leh-nerd skin-erd

Everyone calls it something!

We could end abject stupidity and do much more good! “Hey gurl…let’s dye a waterfall!!”. 🤫

Most people don't like being called out for their own limitations, and in fairness I suggested he was a bigot before he accused me of that. He wasn't particularly original, but it's a natural reflex for some to punch back. After his response to Deek's question about religious freedom and the government, coupled with his complete cluelessness on COVID lockdowns and houses of worship, he's not exactly the DaVinci Code on this subject. I'm completely comfortable in my thinking that Stop the Steal was a natural evolution of political manipulation that started with democrat leadership in 2015. I've yet to encounter a person on this board who's provided a reasonable counterpoint to the argument that the words and actions of dem leadership was an assault on the integrity of our elections, the legitimacy of the Trump election, and on the question of dems suggesting Trump was guilty of treason. I asked Ned about that, he moved on. It could just be the format, but Ned suggested I said Stop the Steal was an "extension" of the Russia Investigation, but that's a mischaracterization, deliberate or otherwise. I referred to it as the 'evolution' of the allegations of illegitimate elections, accusations of treason etc. The point is simply this--the hard sell on integrity of elections and treasonous behavior worked very well for the dems. Their supporters accepted the notion as fact. So, it worked for them, why wouldn't the same branding and message points work for republicans? I'll acknowledge I could be wrong--maybe the most informed people in the world about Russia etc truly thought they had evidence of treasonous behavior but just couldn't prove it after nearly 4 years of door kicking, witness interviewing, deal offering, and such. What actually happened was that allegations of illegitimacy/treason/coup gave way to 'collusion' which morphed into 'obstruction'. but hey, could have all been a grand coinicidence.

I think it’s because, after hitting his head on Sunday, he looked like he had funnel-shotted a handle of Jack Daniels.

Hey Buff--just checking back in--hope you and yours are well!

A few years ago, I was in Las Vegas with a friend. My friend stayed out drinking all night, came back the next morning and announced he wanted to go have a burger. As it was 7am, I had no interest on doing so and told him he should go sleep it off in his room. Well, he was drunk and insisted, and I figured he was likely to get into some trouble, so I went with him. 5 minutes into our quest, we walked past a lady dressed as an opera singer and shouting nonsense at the top of her lungs. My friend heard her, and in his intoxicated state, looked at me and asked "Is she *&*(ing talking to me?" and turned to engage. I grabbed his arm, told him she had issues and that we needed to keep moving. He was somewhat insistent on speaking with her, and it was only when I told her she was spouting gibberish that he relented. Previously, I asked you about the dems actions and statements about illegitimate election, coup and treason. You had no reply, even though you were pretty heated up about Trump's allegations of a stolen election. It seemed to me then, and moreso now, that you are ok with spreading information about the integrity of elections when you get what you need out of it. That seems hypocritical, of course, but just about everyone is a hypocrite from time to time. Now, after your link to the wiki, a free-form, open-sourced collaboration for everyone who wants to chime in on any given subject, I realize that here, I'm my drunken friend and you're the lady in the opera dress. I appreciate your feedback, I'll consider what you've shared and my role in our conversation. Btw...wiki on wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_reliable_source#:~:text=Wikipedia is not a reliable source for citations elsewhere on,in progress%2C or simply incorrect.

Ah, fair enough. I try not to assume too many things, though I’m guilty of that from time to time. You never know who people “were” when they were younger. It’s been suggested I have liberal tendencies or certain issues, and I do. I enjoyed listening to Rush Limbaugh and didn’t really do so until later in life, past 10-12 years. I found his commentary interesting, though I tend to view people in that vein as more Dave Chappel than not. I may at one time have thought the way you did on virtuous leadership, but that day is long, long past. People upset with Trump and his comments about women had no issue voting for Biden and his actions with women. The same applied the other way. I stopped looking for moral guidance from people in elected office a long, long time ago.

Why would anyone be surprised you listened to Rush Limbaugh 30 years ago? I listened to Howard Stern faithfully back then, his show was a staple when I was driving in/around metro NY/Hudson Valley back then. Heck, I listen to him now, though only when he’s interviewing someone I want to hear. Ironically, the sorta judgey judgementalism you displayed here is often reserved for people like MTG. Or, on then other side, AOC.

I see issues with supply and pricing directly related to the policies of players in the American political system. In that regard, he’s been a player in the game for decades. He also inserts himself into the dialogue with the standard demonization of companies and people in that industry, so the specific details about this moment in time are less important to me personally than some other things. If voters associating Biden with discontent at the pump results in the right type of change politically, I’m all for it.

I think honesty is the best policy. He made a mistake. The end.

Damn, a minute forty-seven to try and explain that Biden made a mistake? She's tough to watch.

Everybody likes something, and now we know about the Nedster.

The government stopped people from practicing their faith less than 2 years ago, Ned. Maybe you missed it. Home Depot? Open. Liquor stores? Open. Massive protests in the thick of a pandemic, people traveling in close contact from city to city? Completely and unassailably fine. Church, Houses of Worship? Locked down under threat of criminal and civil action. I didn't suggest you were harassing Deek, he's a big boy and can figure out how he feels. I pointed out that there was an opportunity for agreement, and you chose to ignore it and attempt to mock him. I say 'attempt' because you ended up looking pretty silly, and like a bigot to boot. I support law enforcement efforts against people who committed crimes on 1/6. I supported the officer who made the decision to shoot Ashley Babbitt based on the theory that he felt his life was in danger due to actions of the protestors. My first reaction to hte behavior at the Capitol was disgust. I also think Trump erred in holding the rally that day, not because he couldn't or shouldn't, but because the potential for it to be used against him was too high. I support clean, fair and honest elections. I felt that the Dems referring to the 2016 election as illegitimate, the result of treason by Trump, and to the notion that a 'coup' put Trump in office was dangerous and sowed doubt about the integrity of our elections. I asked you what you thought about that, and like the poser and hypocrite you seems to be, you bailed without answering. That's weak, chief, but expected of a bigot. I also point out repeatedly that leading voices in the democrat party sounded alarm bells about the security of our elections, thereby impugning the integrity of our system. I have stated numerous times I see Trump's Stop the Steal as a natural evolution of "Trump's Coup" from 2016. We're nearly two years past the Biden election, and still waiting for the :wink wink: evidence from the select committee that Trump was directly and criminally involved in sedition or conspiracy. This is the third time the dems have had held all the cards to get Trump, and it sure seems like the only thing popping here is the Dems political attempt to influence the mid terms. To be fair, why wouldn't they? People like you are easily manipulated. It works, politically, so that's the new marketing trend in politics--the other guy is illegitimate. As for Trump and the documents, I see that as an unforced error on his part. He already knows that the dems will launch any assault, including nuclear options like declaring him guilty of treason, because that's what their base demands. I think if Presidents were routinely raided by the political opposition for matters like this, every president in the history of the country would have this sort of problem. Seems clear Obama would fall, Bush likely as well, and so on. I also note that after a 10 hour search by dozens of trained professionals, it's quite telling that items unrelated to the job at hand were seized..medical records, tax records, personal papers etc...and that the Biden DOJ was adamant that it was an afront to freedom and the very security of our nation that an independent party be assigned to dig through the items taken. Who the *&^% buys any party saying "You just have to trust us!"? Who, besides people like you I suppose. Maybe what you seen you didn't see so good?

See, this is where you reveal your true colors, Ned. @SoCal Deek says he agrees with you that religion should not be close to government, and similarly suggests that government should stay away from his ability to worship as he sees fit. A normal, reasonable, American reply would be "Agreed". Instead, you respond with gibberish and attempt to mock his reply. You're exactly the type of individual recruited to harass someone on the other side of whatever coin you're on, you just lack the ability to see it.

Except for now of course. I don’t know Ma, Nicky B or Champagne, but I do know the Culinary Institute. I used to do quite a bit of work along Rte 9 in Wappingers, Fishkill and up in to Pough. I was treated to a very nice meal there one day. Cool spot. I agree on the degree.

Poppa converts the IRA to a Roth, inheritance time it comes tax free anyways, no? If I understand it correctly, the inheritance still has to be withdrawn in the 10 year window, but no one says you have to spend the money taken.

CIA?

Good thoughts from here, Buff. Stay safe.

Ho’d up Chef. We exchanged ideas on the big picture as it relates to religion, and then you made your point about one murder outweighing all the good that faith contributed to the lives of people historically. When I shifted that to law enforcement, you called me out and I offered what I think is a reasonable counterpoint as it relates to the power, cultural significance and dogma of right v wrong as offered by the US Government. Then, ::wupshaw:: you want to teleport me back to The Crusades and 1200 years ago?? Around here we call that a Tiberian Shift. I mow’ def know you are better than that. Be that as it may, if you prefer not to address that in relation to your standard, that’s fine. If it’s Chef and Lehn’s Excellent Adventure, so be it, back to the year 1100 we go. I believe the Crusades were directed by The Church, I believe the actions undertaken fall into the category of the horrible stuff we already agreed on. I am neither proud, nor embarrassed by the historical record, choosing instead to focus on the misguided and often evil acts of man at the time. As for this being proof to you of the fallacy of the concept of God, you already made that point. I’ll revert back to our earlier posts on the subject and simply say that the comfort and power of faith has been of benefit of untold billions and of people.

The US government? Seriously? The power to end your life, end life as you know it, imprison or emotionally and physically, and offer sweet redemption when you stray? Seize the product of your work? Add to that comments about shared values, the soul of the nation, the greater good and justice for all. I’m comfortable with my response based on the ground rules as you laid it out. Then again, they were your ground rules, not mine. I held a different opinion.

That's whack. Did the action of Derek Chauvin outweigh any of the good of law enforcement has done over the past couple thousand years? Anyway, we'll always have Iran. That's enough in this crazy world.

The original post I replied to was when you suggested 'more harm than good'. I don't think that's true, hence my reply. I agree that people acting in the name of some version of God have caused massive, major problems throughout history. As for Iran, I'd guess we would have to discuss who(m) is doing what to who(m), and their perspective on their God. I try hard to avoid bigotry and bias, and I'd think there are Iranian's who's views would align with mine--peaceful alignment with beliefs and society, love of family, respect for others etc. I'd think if their God was down with that sort of thing, their God sounds a lot like my God. If, on the other hand, their God was about complete and total subjugation of all, my God is, indeed better than theirs. About 20 years ago, I chose a doctor who was born, raised an educated in Afghanistan. We had met through friends, spoke quite a bit about his faith (Muslim) and mine. He spoke about the destruction of the village he grew up in, the medical school he attended being destroyed by fundamentalists and how difficult it was. More than a few of my life lessons start like that, where someone talks to me, I think about their experiences, and how I might feel if it was me. I had an infection in my finger one time, went to see him and he suggested it should be lanced. He said to me before he got started "Be ready. This is not going to be unpainful.". I thought about that, looked at him and said "You're saying it's going to hurt?", to which he replied "Yes, it will hurt quite a bit". It was pretty funny, and he was correct.

I don't make the rules on topic love, Chef. I'm just a vessel here. I have no interest in arguing the point, have no desire to suggest you follow The/A Word, and to be completely honest, struggle at times with issues of faith (mine, not anyone else's). I do think it's a lazy argument that those who found comfort in faith, lived lives of faith, or followed the basic tenets of faith are overshadowed by the 'horrible things' done. I won't argue that many, many, many horrible things were done in the name of faith, but I'd argue whether many/most of those actions fly in contrast to the basic tenets of faith. I'd also argue there has been a sh&t ton of of non-religious, non-faith based horrible %$#@ done by humans to other humans. I'm just sharing my thoughts on the topic, like everyone else.

Personally, I think protesting and debating with women on the way into a clinic for services--including abortion--is wrong. One has no way of knowing the specifics that brought her there, the pressure she is under, the emotions she is dealing with. I think this debate needs to happen on a higher level. I also think towing your adolescent children along is wrong, too, perhaps at times on the order of encouraging gender confusion for one's young children.

We may be arch enemies politically, emotionally, and societally, but we're not animals, Tibs. That looks good damn you.