leh-nerd skin-erd

It's not on the average voter to follow each case closely, and it never is. In many cases, probably most, the average citizen votes on emotion. The typical politician leverages that emotion, in many cases manipulating, embellishing or lying to appeal to as many voters as possible. Voters are not prosecutors, defense attorneys, experts on classified document handling, but most have a strong ability to detect bull sh8t when it is served up. The challenge is Dems see bs when it's served by Rs, and Rs see bs when served up by Dems. The facts are, from the R point of view anyway, that Trump was a victim of extreme political persecution by DOJ, FBI, dems. There's plenty of evidence to support that, and there's plenty of evidence to support very questionable practices--up to illegal behavior. It's not just Hillary Clinton getting special treatment, it's well beyond that. The DOJ raids Trump's place, sets up a photo shoot of allegedly classified documents strew about on the floor and leaks said photos. They spend hours there and 'accidentally' grab client/attorney documents, tax returns and private material, then suggest everybody trust them with the documents. Meanwhile, the Biden SC investigation is locked down tighter than a drum, though classified and illegal documents were found in a garage. Then there's this, of course, where one of the most powerful men in the world tells truth. Which leads to this (from the notoriously right wing ACLU): https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/do-us-politicians-need-fear-our-intelligence And of course, reinforces the point that nobody trusts everybody, and just about everybody distrusts somebody, but it's usually limited to the guy who doesn't vote like you or run the agenda you like. "Whataboutism" isn't really the problem, and the average voter using it isn't the problem, either. The problem is the political class is completely and irrevocably untrustworthy. The other problem is that people forget what they were upset about when the last guy was in office, and remember that it's not really a big deal when their guy is running the show.

I responded earlier, didn’t like how it made me feel and deleted it a short time later. I had a very cool Saab for about 5 years (one of those you really like, or really hate), love grapes and am not much of a runner. I did roller skate through a very nice public park in Minneapolis in the late 80s. Have a good night, Kemper.

I’m getting old—that was 2005. My buddy reminded me his son was in kindergarten and he graduated from UCLA not long ago. I had forgotten about the Niagara Falls airshow tragedy. On a video, your friend talked about trying to pass within a few feet of each other, that’s incredible. What a shame. Very cool story about Top Gun! My oldest son has a nice movie theater style set up in his basement, we had a family movie night a couple weeks ago and watched the original.

One of my old friends was born/raised in San Francisco. His parent's house was shown in the opening credits of the old Streets of San Franscisco TV show, it's in a great location with views of the Bay and Alacatraz. I visited him a decade or so ago (probably longer), and he showed me around the city. Beautiful, majestic, awesome and his family treated me like gold. He is a liberal leaning fellow, his family is as well, yet they powered through 😇. Of course, I'm delightful, so there's that. He told me not long ago the downtown area was really a problem, for all the reasons noted, and it was hard to see. He lives in Morin now but still works in the city. @sherpa, just remembered that I was there when the Blue Angels did their air show for Fleet Week. It was an amazing thing to behold.

No one cares about nothing (except when the other guy does it, then it's fascism)

You don't have to whisper...you're not a particularly complex people.

This story is sad, but it seemed destined for a tragic ending. While much is made of her issues with the church, she also spoke about physical and sexual abuse at the hands of her mother. I’m not sure how one ever recovers from that, and it seems she never really did.

Your truth is yours, Kemp, and I applaud you for your commitment to your cause.

I am happy that you have reached the enlightenment stage. I understood you from the get-go, but if repeating yourself multiple times helps you work through issues, I'm happy to have partnered with you here.

And it was known very, very early on by CIA, Obama and Biden that the Clinton campaigned with a hostile foreign national to disrupt our election. Sadly, that fact was kept from the American people because it went against the disinformation campaign of Trump conspiring with Russia. Still, the calculus by dem leadership seemed to be their base really didn’t care about election denialism and claims of treason, and they were correct.

On cue, and on brand-- of all the people involved in that absurd theater, "Barr" is on a "slippery slope"---when he says what we both agree is true: Russia, the red bear, the KGB etc...attempted to influence the election; After an exhaustive, multi-year, multi-faceted investigation by seasoned, well-trained, well-experienced and arguably fervently anti-Trump prosecutors revealed: The Special Counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election," Barr wrote in a letter to leaders of the House and Senate judiciary committees on Sunday afternoon. That was despite "multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign," he wrote. In other words, Trump did not conspire nor coordinate elections interference, ever, and 4 years of innuendo, lies and coordination with the media was designed only to stir the base, rile up the naive and divide the country. AG Barr was the hero of the tale, Frank. You should listen to him. Meanwhile, Russia gets pretty invadey when democrats are in office, and lots of money floats around to their well-placed friends....

@The Frankish Reich Witness ye, one of the faithful. Hawk: https://www.npr.org/2019/03/24/706318191/trump-white-house-hasnt-seen-or-been-briefed-on-mueller-investigation-report "The Special Counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election," Barr wrote in a letter to leaders of the House and Senate judiciary committees on Sunday afternoon. That was despite "multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign," he wrote.

Kemp, I understood what you wrote. Did you think your comments were hard to follow? Now, on the subject of what may/may not be on topic, I think we have a breakdown in communication. Your preferred method is to make a declaration, indicate you are unwilling to consider context of any sort, and demand an answer to whatever narrow question you have constructed. In my opinion, that's not dialogue or a reasonable exchange of thought, that's a cross-examination. I have no interest in being cross-examined, I think it's silly to assume I would, but it's really ok. I don't care.

Frank, I'm exceptionally reasonable and smart enough to get out my own way. I actually like the religion analogy. True believers believe, and for about 3 years, a substantial number of the 80,000,000 faithful believed the preachers and the message that we had Russians in the WH. It was a masterful strategy...use the government to bring the heat, partner with the media to spread perpetual stories that never quite come true, quote anonymous sources that never materialize. By the time the reckoning came, the dems switched tactics to talk about obstruction, and a substantial majority of the 80,000,000 faithful just adjusted their beliefs to align with the message point. It worked well, and here we are with you trying to reimagine the "Trump was not legitimately elected", "Trump stole the election" and "Trump = treason" into something....less. I would absolutely acknowledge that Trump's version of the 'stolen election' is vastly different than that of the dems. The dems were much more subtle, certainly knew the workings of the federal government and what their 80,000,000 would buy, but the fact remains that the 80,000,000 had no issues whatsoever believing that there vote was stolen, that Trump was not legitimately elected and whatever. Truth and decency only became an issue when faced with the same game they supported.

I don't know, I was asking. I just think it's sort of a travesty to speak about the Church of Stolen Elections (2020) without including a conversation about Our Lady Of lllegitimate Presidencies (2016). Thanks for clarifying.

Trump was lawfully elected President in 2016, yes? He was the legitimate President, you agree, yes? There is more than one religion, obviously.

Your initial message to me included a reference to being a "cult member", and it's why I suggested you were a pompous a$$ quite some time ago. I stand by that characterization, and none of your foot stomping or demands changes that. I also suggested that given a chance to have a face to face dialogue on these issues, you would not lead off with that sort of comment. It simply would not happen, not because there would be an argument, or fight, or major disagreement. It's because sane, rational folks don't go around screaming "CULT MEMBER" in social settings in civilized society. Why do it here, Kemp? It's not a great look, but the look defines 'pompous' interaction. Be civil, expect civility back from me. In the meantime, I hope you have a joyous day.

If by 'my values' you mean listening objectively to what Neil said and discussing it, ok.

I understand that you feel the way you do, but your inability to focus on the evolution of your perspective is your burden, not mine.

He used that term, not me. The point is he took a stand about misinformation, he claimed, but then seemed to indicate he might have stayed in spite of the misinformation if they had the superior platform. He may have been trying to finger Spotify as you say, but he sounded sorta confused on what he was protesting. Maybe he was really, really upset about the misinformation but could live with it if his music sounded tight and Neil got paid.

You've lost track again. You stated a position, asked a question and declared there was only possible answer. That was you, Kemp, not me. Then, when I replied, you didn't ask me for anything, you demanded a reply. Here, I'll provide the quote. You know the question. You know the answer, and have assured me there is only one. Does it matter what I think? Celebrate!

Very nice. I try not to do too much research into opinions/lives of artists/actors etc. More often than not, they end up sounding disconnected from the real life most people live, be it because they have more money than they can ever spend, or they have an inflated value of the net worth of their opinion, or they are strange generally. On this particular article, maybe it paints his position in a different light for me. I'd assume if was terrified of COVID and was completely closed-minded to Joe Rogan's perspective, perhaps part of his animus was due to the health conditions of his children. I still don't understand what the pixilation issue had to do with the COVID crisis, but good for him for trying to improve the lives of his children.

No, I'm quite certain I'm correct here. Have a good day though.

Neil Young is a great artist. Reminds me of my younger days, but I think he's still beefing with Spotify. I'm not really sure what his perspective is here...it's like he's kinda sorta upset they didn't choose the guy who's average fan is 77 years old v the guy making them millions. On the other hand he seems to imply that if they offered the best sound quality, Spotify fans might well be considering the needle and the damage done to this day. Either way, it's great for him that he has enough money not to care.

You are mistaking me for someone else, I fear.