leh-nerd skin-erd

Thanks. Let’s hope for less left woke to make the Democrat political machine pristine. As for suppression of free speech, the dangers of trusting whomever “they” are at any given point in time cannot be overstated. In business, standards that comply with regulations equitably across the board make sense. Where government is concerned…suppression is a recipe for disaster. I’ll take a zombie asking questions and pushing for answers over a sheep trusting blindly any day of the week. It seems to me there was a time when those on the left did that quite effectively, back when “they” told people to move along and comply. Thanks for expounding on your thoughts on the right. I felt like I had a pretty good handle on where you were at previously.

So run with this then if it’s your kink! At least you don’t look foolish pining for hidden messages in unredacted sections of Mueller. Or riding Geo Conways jock on a prosecutor who quit—quit—when his boss informed him he was off base. We agree. Trump lost the election. We agree Trump was impeached. We agree he was a one term president thus far. Since we both agree, we both win here—it’s like T ball. We agree he lost the popular vote, but while that’s relevant in the world of prom queens and County Fair Milkmaid contests, it’s irrelevant in presidential elections. See, even when you choose a winning point, you have a way of really gumming things up with irrelevant information like this.

Stormy Daniels is not a victim, she’s a business person selling a product. She saddled up with Avenatti which, it turned out, was almost pathologically dunderheaded. When that went south, she decided to forge ahead and roll the bones. Unfortunately for her, it turned out Trump was actually the aggrieved party. Justice served is Justice realized. I’m not keeping score, but Billsy, has there been a subject you hitched your wagon to where the hero of your tale actually prevails? You’re 0-for-everything. I’d bet if you asked if she was happy you were on Team Stormy, she’d look at your track record and think “Keep that jinx far away from me!”. Then again, maybe the Freemasons got to the judge? Yeah, that’s probs it.

Stormy was cutting him a check for $3hundo-k last I heard?

Again, a pass on Obama? What is it that holds you up there? It doesn’t make you a bad person that you’re happy he withheld information that might have helped the nation, it just makes you a big part of the problem. As for losing, if you’re tied that deeply to the outcome of an election—and it seems you are—my suggestion is to push back a bit. Too many people lose sight of what’s really important in life. I am beyond blessed in life. I was during Bush the Lesser, Obama, Trump and even now with the Biden/Pelosi kleptocracy running the show. In spite of your insensitive comments directed my way, I hope you are too.

I didn’t do anything to help, Tibsy. I sat, waited and watched the complete and total collapse of the Russia play. Had there been evidence of wrongdoing, treason etc, we would be a whole different place today. Your people held all the cards, literally. It started with a bang and and ended with a fizzle as a tired old man embarrassing himself before a national audience. I don’t understand why you’re afraid to address the Obama/Biden issue. Is it because you know that sort of politicking is exactly the reason we end up with Russia hoaxes and Stop the Steal campaigns? You’re complicit in the problem, Tibs! You can love Obama and Biden and still acknowledge the problem with withholding information when the country was being torn to shreds. Or, you can keep politicking.

How did he do it, man? How did he beat the system? 🤔 You must have missed the Obama question. Should the information that the Clinton campaign was directly tied to the Russia story, most specifically the propaganda pieces prepped by—here’s a funny things—-the hostile foreign national Steele? Oh since you were mean to me, you smell bad.

I knew how you felt, Tibsy. You’re in the “Everyone knows it but the dumbest man that ever lived deftly beat the system with a Special Prosecutor, unlimited budget, wide-ranging ability to investigate, and every major media publication utilizing anonymous sources that didn’t pan out and circular reporting” crowd. 😵‍💫 Btw, Tisby, do you think Obama and Biden should have come clean that the Clinton Campaign was a major contributor to the Russian story? Even though we’re at odds on certain issues, the nation was torn apart by the Steele allegations. The greater good, you know.

What negatives can you suggest about your party? I’ll offer a few tidbits that bother conservatives: Russia investigation, Trump walks away untouched, allegations of treasonous behavior, an illegitimate presidency, 4 years derailed. The fact that Obama and Biden were debriefed on the Clinton connection very early in the Trump admin and said nothing about it. Biden’s acknowledgement that he directly tied taxpayer funds to the removal of a prosecutor in a sovereign nation. The character assassination of Brett Kavanaugh. What bugs you about the home team or if not your team, the other guys?

It’s funny you mention that point—I was focused on the support the leaker will get from the left once/if they figure out who did it. It’s as likely the leaker will be handsomely rewarded as face any significant consequences. That said, this was a d#ck move by Will Chamberlain at this point. The disclaimer aside, there are some crazy people out there. Sadly, it’s the way the game is played as you pointed out.

Smart, connected, nice-looking. If she’s the leaker, she’ll probably be fine.

You’re on a good run here with sensible commentary. I see @SoCal Deek addressed the right to life consideration, but suggesting right leaning folks “are unwilling to be taxed to help pay for children…” is complete nonsense. I think most people—including liberal lefty’s looking forward to having their debt obligations get the Jimmy Hoffa treatment— get uncomfortable when they realize they work for the govt until April or May when they are allowed to keep a bit for themselves. There’s plenty of money in the system, it just gets stepped on multiple times along the way.

They do, when they want, but don’t, when they don’t. They’re a conflicted lot.

Ms Tran seemed reluctant to discuss the bill she wrote.

That's not a foregone conclusion, in fact, one could argue an entire cottage industry might arise transporting individuals to states that offer services they value. One might also assume it would be good for some blue states with declining population. In the meantime, cities burn, innocents are assaulted/maimed/killed, and police officers die at a rate substantially higher than anything ever imagined by a crazed anti-abortion murderer.

I'm happy to correct the record if I "liked" a politician using us v them posted by any member of the PPP family. Please, show me where that happened. It's a complicated and nuanced discussion. We agree there?

That's the point exactly--big picture, it's an incredibly complicated and nuanced discussion that the poli's break down to us v them. My point with @ALF is that politically speaking, being pro life for one's self but everyone else should be free to decide on their own is a Pro Choice position. I'm not demonizing him, and respect his point of view, I just don't understand the emotional gymnastics in play. Your point on the autonomy is spot on. There is precious little reality to "My body, my rules" when considering laws, rules, and regulations in the country. Better stated, it goes "My body, my rules so long as I conform with the rules the state and federal government has set in place.".

What does that have to do with my post? Do you believe that the murder of an abortion provider is more tragic or more illegal than the murder or a police officer?

The SC nominee issue is a fair point, but I'm not at all certain about "illegal in Republican states". I think the question will ultimately boil down to a reasonable determination when the right to choose ends at some point prior to birth, with appropriate consideration for sexual assault, ***** and concerns for health of the individual. I think I understand what you're trying to say, but this sure sounds like you're Pro Choice. I see a number of folks trying to thread this needle where religion is concerned and I really don't understand why. As for the partisan nature of the country, it is what it is. I think that whole notion is oversold to begin with. Most politically minded folks seem to define partisanship as "We'll get along great once you square up to my way of thinking." Abortion has been a hot button, divisive issue forever, and I'm in the camp of suggesting that if it was bad law, it was bad law.

Murders, firebombs, and anarchy sounds an awful lot like what went down in cities across the country just a couple years ago, Bill. In fact, if you substitute police officers for abortion doctors it’s going on now.

It’s like you say though, BillSy, there’s no one more credible than a spineless coward pimpin’ a book deal.

I think he's betting on you believing just that. You should buy his book, mos def. I'm just grateful Mr. Esper had the moral courage to, immediately upon leaving office, grab a couple loose leaf pads and some #2 pencils, sit down, write out his story, find an agent, find a publisher and have the copy edited, prepared for release in less than 2 years. It's shame he's mute, really, or this all could have been brought to our attention when Trump was still Russian puppet.

Now you’re reduced to repeating language I used in my last post. How depressingly unoriginal. Think things through before you post, you’ll thank me in the future. Or, on the other hand, maybe your friend Jo can root around for some fresh insults you can copy and paste. She’s probably got the time, what with her suffering in perpetual servitude and all. Only you can fix you, lad.

Sure you are. You linked a tweet about freedom, it was the tweet of an overly emotional petulant child. That was the point. The fact is that your gal Jo can get pregnant repeatedly, abort repeatedly at virtually every stage of her pregnancy. Pull it together for goodness sake.

I’m telling you that the tweet you forwarded, from your friend Jo, implied that things were different than they actually are. When I suggested she hook back around when the world she described was a reality, I meant just that. Jo has multiple options to terminate any and all pregnancies with little regard to how far along she is, potentially extending beyond the birth of the child she is carrying. This is pretty common knowledge. You’ve acknowledged it yourself, of course, here. Why do you posit something only to change the subject when callled out?