leh-nerd skin-erd

Thank you, Goose. So, one has to wonder what the objection would be beyond the people who do not agree that same-sex or interracial couples should not be afforded protection under federal law. That is, of course, beyond the people that clearly feel that they shouldn't. I'm not one of those people, but they obviously exist. I'd suggest more than a few democrat voters feel this way, and certainly acknowledge republicans, independents and agnostics do as well. People are complicated. I decided to check the official record on which Republican's might have voted 'no'. I was prepared to call a couple representatives as necessary, but here is the statement from the lone NY congressperson who voted 'no'. I really don't know the rules on posting articles, so I'll just add the link. https://tenney.house.gov/media/press-releases/congresswoman-tenneys-statement-houses-passage-respect-marriage-act Summary: She supports precedent, supports love is love, and feels the Democrats pulled a cheap stunt to create a narrative that doesn't exist, bypassed traditional rules of Congress, and represents 'fear-mongering' designed to distract from the serious and substantive issues of the day. She seems quite unlikely and unwilling to cast people to the fiery pits of hell, and assuming she's correct on the established protocol for such things, she raises an interesting and unquestionably political point. Personally, I think people should have a right to marry in the eyes of the law, and I don't really think congress can be trusted blindly on any issue. I'm quite certain we can find similar objections to similar bills submitted by Rs.

Ah, fair enough. When you mentioned "weird-assed conservative media" I wasn't following the social media angle. I'm not sure I still do, but I figure since I don't knock on my neighbor's door and ask him to read me in on the hot topic social issues of the day, why would I really care what some dopey twitter d*uche thinks? As for the NYT, the problem with agenda-specific reporting comes when the agenda is revealed. Once revealed, it's completely natural to question everything that an outlet offers as 'news'. Once that trust is lost, it's virtually impossible to get it back, so even well-intentioned but erroneous stories are viewed as intentional. Whether the institution survives, thrives or dies is irrelevant to me.

One of my truths: There was a DQ near our house when I was a child. When we would wander over that way, invariably I'd get a chocolate cone dipped in cherry. There was a sign there advertising the Peanut Buster Parfait, and it always seemed like the shiny new convertible BMW of frozen delicious treats while I was on a rusted barely running Pinto budget. I don't think I ever actually had one, and thus my Trump story a complete emotional fabrication.

The 'weird-ass' media play is not limited to conservative media and one trick clicking. It's been a thing since before the self-aggrandizing "Most trusted name" slogan was a thing. In virtually every scenario, a media outlet follows a business plan to attract viewers/clicks/retweets, and establishes an agenda to meet certain objectives. Rarely, the news is delivered in an objective, non-sensationalized way. There's no money in that.

I'm not seeing anything beyond the texts have been deleted, they appear to be unrecoverable, and there is rampant speculation that either the SS agents were communicating directly with the Kremlin to ensure the Trumpster moved the Resolute desk to a DC Hampton Inn to run a proxy govt from there, or that they completely vindicate Trump as he was wrestling that agent in the limo in an attempt to lead the rioters to a local DQ for Peanut Buster Parfaits. Nobody can insurrect after a Peanut Buster Parfait.

🙉 I'll watch this R rated stuff you send over later. Just to put and exclamation point on that prior video, I wish when I was younger, I had half the self-confidence it took for that young lady to pursue her creative passion and do what she does. It was a point of emphasis for my own children, in fact. I didn't like the song so much, but respect the work put in, and some of the other stuff she brings to the table.

I really have no issue with her. I was only trashing her to get to you. Avatar shaming is not cool in 2022, Mup.

Better to rage at the machine, rely on a politician to rage with you, then offer opportunities for employment to those who wish to work. The recent bout of hilarity after she lost her marbles when heckled at the Capitol was awesome. Now this—fake hand cuffs. What a maroon.

It would be nice, in an issue as important and impactful as this one, if the bill would be clear, concise and straightforward with no language designed as a poison pill for purely political purposes. I’m not confident, but I guess we’ll see.

Fiercely easy, maybe.

So, the Secret Service says they didn’t violate any orders or rules, or did the other day. Now, everyone is mad at the USSS and we haven’t even had a committee put together to figure out and politicize what happened, and everyone thinks the other guy is hiding something. This is a mess.

Exactly! Exactly!

He's the Juice Box guy?

I’m just trying to heal us all, Doc. Perhaps compassion is my greatest flaw.

I feel like this is a pretty good opinion-based analysis of how Biden is perceived on the international stage, and by many in the US, written from a non-Trump perspective. Apologies to Tibs and the other katzenjammer kids who feel everything is beyond Biden’s control for reasons unrelated to his lack of leadership and overall dunderheadedness. https://nypost.com/2022/07/18/biden-is-a-gaffe-ingstock-he-and-the-presidency-are-declining/ This contrast, more than his incoherence, explains Biden’s problem. Enemy regimes proceeded cautiously with Trump not only because his instability and tendency to dissemble made him unpredictable, but because he was just aggressive enough, and just dismissive enough of the progressive international order, that the rogues figured he (and the hawks around him) might just take out an Iranian terror master, such as Gen. Qasem Soleimani. Later, same piece: During a press conference, with Russian divisions encircling Ukraine, Biden — making like a pundit instead of a president — jaw-droppingly observed that Moscow would face limited risk if it proceeded with a “minor incursion,” since the United States and its allies would inevitably “end up having a fight about what to do and not do, et cetera.” 30 is the new 20!

My favorite part of wall that was her allies, Obama et al, were out there suggesting that while yeah, an Ambassador and several brave souls protecting him were murdered on her watch, sure, her biggest issue was being completely reckless with national security issues and protocol, and yeah, what she did was kinda sorta criminalish but kinda sorta not, she’d make a crackerjack President. But as Chi suggests…classified, top secret, as if.

I think Tibs is a trust fund liberal, and that the high cost of living impacting normal working folk have no real impact on him. This allows him the luxury of buying into everything pitched his way. For a person in this situation, if “power to the people” means crushing families along the way, so be it—he’s fine.

I always thought he could be most effective in lobbing shots at Biden, the democrats and woke culture. Add in Biden’s decision not to go the border, the immense challenges there, inflation, supply issues, etc. Why he would want to be president again is beyond me.

“…as I’m currently doing it…” is the key phrase here. Some people have a healthy skepticism for the information she’s presenting because of how she presents it. She probably should toughen up a bit. I recall Trump being on the Today Show well before the 2016 election. Savannah Guthrie set up a question about his chances by asking him about a poll that showed him struggling, and Trump replied that an NBC poll just released showed him doing very well at that point. He suggested that sort of thing was exactly why people didn’t trust the media. She appeared quite flustered at the time. It was great television and just a quick sampling of what was to come.

Maybe she should text Joe B, last I heard, he was paying deference to the Crown Prince and inquiring about his dirty fossil fuels. He probably has some pull with the department that handles birthed people records.

I didn’t mind paying for it, but I was guaranteed to have at least one game a year with issues. Crappy picture. Receiver issues at game time. Inability to record a game one year. I actually hated dealing with them.

I feel like I’ve heard this story before. Government officials not being truthful, the IG looking into it, something fishy going on, etc. I can’t place where though, that’s what’s driving me crazy.

I try and stay out of some of these posts but hadn’t seen Hillary Clinton and her toxic comments on Clarence Thomas. In that regard, I’m glad I checked in. That’s one angry woman.

In the next clip, Gayle asks “By suicide, Hillary?”.

Great day to be in the Adks, Westy. Saw a news piece of a guy shot by an officer in Saranac Lake, thankfully that sort of thing is rare up there.