leh-nerd skin-erd

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?

You’re telling me that a woman can’t get an abortion in this country? That’s simply not true.

Tell Jo to hook on back when that day she’s pining for comes. I’d predict she’ll be happy only when her version of authoritarianism is knocking heads over at the Ministry of You Can Only Say What We Say You Can Say.

Thank you for the opportunity to clarify. Dickley raised a particular scenario, and it happened to be a child with a family and non-explicit photos. I wasn’t suggesting that the family tree project should be scrapped, it was that if the school district felt there might be unintended fallout the/a program the school district would have a decision to make. In my opinion, we need more discussions/projects that lead to understanding of our collective journey, not less.

You're killing me here, Smalls. One of your first notes included clarification that a teacher should not talk about sexual intercourse (obviously), and in this one you clarify that Jimmy's class pictures won't be sexually explicit. I went to Catholic school in the 70s, what sort of Thunderdome school did you attend that prompted you to make sure there was no misunderstanding on THOSE issues? 🤣 I'd think if the school district was concerned about fallout from that type of project, that project would be on the chopping block. I wouldn't have an issue with it. I have to tell you, my children had some good teachers, some average teachers, and a couple were not great at all. Personally, I wouldn't want any teacher getting too far off on a tangent as I described earlier. I'd bet most teacher's don't want that conversation, either. The one's who do, well, they probably shouldn't be teaching. What I wanted was kindness, empathy, understanding and lesson plans, with a little bit of toughness as needed.

I like your approach. It could just be me, but when little Jimmy asks why his classmate has two mommies, it seems perfectly age appropriate to say "Some children have two mommies." When little Rebecca asks why little Jimmy is wearing a dress to school, it seems perfectly age appropriate for a teacher to say "Some children choose to wear a dress.". There is a tendency for human beings to talk too much when placed in an uncomfortable situation. The best approach is to establish a process consistent with the law, train the teacher on best practices, offer word tracks to the teachers that consider outcomes, set the expectation of behavior and hold the teacher accountable for their performance. Simple wins, usually. Glad to hear that the relevant bit was NOT "Don't say gay ever ever ever.". There was a rumor circulating that that was a thing. Hope your daughter is doing well.

This presumptuous, narcissistic and completely self-absorbed baby must have slept through the period of time commencing in 2015 and running up and through 2020. But if he’s your go-to, run to him!

What a nerdy baby.