leh-nerd skin-erd

Don’t overthink this stuff. The set up was funny, delivery quite good. The size of the photo enhanced everything. To be fair though, I found the first Austin Powers movie hysterical. As for fear of the mob, I’d probably go more with concern than fear. Lately, we watched those knuckle draggers in the Capital, anarchists torching cities assaulting/killing people, destruction of property and more. These are crazy times, but let’s not let kitty pictures and good old ball busting tear us asunder.

See, there you go, L’Ron. You were a bit suspicious, but the videos cleared it up. I wasn’t suspicious per se, but it was a strange fact pattern and questions naturally follow. On the other hand, we had lots of folks buying the notion of a James Bond type ex-MI6 and Russian hookers urinating on beds, two assailants tying shoe laces around Jussie Smollette’s neck and stealing his Taco Bell, and so so many more.

ka-BOOM 🤣

Those are fair points on the ghoulish nature of the video, but that’s secondary to my point about this particular video: If the standard is to release, follow the standard and release. If the standard is to withhold, withhold. Making the $&@& up as they go would be grossly unfair to those who had their video(s) released, and gives the appearance that the pain of some folks is worth more than others. Btw, at the risk of sounding insensitive, I would bet comments made by Nancy Pelosi on issues involving release of body cameras in political motivated situations (namely involving police officers) would trend toward “release the tapes the people have a right to see them!” . Just a hunch.

Settle down Red. Seems you're angling for a fight when there's none to be found with me. The question about whether or not the video was withheld is fair to discuss, and it seems pretty simple to me. I said that upthread. If they generally withhold video for the reasons you offered above, it's easy enough to say that they were following procedure. That ends the conversation for me, and what happened to Paul Pelosi is still horrific. If they generally release video, but chose not to do so in this case (political patronage, special treatment for special people, whatever), it's fair to ask why public servants extend courtesy to this family and not others victimized in a similar fashion. In that case, what happened to Paul Pelosi is still horrific. Btw, I know many elderly people, and it seems reasonable that the same amount of respect for people across the board be extended. If it was, it was.

This doesn't change anything for me, other than to wonder why they withheld the footage if the normal course of action is to release. My first question is why Pelosi wouldn't signal he was in danger, or attempt to run, pull away etc. On the other hand, he's an old timer and it looked like the assailant had a pretty good grip on this wrist. He called the cops, one way or the other, so there is that. Assuming the guy broke in, who the frig knows what thoughts the victim has in the moment? We just heard about a young lady in Idaho traumatized to the point that she locked herself in her room for several hours after some really unusual circumstances in the apartment she lived in. The attack itself is gruesome, and any way you slice it, Pelosi is the victim here.

Who--the media? NBC? Jesse Kelly? Everyone? I view this as pretty simple. If the body camera footage is normally released in a timely manner on this sort of thing, it should be released. That it was not would be cause for concern. If body camera footage is not normally released, the standard has been set and followed and it is what it is. If body camera footage is released and shows what was widely reported (by sites other than NBC news), great. If body camera footage is released and shows a manipulation of the fact pattern to promote the theory of an outcome other than was accurate, that's problematic but probably unsurprising. I guess we'll see, maybe.

“Suffer” is a strong word here, especially in light of some of the trauma people go through in life. I try to be a realist, and while I’m not always successful at separating fact from fiction, I do try. I think the argument is silly, and while I recognize the fact that the use of natural gas is not 100% “safe” by all measures, nothing ever is. In my case, installing the fireplace has reduced our overall consumption dramatically. I like that. I think some people and organizations use fear as a tool to bludgeon people into submission. I think technology can be a good thing and if the next generation has the option of completely environmentally friendly heating/cooling and we see a major reduction in climate hypocrisy by those leading the charge for me to sit by a plant light pretending it’s a roaring fire, that’s ok by me. In the meantime, it’s cold outside and I’ll click the remote and be grateful for the smart folks who came up with safe click-to-flame technology.

I converted my old, dirty wood burning fireplace to natural gas about 8 or 9 years ago. The suggestion here is that if I’m concerned about impact to the environment, I drop $5-7000 to get an electric model with a cool led light and fake crackling w/ no heat, or $15-20,000 to return to a less dirty but dirty wood burner. I’m not feeling it, and am currently exploring the ways to beat the system in the event Gas Fireplace Prohibition becomes a thing. So far, the prevailing wisdom is to offer protection money to the politicians/authorities implementing the rules for the greater good. I’ll stay with this story…stay tuned.

Entirely possible, but if all goes as planned, there will be no subsequent gas leak.

October 11, 1993, 9:30pm @ChiGoose walks into a club, surveys the throng of sweating, heaving danceflesh, and yells to his posse "YOU WON'T EVER SEE ME UP THERE DANCING THAT DAMN MACARENO! BUNCHA LOSERS!". October 11, 1993, 9:51pm, Chi Goose...

“…at least rowing in the same direction” means nothing in the context of the Russian collusion narrative. With all the time, effort and money that went into tying Trump to treason, these are nickledick words to justify your belief in a disproven narrative. We know what happened. We know the democrats spread election disinformation to unseat Trump and scuttle his agenda, and we know you were ok with that. We know that Biden defeated Trump in 2020, and that Putin launched his invasion a short time later. These are the facts.

Unfortunately, we've seen plenty of reason to view what's passed as an objective Intelligence assessment with a jaundiced eye. From spying on American citizens, selective leaking to influence the opinions of ordinary citizens, unmasking, the withholding of critical information that might better inform citizens on issues of national importance, and massive/huge misses on stories like the Biden laptop, it's in one's best interest to question what is passed as fact. There was a time, probably, when prominent members of the left knew and warned about that sort of thing, but it seems the suggestion these days is for people to be all in on whatever narrative is being sold. That said, what the Russians may/may not have wanted is largely irrelevant to the question of whether or not DJT was elected illegitimately, or his election resulted from a coup, or if he committed acts of treason in an effort to get elected. In that regard, the democrats who spread knowingly false information about the legitimacy of our election in 2015 did more to aid the Russians in any effort to upset out apple cart than any troll farm could possibly hope to achieve. We know the conclusion of the Special Counsel and AG assessment of it. This is a matter of record--Trump was a victim of democrat political persecution. You may not like those facts, but they are the facts nonetheless.

I would think the only bigger waste of time is taking the time to declare how much time you are wasting wasting time.

The Dems were absolutely spewing anti-Trump stuff. Absolutely demolished the concept of safe and secure elections in our country. Lots of people didn’t care then, it seems presumptuous to demand more of them than you demand of yourself.

Being “pissed” has nothing to do with supporting claims of an election that was illegitimate and treasonous behavior to put a president in the WH. I want to be clear—you supported that, and now want to draw some sort of moral equivalence between anger that the favored candidate was trounced with running a 4 year operation to unseat a lawfully and legitimately elected president. You, and people like you, are the reason we get stop the steal and claims of Russia in the WH. You, and people like you, did not accept the results of the Trump election, you supported the very behavior you claim to abhor. I would care about Putin hacking the Dems, the Rs, or anyone else. Same for the Chinese. Sadly, after seeing how our current industrious leader has violated laws of the land and the guidelines of common sense, I would not be surprised at all to find it has happened regularly over the past 20 years. Btw, I also care about unsubstantiated claims of illegitimate elections and those that are stolen. Of the two of us, I seem to be the only one who consistently cares.

This is complete poppycock. Leaders of the House and Senate called Trump’s election illegitimate, a coup, and in at least one case, suggested he was guilty of treason. Adam Schiff (RIP intel committee) lied regularly about the alleged connection and claimed to have evidence of direct ties to Russia. 50+ former intelligence experts spread disinformation to assist Joe Biden in the run up to the election. The Dems launched 2 efforts to impeach Trump. That was just leadership…..what some extremist Dems supported thereafter was perpetuation of the Russia myth that morphed into claims of obstruction, the attempted public disembowelment of Brett Kavanaugh, spread mistrust and disinformation on the vaccines developed under Trump. Now, you’re up to raiding houses of opponents, taking about the threats to national security posed and just a few short months later finding egg of your face as we find out your boy Joe has been dabbling in the removal of top secret material for decades. You guys call that “spillage”, smart folks call it predictable.

I don’t always get the part about being “destroyed”, but he sounded both reasoned and reasonable in his reply. Tbh @redtail hawk seems less concerned about the Dems being bounced than he does about McCarthy’s character.

Apparently the new plan is you get a resume when someone is trying to bludgeon you with a blunt object, review it, and consider whether or not that person’s past is filled with decency and kindness before allowing them to continue on assaulting you.

I don’t think so, generally speaking. The question in my opinion is whether or not the duty to exercise care can be delegated to another individual, and whether or not his actions violated the standards expected. So, someone hands him a gun, he points it away from people in the area to test fire, something jams and shrapnel hits the person next to him. In that case, I see the application of your logic. In this case, knowing there was live ammunition on set, knowing there were safety concerns, and pointing the guy at two individuals, pulling the trigger and subsequently saying he didn’t…seems reasonable to charge. These rules are well established generally, and on a movie set, I would think the standard would be higher still.

If reports are to be believed, the entire production sounded like it was chaotic. Live rounds intermixed with props, members on set using the weapons for target practice, people leaving the set due to safety concerns, and Alec Baldwin pointing the gun at two individuals and pulling the trigger. After the tragedy, he makes a series of odd statements and apparently misleads investigators on his actions. It seems to me the charges make sense once you get past the fact that people can be charged in scenarios where a series of unfortunate events lead to death. As for pushing forward with the movie, that’s pretty pathetic imo. Creepy.

I don’t think it’s surprising at all, really. I think it’s business as usual in Washington, with high profile characters from all parties doing the same thing. They have the rules established, the rules are onerous at times so they work around them. In fact, I’d bet if you looked, most major players from both parties would be caught up in this sort of thing. Trump used it politically, and it was an effective strategy. Certainly no major political player was going to declare that it’s pretty common. Certainly, Joe Biden could have stated emphatically that he had lots of material from his days in the senate and that as VP, he removed and stored Top Secret documents in quite a few places, including in an old file box on the floor of his garage. That would have gone a long way to normalizing the action, everybody does it etc etc. Now, we’ve got this scandal where folks have to come up with explanations like as @ChiGoose says, there can be “slippage”, and sometimes that slippage results in documents slippaging off to 5 or 6 different places over 10 -15 years.

I considered that, Dude, that’s why I sought out an unvarnished opinion. I was disappointed you used that as an opportunity to lash out at B, comments I found quite scandalous. In retrospect I feel horrible for exposing him to that vitriol. He was just trying to provide a public service. It’s like watching the guy ringing the Salvation Army bell getting swung at by a chubby guy in pajamas outside the Walmarts.

My perspective hasn’t changed because the facts are clear. The Dems alleged the election was rigged in 2015. They did that many, many times up to and including statements that evidence existed to support that claim. Trump and certain Rs alleged the election was stolen in 2019. He did that many, many times up to and including statements the evidence existed to support that claim. I wish you didn’t have blinders on as you worship your false idol, but that’s not my problem.