/nypd/news/pr0902/nypd-citywide-crime-statistics-august-2020
-
11 minutes ago, daz28 said:
It's hard to get a message out, when you have Tucker, Sean, and Laura all distorting it on a nightly basis, but you're right they do have to do a better job at that.
Yet by several accounts, it is being investigated. Here are three links. So I'm not sure what you're saying there about a message getting out. There's news reporting, and there's editorializing/opining. Too many times the two lines get blurred these days -- both ways. I wouldn't single out one source of opinion.
https://news.yahoo.com/lapd-investigating-george-floyd-photo-143100107.html
11 minutes ago, daz28 said:The problem with the racism is that it isn't called out when it rears its head. The nation itself is indeed complicit when they don't.
I agree with this. And the LAPD incident you pointed to was called out. None of us would have heard about it if it wasn't called out.
Seems like the LAPD is investigating and probably the people involved will be disciplined. At least they should. I'm sure there are a lot of people looking for something to come of the investigation.
-
14 hours ago, Backintheday544 said:
You do understand that this has been the most partisan impeachment in the history of the country right?13 hours ago, Backintheday544 said:
l don’t think you understand what partisan and bi-partisan means.I’m not sure you proofread your initial post.
Then you wasted a lot of effort explaining bi-partisan. A word you didn’t use.
-
1
-
-
What should be done about this?
-
What should be done about this?
-
31 minutes ago, 716er said:
15 Senators did not attend today's proceedings.
That cant be true.
Their attendance is mandatory.
10 minutes ago, Scraps said:I'm pretty sure Joe, Kamala, Jill, Doug and their families voted for Biden.
I’m pretty sure they voted against Trump.
-
18 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:
Why do we need to “tighten up” what isn’t broken? Show the need. Maybe start with the Dominion Voting Systems lie. And here’s the thing: there is a presumption of regularity with respect to elections. Think there was a problem? Prove it. Go for it. Take your case to court. But you don’t get to shift the burden to the proponent of the result to prove its validity, or to disprove your lies about fraud. That’s not how it works.
This is my last post on this matter...
Computer counting mechanisms count the ballots that are put into them. They don't feel. They're machines. The machines aren't the issue. People who handle the ballots are the issue. I already said that the newly implemented voting absentee and mail-in methods were SO new that the election boards that had to implement them were not likely ready to handle the changes. I said that way before the election. It was obvious that States weren't ready. It took Pennsylvania months to count primary votes. Same with NYS.
It is very difficult to go to court with evidence that's not available to you, even though you ask for it. It is very difficult to compile evidence in 30 days (between election and certification). State legislatures held hearings (albeit Republican-dominated hearings) and took testimony of people with boots on the ground during the counting. These people were dismissed as kooks, and some may have been -- but the messenger was killed and the message wasn't probed. Headlines from the media on November 5th all immediately claimed that Trump was lying. Why would they editorialize in their headlines? Why not say "Trump alleges", instead of "Trump falsely claims". What made the reporters of facts so factually certain? People like to claim that Trump lost "x" lawsuits, and he (or people challenging results) certainly did, but it seems as most of those were lost on procedural grounds and not substantive grounds. Take the Texas Case in the Supreme Court. Did you read their brief and the briefs of the Respondent States? The substance was never addressed, though it was laid out pretty clearly. They had no standing, the alleged deficiencies never saw the light of day.
Why NOT ask these questions (I'm referring to November, 2020)? What is the harm in answering? We saw the harm in dismissing the questions out of hand on January 6th.
-
2 minutes ago, Scraps said:
If you believe Trump lost, shouldn't he have admitted as much and not filled people's heads with nonsense about a stolen election? Shouldn't he have put the country first and engaged in an orderly, peaceful transfer of power like his predecessor afforded him?
Yep. Except he had every right to question the results. He's not the first politician to do so.
His complete screw up was not to have his legal team in place well prior to the election. Every deadline he had was missed and every complaint he made wasn't ripe. Those are technicalities that got him bounced out of court after court.
2 minutes ago, Scraps said:What in the election needs to be tightened? What lack of transparency are you talking about? What serious **** ups along the way are you talking about?
There are several States which do all mail-in balloting and have done so for years and are good at it. I don't believe that ANY state which wasn't set up for it was ready to handle a covid-19 election in a proper and efficient way. They have a year to get things right, if they keep their newly altered rules. Pennsylvania (for one example) saw the legislature pass laws regarding voting, and then saw their Secretary of State change the law midstream. That's actually a Supreme Court Case that hasn't been argued yet. What pipe burst in Atlanta that shut down their vote counting? Why would someone lie about that?It just seems like there are questions that need better answers than "the big lie"! I already said that I believe Trump lost. I believe that EVERY vote cast for President was about Trump. Not one had to do with Biden.
3 minutes ago, TH3 said:Ummm....See gerrymandering....and as well virtually every GOP controlled state has just introduced legislation to pinch voter access
What about my first point?
Go look at the votes cast in certain states. You'll find that total votes cast for Republican Congressional Candidates per State was higher than those cast for Trump. That is statewide and has nothing to do with gerrymandering. And if Gerrymandering was actually the explanation, then how would you explain the 2018 midterms?
-
13 minutes ago, TH3 said:
What is more...you know who is AGAINST a formal standard system of voting protocols? ...The GOP...because it would solidify voter access - which is the last thing they got going at this point.
I don't think the results of congressional and State elections prove your point.
Trump lost and the R's picked up seats in the house, and R's aren't losing ground in State races, either.
-
18 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:
Let’s start with your first sentence. It contains the false premise that the refusal and failure to quell can relate only to dereliction of duty. That’s wrong. HIs refusal to act once he knew that the mob had overtaken the Capitol is circumstantial evidence that he got what he wanted and what his words leading up that moment had suggested, namely, an assault upon that building.
I clearly disagree with you. Not anything more to be said.
18 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:Let’s move next to Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz. Both of them amplified the Big Lie. That’s pretty well established. And both of them knew better. These are smart guys who capitalized on Trump’s exploitation of a bunch of downtrodden, angry, victimized gullibles. They encouraged this nonsense, and it’s splitting hairs to say that they aren’t complicit in the outcome. Josh Hawley’s little fist of power on the Capitol steps speaks for itself.
I disagree with you. They were calling for transparency and they said they would abide by the results of an inquiry. I saw the Senate re-convene that night AFTER the riot, and if I recall, there were Senators from both parties that said they wouldn't have objected if the riots hadn't occurred. Or at least said, that was Cruz and Hawley's right to inquire. I don't know of any statement they made before the riot that would tie them to it. I think to do so is dishonest and dangerous. Hell, there were members of Congress in 2016 who disputed the vote. Were their objections "the big lie"?
Biden's Foreign Policy Already GettING Results
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
Austin said a lot of nothing, ALF. Every quote was a dodge and a weave and an empty statement amounting to "trust us, everything is great".
https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/2516530/us-conducts-defensive-airstrikes-against-iranian-backed-militia-in-syria/