leh-nerd skin-erd

I cleaned it up for you as the additional verbiage was superfluous. Option 3: Too soon to answer. Today, Option 3 is my answer. That said, I'll follow the same course of action you suggested with respect to grabbing a heap of Biden lovin today and reviewing his presidency 4 years hence--come the third week in January, I'll be in a position to answer. Could be sooner. I'm also happy to speculate as to what I think it will look like come January 20. Just ask--but watch the loaded questions--they will be summarily dismissed, probably with prejudice because that's what we Trump supporters do.

And many of those people voted Biden for just this reason. This one is painful for me. We committed to the $300k or so that it cost to send our 3 children to school, including the opportunity to attend school away from home if they wanted it. Going away to school changed my life in many positive ways. My wife and I both incurred debt for school, both paid it off, and both were better for the experience. We viewed the commitment to our children's education as one of our parental duties, the only caveat being I wish I had encouraged them to absorb some of the debt along the way. I appreciate the Zeeb's honesty in the post he most recently shared--he understands the debt obligation but doesn't feel the interest payments are fair. I can also understand him wanting to offload the debt to the extent possible as his own personal hh stimulus. What I struggle to understand is why it's always someone else's burden to carry. I did a quick google search--SUNY Buffalo has an endowment fund of nearly $800m. In NYS, for certain families, the Excelsior grant provides free education that takes into account only hh income. When we get to the Ivy league and/or larger schools, the endowments are insane. Penn State is at $4.6b. Where is the push for the University to give back in any way, shape form? You hooked a rich girl. Nice pull.

You've attempted to accomplish three goals here. 1. Ask an either/or question, framed as you see fit, with a subjective and incendiary narrative; 2. You've refused to respond to a query that better frames the argument so I understand your perspective; 3. You've accused me of dodging a question, thereby creating the appearance that the question is valid in form and I am unwilling to answer; I reject the question in both content and form.

Define "accept the winner" as it relates to Russia, Ukraine Impeachment and the democrat majority in the house.

It's the reality of the world we live in. It's not the way I want it to be, it's not the way I saw it during the Obama years, but it's the way it is today. No, it's not. It's identifying the type of systemic career politico bs that leads to where we are today, recognizing the destructive nature of it, and rejecting it. Biden is not America, Biden is a 5 decade dimwit who has vowed to finally get something accomplished. He was a willing participant in the Russia scheme, and as such is a co-conspirator in an attempt to steal my particular vote. There are 15 other reasons to root against him--border security, tax plan, fracking, energy independence, the 'let's get someone to pay your loan because you're the victim for attending UCLA and taking spring break to Cancun', and his very murky relationship with China to name a few.

Cool. My offer still stands—you said that I was “excusing acts of violence on their part”. What acts of violence are you speaking of? Who did what? What specifically did I post that brought you to the conclusion that I excused the specific acts of violence you’re about to reveal to me? Let’s get through this together. I can’t spell unity without u.

I’m going to assume you got into you parents liquor cabinet and disregard this foolishness. In the alternative, please point out where I excused any violence whatsoever from the posters referenced, or in fact any violence at all perpetrated by anyone there. Be specific—I want to be sure I correct the record.

Are you suggesting that if there was widespread fraud that wouldn’t change the election results it should be disregarded and we all simply move on?

Talk to your boys here. I’ve never doubted that people will vote for Biden even in his present condition. Tribalism, protectionism, liberal guilt and protecting the home field all contribute to people overlooking some stunningly obvious issue with this member of the ruling class. Transpy just commented about how the Rs are all old rich guys while pulling the lever loudly and proudly for...a rich old white guy. I was fully prepared for this eventuality. That said, it seems for some that the argument that there was no election fraud and the machines and software we flawless has morphed into something else entirely. I’m onboard with complete and total transparency and quite frankly would advocate declassifying just about everything we’ve got.

Wait...you’re arguing that there’s “tomfoolery”, alleging election fraud and complaining about the machines and software from various venders? I’m a Republican and I’m hear to say : Look at all those machines closely. (And you’re nutso cookoo if you think the Dems don’t know how to go on the offensive!)

Which they see as neither fair..nor free. Obsession with vices? What is this nonsense? The desire NOT to see a human being eviscerated for political gain on an issue that has no substance reflects an 'obsession with vices'? In the time Kamala Harris has been a major contender to the throne, and in spite of her own disgusting attempt to destroy Kavanaugh, I've not once mentioned the rumors surrounding her ascension to power in dem politics. Imo, it's mean-spirited, judgemental and to be completely honest, there are plenty of reasons to dislike her. Your biggest issue with me has been that when I point out the troubled past of your boi Joe, you are forced to defend him and set aside your own principles. I never made allegations about other political players, but just because you're comfortable with ***** Joe does not mean I need to be. As for Trump's past--I acknowledged up front that I thought the allegations stemmed from a money grab by his accusers. It's unfortuantely part and parcel to being a wealthy man in the public eye, but he declined the allegations and that's that. As for Biden--his tendency to grope and grind is much more public, and he's acknowledged that his victims just misunderstood him when he cupped a tater or two. In fact, Kamala Harris said she believed the woman you marginalized, correct? She claimed a violent sexual assault occurred--Kammy said she was credible until there was something in it for her. She traded integrity (whatever that means for a senator) for the VP slot. See Romney, Willard for a similar tale. Let's hope you're right on the senate. As I said earlier, some people push back when pushed. I'd hate to see that. As for McConnell, do tell--what's the 4.5 year slug that has you all geeked up? Besides Garland, I mean. Of course it happened...and you're right, it worked. Division sells, why would you expect unity now? The cult talk...yeesh. What a tired cliche. I'd agree with you on this issue if, in fact, there was any attempt at unity, or any push back whatsoever after the repeated failed attempts to unseat DJT. I have friends that don't like him, I certainly have liberal friends, but the liberal collective sends the message loud and clear. It's why suddenly, as if by magic, UNITY is buzzword because Biden was elected. The only question is who is on the outside looking in. Sorry friend, you voted for Biden. The rest is window dressing. You used a ton of words to rationalize whatever it is you feel, but jobs put money in people's pockets, growth is good, reasonable taxation is good, excessive taxation is bad. Some of you who voted for Biden have become so accustomed to thinking the scraps they leave for you after stepping on your paycheck is awesome. You morons (politically-speaking) lined up and voted (sometimes multiple times!) because Joe pitches that you're the victim, the rich man is taking advantage of you, and you need him to save you and it'll only cost you your pride and his hands on some poor girl's ass. The fact is that on the ledger, there are annuitants with a guaranteed income and benefit stream regardless if times are flush or we're in a pandemic. It's sort of a cradle to grave approach to adulthood, and i'm sure it's intoxicating. Think of it like this--throughout the pandemic, as industry after industry is asked and/or strong-armed into submitting to give back (defer loan payments, allow tenants to live rent free, reduce insurance premiums, etc), the state rolls on. No deferments. No hardships. No sympathy. Just "I want my money man". Cripes, here in NY, they didn't even offer to waive the late payments for school and property tax. How about a &^%$ing sales tax holiday? Temporary suspension of gas tax? Anything? Anything? Nein. Just Robert Deniro choking out poor Maury in the wig shoppe looking for the vig. For most of the rest of us forced without mercy to sustain the annuity payments, that bs Trump economy as you see it was the difference between life and death. For some, it was same/same pay for a lot less effort. Peace out. I have to go stick some pins in a doll. **Edit-one more thought on that annuitant philosophy. The genius of Biden was to encourage some folks formerly not of the annuitant class to get a taste. He sets the income bar at $400,000 (because why shouldn't some Americans work 39%+ of the year so others don't have to) and then rolls on "I'll get some folks to pay your student loan debt--man, that's not your fault you incurred $87,433.68 in student loans when you could have done it for next to nothing!". Division sells. In addition, you can figure out the cost of some people's integrity if you know how much it cost him to attend Boston College.

My younger brother drives for UPS--deliveries of vaccine to MF Suburban and Kenmore Mercy today. May have also had deliveries from other hubs to other hospitals, but had no intel on that.

And I'm liberal on many social issues. Here's the best way for me to say it using a copy/paste of your words: Though I have to say democrats/liberals in their zeal to wrest power away from a lawfully-elected president to keep moving things in their direction are coming about as close as I've ever seen. I mean they're at best flirting with the idea of removing a President from office over a phony commie conspiracy, and thena silly impeachment gambit which would seriously break everything I mean what's next--it seems perfectly plausible that they would attempt to steal the election. They've said things like 'nothing is off the table', 'by any means necessary', and of course 'the intelligence community will find six ways to Sunday to get you'. Out of everything you said, what makes me the most sad is that had he won reelection, with all the positives for people from all walks of life, you might have hated it. It's going to be flat out fun to see what happens when the arrogant prick-elect wages his personal war on the fossil fuel industry.

There are people with extreme points of view, who believe on one side or the other that things need tp change. There are people on this site I wouldn't trust if you paid me to so. Still, as a get-along guy, I watched quite a bit of footage of folks looking to tear down and destroy the livelihoods of others, and we literally saw blood on the streets. I watched large gatherings of roving human trash confront and bully citizens out and about minding their own business...and saw mostly deferential treatment from major media outlets and the 115 year old dementia patient about to assume office. Respect is earned, and it's important to know that when some folks push, others push back. I don't advocate violence, I engage in civil discussion, but we live in the real world. I've never put words in your mouth, I interpret what you have said and recreate as I understand it. As for Shoshy, he can respond, but I believe I've recreated what he said a few posts up accurately. Wrongo Charlie Chan. I never ignored what the R and McConnell did--they acted within the framework of the Senate, referenced the Biden rule and refused to take up the nomination. They certainly did not accuse the nominee of being a sexual predator, and certainly did not attempt to destroy him in front of the world, his wife and his children. The pattern is apparent---Bork, Thomas...and Kavanaugh. And as I said, it works. The brilliance of the ACB nomination was that in 2020, even the most vile among us recognize the potential downside of destroying a mother. I wished no ill will to RBG, but in retrospect, it was fortuitous that she passed away when she did and I'm grateful she decided to hang on during the Obama years. The SC is not the focus on my post, it's simply part of the explanation of why 'us v them' is the natural end game of American politics. Put another way, Ruth Bader Ginsburg--politics aside--should be an example of American exceptionalism. She was confirmed without issue, and no one raised a complaint that she broke up a happy marriage when she gave a hummer to an oversexed father on the way home from a babysitting gig while performing a pommel horse routine on the stick shift. That's not to say there were not people who would do that, it simply was unthinkable back in the day. Now---it works. Kavanaugh = rapist = Rs support rapist = votes for Biden. As for packing the court, well, even better that RBG expired when she did. You can never count on what is going to happen next. Or, next after that. I am fully aware of that, but here's the thing. I would not have supported a phony impeachment scandal for Barrack Obama, and I think the guy was a horrible president. Still, in 2020, we know that a phony impeachment scandal turns out the vote, right? So while impeachment isn't going to happen, that only leaves the politics of personal destruction. I don't make the rules, and it's sad, but again, it works. 65,000,000 people +/- voted for Clinton in 2016. They voted for the characterization of me, and the people I love and care about, as racists, misogynists and deplorable---beyond all redemption. The challenge this time around was when she rolled the bones on that tired democrat play (who can forget Biden famously suggesting that Rs were going to enslave black folks by putting them 'back in chains'), Trump was having none of it. He pushed back--something that a formerly lovable but ultimately nutless politician like Romney would not do. The most fascinating part about DJT to me is his almost unbelievable ability to say to his detractors --"Get the &^%$ outta here". While I was very concerned about Obama, I held my breath and hoped for the best. I was hopeful he would far surpass my expectations. He didn't. Good for you on wishing DJT well--in the 3 years prior to the wet market bat virus issue, as our economy roared, millions of folks on your side of the fence supported the continued attempt to destroy him. No unity, no meeting in the middle, just a constant and perpetual movement toward destruction. It never ceases to amaze me how dumb people are, and how they'll vote against their own best interests. But that was then, this is now. The players set the ground rules, and they are what they are. The rest of us push back or comply. I have no desire to meet you in the middle, or hope for the best for that fading old man you elected king.

Fair enough, but the end result was some folks moved on.

It is 'us v them'. What's odd to many of us is that you all didn't seem to worry about that when you were them and we were us. Shoshy responded to one of my posts above with "Sad". Interestingly, he seems to concur with the assessment that what happened to Kavanaugh was horrible, that the impeachment attempt to remove the president was "terrible" (something like that, anyway), and that certain elements of Russia Russia Russia were troubling. From me perspective, it's pretty simple: -What reaction would be appropriate to a Kavanaugh-style public character assassination? Let's assume Biden understands the difference between the Supreme Court and a Food Court when the time comes to appoint a justice? In my opinion, there are two choices for the opposition party: Submit, and focus on character and achievements; or Follow precedent and launch an all-out assault to destroy the candidate; History shows us that option 2 is the best course of action for the opposition. Imo, when you (who also felt the man was mistreated) and Shoshy vote for Harris/Biden, you vote for that approach to SC management. -With respect to impeachment, assuming the Rs were able to gain the majority, Biden's been in office for 40+ years. There are two choices: Let him reign for as long as his Depends stay dry, babbling like a drunken monkey and talking to his good friend Margaret Thatcher across the pond; Dig, find the dirt or something that the average Biden hater might see as dirt, and impeach him; Recent History shows option 2 is a crackerjack way to go. -With respect to a Russia-style investigation: As if on cue, as the Trump legal team moves along and Biden gets closer to Craft Day on the National Mall on Jan 20, we begin to see reports on his son's business activities in China. More will follow, Joe will be tied to the shady deals, and decisions will have to be made. The Rs have two options: Let it go, move on, lick their wounds; Start the process to uncover what needs to be uncovered, selectively leak details, generate public support and try to destroy Biden and his family; Recent history shows hate is a powerful aphrodisiac, so destruction it is. At the end of the day, lots of folks on your side are lamenting the lack of civility and the refusal to submit for people on our side. Most of us simply point to the last five years and "GTFOH", take your unity and stuff it (politically speaking anyway). Personally, I hope Biden fails. I hope he fails miserably, and at the same time the resistance (overly dramatic but whatevs) works to tear him down. That doesn't mean he's not my president--I'm an American so I'm stuck with the old douche. But...unity? Pass.

Stop yelling at me. In high school, I passed English with honors and never caused anyone any trouble. In the interest of clarity, I did not intend to imply you complained personally but see where I did. I apologize for that. I have no idea who complained.

I'm all for clarity and transparency. There are quite a few folks who indicated there was pushback from moderators specifically for viewpoints they held. The push back included being banned. I read SDS comments after the great reset, took them as they were presented and explained that I had not experienced anything similar. I simply replied to a post about an issue, shared my perspective and you're free to disregard it.

I really enjoy interacting with DR, and other than Transpy being an entitled product of the system and woefully naive, I enjoy interacting with him as well. He seems like a good guy. I’m not going to argue with you about your view on DR, it’s irrelevant to me. On the other hand, you’re right, it wasn’t a 30 page contract as I understand it. It was a 2BD bet, not Twitter, not Insta, not wear a Biden shirt down Main Street, and certainly not at a newly formed site after folks conspired to have him bounced from here. Personally, I can understand his perspective and take zero issue with it. I also understand Transpy thinking his bet spanned the international date line, but I think that was unrealistic.

Transpy feels DR should honor a bet made regarding online profiles as they appear here, after he was banished here due to complaints from posters like, well, Transpy. DR sees it differently. It’s not a question of honor, it’s a question of proximity. You raise a point we can agree of—some unelected Washington insiders undoubtedly felt compelled to save America based on their view of what America should look like. They are frequently referred to as “people familiar with..” and “...anonymous sources... or “James Comey”. Instead of practicing subversion, they should run for office on the strength of their ideas.

Tolerant. Respectful. Non-judgemental. Nice.

100% comfortable.

Integrity means something as well. Have a good day.

I have. The issue was about leadership and why some people think our leaders are running a grift on us all. I can’t think of a reason that leadership would not be as passionate as you are (most days when not discussion protests) about social distancing, masking up, staying home to prevent the spread. I honestly don’t understand why you suddenly develop scientific 🐊 arms on what is painfully obvious— a wide scale protest simply cannot occur without many people violating virtually every sensible guideline you support based on data you rely on. Well, it could, if everyone arrives in hermetically sealed test tubes. I’d place the odds of that at less than 5%. But, we can just go with “it’s probably dumb”.

Excellent. In the imagination game, I’m not sure why I wouldn’t be responsible for stepping up and saying “Listen, I fully and completely support your right to assemble and protest systemic injustice, but chances are exceptionally high that you are going to be responsible for the spread of the virus, the infection of strangers, friends and family alike, and people will die as a result of your actions. The science doesn’t just apply to strip clubs, churches and Memorial Day gatherings of 11 or more. However, if you must protest, please spontaneously appear so we have plausible deniability.”. **btw, snark aside, your point on political leaders is valid. I have Cuomo a substantial pass on early COVID handling. No one wants to be in that position and flying without a net. It’s very difficult. That said, the pass lasts only so long.