leh-nerd skin-erd

It’s a weird dynamic to be sure. On the other hand, it does show exactly what the franchises view as an unacceptable risk to reward ratio.

It seems each time someone makes a claim, and a politico says “We should listen”, the next big thing that happens is…nothing.

It makes you wonder if they can’t figure it out, or don’t want the problem solved. When one controls water supply….

This is the problem with hyper partisan politics, the inability to see beyond the improvement in one’s personal situation. The market is adjusting to socio and economic unrest. “Biden the unifier” was a myth. Biden is who he always was, an incompetent boob similar to the guy you see at the local market, telling you all the great things he is an has done, trying to charm the pretty girls at the register as he walk by with toilet paper hanging out the back of his pants. Your democrat ancestors knew it—that’s why he was shown to the curb previously by your parents, grandparents and great grandparents. It really took a whole lot of foolish offspring to elect him, and we’re seeing the results. Everything is not his problem, but the guy’s idea of leadership is blustering to some guy about how many push-ups he can do. All that was before the sudden onset of his stutter, the one that manifests itself with symptoms of dementia.

No doubt. In addition, there’s a massive leadership void in the US. You place an old man with cognitive difficulties in the White House, have junior interns shepherding him around like Great Grandpa at a picnic, and uncertainty follows.

I’d be surprised if the bastion of fact-checker truth, where some people became extraordinary wealthy supporting politically motivated causes, would have any sort of issue with under-estimating the number of fake accounts. That might impact value of the company.

Is the suggestion that 100% of the time, police officers arrest and incarcerate the drunk and disorderly guy, or the guy with no shoes? 75% of the time? 15%? I think the police would be completely behind the outsourcing of mental health issues to non-police associates. Domestic disputes as well. In spite of the narrative, I think the overwhelming majority of law enforcement professionals want to do their job, help some folks out, and go the &$** home without being shot, stabbed, spit on or cursed at, and do so without shooting or taxing anyone.

Well, no, not if you're a student of history, Alf. The Whitewater investigation took six years from the initial DOJ referral that the Clintons were potential beneficiaries of illegal activity, and quite a bit more than that from start to finish. The Mueller probe took two years from the date the Special Counsel was appointed to clear President Trump, and that was a solid 3+ years whatever didn't happen was alleged to have happened. The Dems 1/6 Committee is ongoing 16 months after the breach of the Capital. When taken in context, the dems first suggested Trump was an illegitimate President, elected in a coup, and 6 years later we're still waiting on proof. You might be correct--though you clearly have no faith in the ability of the SC to objectively analyze that which might come before them ----but a wait and see approach is always best.

It would certainly reduce the number Americans traveling to Edmonton for medical treatment, that’s for certain.

No, it’s on me. I misread “medical community” as “god”.

It didn’t read like that was your point originally.

I suppose it depends on the context. I looked the outcome of the Mueller investigation and thought, geesh, all that time, money and partisanship and they got nothing. Then I was told the real evidence was hidden in what wasn’t released. Then I looked at the outcome of the Stormy Daniels saga, what with her attorney/dem media darling going to jail, and the outcome of her legal troubles. Then I was told that Stormy musta had something really big on DJT, presumably in addition to the restitution bills of $300k+. This guy is strange to be sure. Seems unhinged at times. However, I agree with Frankish that you can’t throw a stone and not hit a creepster in Washington. When you think about it, most of the history of the current polis of either side has yet to be written. Who knew JFK and RFK were taking concurrent liberties with MM, and maybe working with the mob back in the day? Some folks think the allegations of our current President sexually assaulting a woman are quite credible, in addition to his acknowledgement that he was pretty handsy with the ladies when people were actually in the room?

You liked it because you’re a fat cat rich money guy. You’re part of the work 40+ years saved and invested in his own future lottery clique. I bet you even paid off your own debts, ya selfish bastage.

I get the feeling the Dems liked it when everyone stayed home and hunkered down.

I don’t share your perspective. I suppose if I did I’d wonder why the medical industrial complex allows this scourge to perpetuate. Money, I’d bet, if I did. Don’t even get me started on male pattern baldness if that’s the next great mystery brought to the table.

Huh. The advances in reproductive health over the decades have been nothing short of amazing. In addition, the advances in mental health treatments for people who have suffered through that event are amazing as well. If you believed in God, your perspective might be different.

Don’t shake your head at me Playa, I believe in a woman’s right to choose, up to a point in the pregnancy where things transition from medical procedure to… ghoulish. (Sexual assault, woman’s life at risk is another issue entirely). The way I see it, you and I see things the same way. In the end, we agree that at some point during a pregnancy, choice should perhaps no longer be an option. Now you may say, with hesitation due to your Christian faith…”Ugh, I don’t like it, but the law has to be clear that a woman can abort up to the time a baby is born”. I might feel the law has to address things by 3 or 4 months, but fundamentally, we have the same general view about abortion. As for pregnancy and govt telling people what they can and cannot do with their bodies, that ship has long since sailed. The reality is the govt has all sorts of rules on bodily autonomy. In fact, once a child is born, there are all sorts of rules and regulations about what a man must do financially to support the child. I think the ultimate measure of a man (or one of several key metrics) is how he treats his children. I support those laws generally, but they sort of date back to the patriarchal days of old, no? Why is a man compelled to support a child he may have not wanted? Who is the govt to dictate terms that go against the free will of a human in that case?

Because it had nothing to do with the post I sent. If you think about it, there’s lots of stuff I didn’t include that I could have: Strawberries have seeds on the outside. The Kentucky Derby, wow! Exciting! I wasn’t a fan of disco, but I wish I learned to dance. Pay Attention, Buttinski.

Ah. It's Creepy Meme Monday. I forgot.

I wasn't trying to have you engage, I saw you posted up thread (or in the other thread on this issue) last night and was surprised. I had started off asking for more feedback from you about what "Pro Choice" meant in your world. I think we might agree on what that might look like, but then scrapped it because you are the self-proclaimed PPPipsqueak and I understand it's not your favorite place on the board. Sincerely, I was not trying to draw you in, I was just acknowledging the voice you bring to the discussion.

BillSy, you're a bigger Q-style conspiracist than any true believer could ever hope to be, but in essence you made my point. You've spun wildly all over the page from Roe V Wade to compulsory vasectomies to now birth control, marriage and whatever other tabloid stories you seem able to consume, and your appetite is ravenous. You're the poster child for "demonizing the other guy" political branding. Your latest post sounds to me like it was written by a crazy haired professor locked in the basement of a liberal think-tank somewhere in middle America. I will do what I always do in these situations. I acknowledge that there may well be a tsunami of backlash from liberals and left-leaning supporters to carry the day at the mid-terms. I have never--not once here, or in person---suggested, remarked or opined that 2022 is a done deal. I wouldn't do that. Too much landscape yet to cover, too many things can happen, and the fact is that people will vote over their own long term interests in exchange for cash in hand now (see College Debt, Evaporated as if by Magic!). Your post reveals the obvious truth: Negative branding works quite well.

First, I agree with you on the band name. 100% score. I fear, however, when naming a household pet "Moloch" you open the door to potential liability when/if that dog chomps on a passerby or the Amazon guy in one of those silly tiny-package vans mocked by UPS drivers everywhere. I won't argue polls and numbers. Booooorrrr-RING. When I dig into these numbers, or any numbers, I'm struck by how freaking difficult it is to find out where people stand on this issue. Lots of folks are 'pro-choice', obviously, though to what point? 3 months. 4 months. 6 months. 9 months? Whenevs? It seems to me that regardless of how this all plays out, someone in authority always has their fingers in the abortion pie. Someone is always limiting choice (again, except for those who support unconditional no questions asked abortion until birth). The real question seems to boil down to where choice begins, and where it ends. So, on moral imperatives. I may be on a different side of the political spectrum, but I think you're correct that where the outcome of the election is concerned, education and branding is critical. If you allow the opponent to establish the messaging, you lose. I'm not convinced that abortion will be the end game here some dems have suggested it is. I believe that while it's a hot button issue, before voters start worrying about someone else's problem, they worry about their own problems first. It makes sense to me, a simple enough fellow, that people who don't care about the outcome of a pregnancy one way or the other probably don't care much about the impact on the person who is pregnant so long as it's not them. So, my thought would be the Rs should focus on disinformation on Roe V Wade generally, elevate Pro-Life Women to deliver that message, and move on. From there, it's all about Branding the Brandon and all the bad $%$# going on with the Dem party today: Inflation; Crime; Gas Prices; Supply chain issues; Crazy green energy plans and the impact on people's lives; Ineptitude on Russia and the Afghanistan withdrawal; Das Truth Commission; Market volatility and consumer confidence; The ever-present specter of the stolen election; We'll see soon enough. Shout out to my friend @muppy for wading back into the PPP fray. Good to have some strong chick* voices in the house. (*yeah, I said chick voices. My body, my fingers attached thereto, my laptop, my font, my rules)*

I’m advocating for resolution through the system we live in. You’re advocating for carving out a process that is unreasonable, unlawful and removed voices from the discussion that you don’t want to hear. You’re a presumptuous fool. “Hide behind elected officials”?? Here’s the thing—what you want is never going to happen.

You said I am “imposing my beliefs on others”. I asked for an explanation, realizing you would likely tap out and change the focus. What a surprise…you did. New subject about “kidding myself”. No, BillSy, I’m not kidding myself at all. You’re on some fantasy world tangent and you make less sense with each post. People will break the law(s) set in place by our elected officials, and some will directly impact what a person does with their body. Drug laws. Prostitution laws. Soliciting prostitution laws. Abortion laws. These laws will have been put in place by elected officials that are men and women. When you get a second tell me what beliefs I am personally imposing on others as you suggested a few minutes ago.

You’re confusing apathy for dislike. We can agree to disagree but in the end, it’s your opinion, live your life. We live in a well designed yet imperfect system based on certain rules. You can petition to change those rules, or pretend that they don’t exist, that all women think and act in lockstep with you, or that anyone in this country has an absolute right to privacy and choice. Any way you slice it, men and women, working together as elected officials decide what rules govern the system. What beliefs have I imposed on others that have your taters in a pinch? We talked. You said blah. I said blech. You said blech. I said blah. Then you sent over a picture of your “Trump-Reimagined” poster.