leh-nerd skin-erd

I don’t see this happening. For every Biden, there’s a Republican doppelgänger. These people are above the law, and where money and influence converge, they ultimately protect one another.

So…the president has the authority to act immediately…has had the authority to act immediately since Jan 2021…was VP under Obama who had the authority to send this statement for 8 years…and the Post quotes Dick Durbin (a highly influential senator since 1997) as saying “it’s time” to send the Saudis a message…and the message should come just before the midterms…because fuel prices are high during a time when the Dems have worked for exactly this type of scenario for decades? High energy prices; The push for a move to green energy; American dependence on Saudi oil; Dems control the WH, Senate and Congress; You’re allowed to question the narrative Tibs, and recognize that the Trumpian push toward American energy independence wasn’t all bad. Anyway, why wouldn’t Biden just pull the trigger?

This thread commenced in 2008, 14 years ago. W Bush was president. Some popular things in those days: Apple bottom jeans Boots with the fur with the fur9 The Blackeberry Twilight, the movie 14 years later, with nearly 10 of those years seeing democrat administrations and all of those 10 with Joe Biden being the first or second most powerful man on the planet....what has changed? The Saudis etc still seem pre-inclined to tell American presidents to %$#@ off. https://english.alarabiya.net/business/energy/2022/10/05/US-criticizes-OPEC-decision-vows-to-curb-its-control-over-energy-prices Maybe we need to elect better leaders?

There IS that, Doc. Good point.

Yes. On a scale of 1-10, with 1 being 'not a' and 10 being 'hellz yeah ya are', you're a 10.

Now how did I miss that? wny 1 l-s zed

Did you meet Tibs on the head injury floor at the Buffalo General?

Let me guess...you would rather I continue to point out your obvious, sustained hypocrisy than face the indignation of being unable to answer the simple questions I posed? What's so hard about all this for you? These are painfully simple subjects.

Ah, you have special rules when it comes to “admission”, that’s what I was referencing earlier. Biden admitted inappropriately touching multiple women (often called “groping”) and you love the guy. Same with Clinton’s, both of them. HW did not acknowledge being a “wife beater” as you have claimed, acknowledged anger issues and poor behavior and suggested he never broke a law. Besides, I never voted for him. Now, let’s see how Tibsy cares: Did you vote for WClinton, assuming you were able? Did you vote for HClinton, she of “bimbo eruption”, perpetual enablement and victim blaming fame? Did you vote for Joe Biden, acknowledged groper, perpetual plagiarizer and candidate with a history or making racially insensitive comments?

The accusations of him beating his wife are just that, accusations, in a hotly contested political race. I take nothing at face value where politics are concerned. If he had a conviction on his record for domestic assault, I would consider the facts and make a decision from there, though in your scenario, I cannot imagine voting for a convicted 'wife beater'. Then again, that's not the scenario here, is it? Lots of people have different children with different partners. It's already a thing. That would not stop me from voting for that person; Abortion is a divisive subject, and this is the sort of October surprise element I was speaking about. I support a woman's right to choose within reasonable standards for many reasons, not the least of which is I have no idea what I might have done/supported when I was much younger and had there been an unwanted pregnancy. At the same time, I think the approach to abortion by some pro-choice advocates borders on the grotesque and obscene. So, a pro-life candidate having supported an abortion at some point in the past would not preclude me from voting for a candidate. I do believe however, that if a candidate supported the causes important to you, you abandon all pretext of defending and supporting victims and vote party line.

I was certain you were just messing around on Clinton/Lewinsky, but now it seems clear you've got the classic mindset of a toxic male. Many victims of this sort of trauma 'love' their victimizer. It's one of the reasons the actions of the predator work so well. I'm just surprised to see you defend the guy so passionately. Clinton is bad, that's completely irrelevant to allegations against HW. What is relevant is that people like you are happy to look the other way and use the 'she wanted it' defense when it suits you, and pretend to be offended when it's someone else. I couldn't support Herschel Walker if I wanted to, I don't live in Georgia. If I did, I would weigh out my options, consider the relative credibility of allegations, factor in the October surprise element, and my personal viewpoint on the most important issues in the race. When all was said and done, I would also factor in the very mindset that you shared here: The standards I might apply when considering to do business with an attorney, accountant, or plumbers cannot be applied to politics. As I hold my nose and look away, folks like you will flock in large numbers to vote for people with serious ethical and moral issues, all as they pretend to champion rights these their candidate(s) tend to trample all over.

I understand your point here, but that vax issue was a very hot button deal at the time. With the approach the NFL took to it all, there was no real flying under the radar to begin with. Lots of people did care about his beliefs and had no problem sharing their feelings with him. In context, for some, he went from beloved and quirky 'great get' and fan favorite to being a pariah to some. When you add in the fact that he took it personally when some fans turned on him...it was a recipe for the type of ugliness we saw. As for division at the team level, I always figured on a percentage basis, had the vax been optional, a high percentage of players would have forgone getting it. I base that on the fact that a fair amount of these guys are under 30, high performing athletes, and have a willingness to expose their bodies to traumatic injury on a regular basis. Add in a high percentage of players come from communities the expert's suggest are typically vax hesitant...I'd think what caused a lot of players to get vaxed was the money element and pressure by the league. In the end, I was happy when we signed CB, happy he was a Bill and thought he was damn fun to watch. It's a shame it ended with (some) hard feelings, but it was a fun ride.

Holy cow, you really think ML was a "willing accomplice"?? Maybe she dressed inappropriately, Tibs, or showed too much skin? 1955 called and wants its approach to viewing workplace interactions back. She wasn't a willing accomplice, Tibs, she was an individual caught up in the very, very dark game of workplace power dynamics on the world's greatest stage. Whether or not she had a crush on the guy, whether or not she wanted to sleep with the guy, the onus was on him to not be a predator. He failed in that regard and damn near destroyed her life. Then he lied about it, exposing a 22 year old female to accusations of lying, manipulation and attempting to bring down a president. Your heroine Hillary, and your political svengali James Carville were active and willing participants of the attempt to discredit her. Your attempt to sweep it all away with the old 'she wanted it' defense is why it happened over, and over and over. The people involved are why it happened. It's like the whole #metoo and "#ibelieveher" movements were just a show for some people. Come to think of it, we already knew they were a show when you all saddled up for one of the most notorious and admitted gropers in American politics.

On the bright side, if any trouble breaks out, you can heal thyself.

Using your standard, Clinton raped a woman, assaulted several others and used the power dynamic of the highest office in the land to use an intern for a spittoon and/or humidor. All you stalwarts punished him by making his wife a senator and major presidential candidate. Hell, some folks even think she won. Why you rush to defend this creep is beyond me, but heck, it’s only been 30+ years of wrongdoing.

Oh, I’m right Mack Daddy. Carville is a mercenary in the Great War, and holding him out there as anything but a partisan player who will say anything other than that which promotes dem policies is silly. He’s compromised and can’t be trusted. I guess if you want to play it that way, I’d have to think about it. I thought about it. Herschel Walker supporters have been a thing for a year or two, the allegations against him may/may not be true in whole or part, and the political landscape is pretty much slash and burn for every race. Clinton supporters like Carville targeted victims, denigrated women who were brave enough to come forward, and supported the politics of personal destruction of accusers. They then supported Hillary Clinton, a notorious enabler and victim blamer who ran on the carpet bagger platform for senate, then defended her when she trafficked in classified information, and supported her during the Benghazi testimony where she participated in a cover story where some poor bastar d was blamed and life threatened to cover up admin errors. They also supported her when she trashed tens of millions of Americans for not supporting her as people beyond redemption. I don’t think it’s even close. Clinton supporters who trash others are amongst the most hypocritical people to ever walk the planet.

The rajun cajun has demonstrated he's anti-woman, anti-victim, and pro-target the victim over his years as a Bill Clinton loyalist. His comments are despicable. He was also pro-no-big-deal-to-keep-top secret documents when Hillary the lesser Clinton was running, flippity flopping here with Trump. Hard to say what's true. He's unabashedly a dem apologist/strategist, but maybe this time he's right.

So grave a threat that the finest of the finest investigators, knowing their actions would be viewed through a political lens, mistook Federal tax returns for top secret intelligence. If the DOJ has nothing to hide, why fight the appointment of the Special Master to begin with, and stonewall once appointed? It’s like they want to establish their own rules of the game.

You got BillSy talking all tough on the internet with your craaaaaazy talk about proof of wrongdoing being required. You’ll be the talk of the virtual water cooler on the imaginary coffee break. One of the most troubling aspects of this scenario—beyond the potential for political malfeasance by the Biden admin and dem DOJ—-is the the desire by the DOJ to stonewall the lawfully appointed Special Master. For all the talk of wrongdoing by Trump, the last thing the Garland DOJ seems to want to do something a comply with the very reasonable review by the Special Master. It’s certainly fair to wonder why that is?

Stacey Abrahams, a major candidate for public office in Georgia, explaining how she didn’t not not not say the election was free, fair and beyond reproach, and how she completely supports our legitimate process w/e of things she doesn’t like in the process which is not fair, or legitimate. https://www.foxnews.com/media/stacey-abrams-claims-cnn-never-denied-outcome-2018-election Stacey A says Stop the Steal!

This is one of the most chilling things said by a Senator I've ever heard. On top of that, with Maddow not offering even the most minimal objection to what he is suggesting tells you all you need to know about her. This is another example of very unAmerican behavior I've asked for feedback on from those I might consider moderate democrats on the board here, but no one really wants to touch it.

I agree with this analysis, and think the squeeze on the “disinformation” element is problematic here.

No photos, he doesn’t care. Photos, he’s an attention *****. Can you imagine the outrage if Biden didn’t visit the southern border and the humanitarian tragedy down th——oh, wait. Never mind.

I’m torn on @aristocrat post. I don’t know anything about the AMA and would appreciate any additional thoughts you might share. Big picture, I think that the medical profession is like any other profession, great folks/good folks/bad folks. A consumer has to make informed choices to the extent possible, and the AMA seems to operate like a union for the benefit of its members. It’s unwise to trust blindly and assume information shared is always for your benefit. If, for example, the AMA advocates for removing a concerned parent from dialogue regarding gender reassignment issues, pregnancy etc, well, it would certainly make me question just about every other piece of advice they shared. Threats of violence and harassment should not be controversial issues. They should be investigated, and where appropriate, charges filed. I also think people that get their daily dose of credible information from social media posts need to rethink their strategy.

Sure, there are problems with the federal program because it's handled politically. The same scenario applies to Medicare, and Social Security. Government pensions and benefits are are not adequately funded, are borne by all Americans and benefit the select few, relatively speaking. Then there's this sort of thing: https://www.csus.edu/indiv/k/kusnickj/honors/northridge.html#:~:text=The United States government declared,in to assist in recovery. Local Response The United States government declared the Northridge earthquake a national disaster. $11,000,000,000 federal assistance was sent to the Los Angeles and Ventura counties.* The Federal Emergency Management System (FEMA) sent personnel in to assist in recovery. National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) agencies were put in charge of helping in long-term recovery. (FEMA, USGS, National Science Foundation, National Institute of Standards and Technology). *$23,000,000 +/- when adjusted for inflation Why the special treatment for the poor folks on the East Coast? This is a federal program and should be fixed by the feds. Match risk with pricing, I'm all for it. But suggesting the feds abandon a program they designed and created would be devastating to the economy. An alternative might be to privatize the program, let the free market figure it out, but even then, the inherent nature of government seems to be to completely ignore the math associated with risk and reward.