leh-nerd skin-erd

Good Lord, another link to a Vox short story? Last time you did this, it took two clicks to find a second article the novelist wrote contradicting the one you hung your hat on.

It’s not that he’s the best they can come up with, it’s the one they want in office. He is The Chosen.

Man, the blue wall did a bang up job of cleaning up the excessive force of this arrest. Dubbing in “Show me your hands!” like the officer wasn’t looking to just indiscriminately just take a life, editing it all like the officer was shot, and appealing to our humanity by making it sound like a woman was terrified for her life. I think the social worker crowd has this thing buttoned up in about 3 minutes with “Say pal, what’s got you down today?”. You put a low key guy in a soothing blue shirt, sleeves rolled up mid-forearm, and khaki pants with lime green crocs, no way there is any trouble. No raised voices, no hurt feelings, nothing. I see it now. God bless the officers involved.

As I’ve said many times Sect, I’m a simple guy. I reject the notion that I need data beyond what’s readily available to come to a reasonable conclusion. I’m not the harbinger of doom suggesting church gatherings of 15 socially distanced and masked protests create unreasonable risk where gatherings of 25,000 people gathered in close proximity do not, masked or not. I’m not the one suggesting haircuts posed a clear and present danger to humanity, or that thousands of protestors somehow magically appear masked and virus free at a protest. I’ll say it again—- people come to protest via all means of transport, touching and interacting with many people along the way. They talk, they sleep, they eat, they consume, they cry, they rage, they defecate and more than likely urinate wherever possible. They likely boink like the dickens too, mostly because that is what people do. I did not defend Sturgis, I’m not defending Sturgis now. I simply applied the logic that ultimately, to gather or not gather is largely a political decision, not a medical one. That leads to believe we have been bamboozled on a massive scale, or, in the alternative, political leaders in support of shutdowns for gyms but massive protests for individuals are all about culling the herd. If large protests are not dangerous, it stands to reason that large rally’s are not.

Interestingly, he’s willing to risk many, many more lives in pursuit of his own personal gain. He’s one of the architects of a few hundred people getting together repeatedly over 6 months in a blood sport that encourages extremely close contact and the exchange of massive amounts of bodily fluids.

Welp, you made the initial point, in my opinion it was an overly simplistic version of “Why can’t we all just get along” which for most people means “ Do what I want and we’ll get along”. Your question about protests v Sturgis is reasonable, and I’m happy to address it. Had the call for a total lockdown been observed strictly, I would be bagging on the Sturgis crowd. The fact is that long before Sturgis, there were mass gatherings of people across the country. There was precious little outcry at the mass gatherings, while those with the inside scoop suggested a family Memorial Day gathering of 11+ was exceptionally dangerous, and that gathering together to celebrate the life of someone lost was the beginning of the end of civilization. On the other hand, Home Depot and the like we’re wide open for business, subject to a max of 50 so folks could buy their petunias and tomato seeds for the backyard garden. As for the data set, I’m not sure what you’re seeing. Infection rate and death count increased in conjunction with the mass gatherings. Is that not true? Anyway, I’m 100% comfortable with lawful and non-violent protest. I have friends who I disagree with on issues that protest, I respect many of the people who stand for a cause. IMO, though, it seems silly to debate 10,000+ people being extremely dangerous on one hand and suggesting the wings of butterflies above another crowd of 10,000 creates a containment zone that is COVID free.

And...a whole lotta buncha folks who thought they had the moral high ground are lining up to pull the lever for JoeBo. He’s literally the villain Trump was portrayed to be when they were swooning these last several years. It’s absolutely priceless.

I reject your speculation. We’ve never gone full measure, no one supports full measure, and we’ll never know anything about anything because it’s all based on speculation, not reality. Using the logic dictated by the fear mongers, the reality is protestors caused many, many, many deaths, likely the majority of deaths in the country.

Rest easy in the knowledge that The Hero of Humanity will soon be here to save us all. Your boy Joe will shut it all down, mask us all up, and save us all. For the those with guaranteed jobs and income funded by the taxpayer, good fortune will come in the form of business as usual and absent the pesky concerns about how to pay for trivial things like a mortgage, car payment, electricity, and food. For others, those who see businesses and their life work destroyed by the perpetually shifting narrative that COVID kills unless people are outside burning sh:t down, good fortune means that as their financial prospects dwindle, their children go to bed hungry and they become desperate, websites like Craigslist exist for them to dispose of their meager possessions. in that regard, the entitled probably can score some pretty good stuff at pennies on the dollar. The only question Transpy is whether one is a “have” or “have not”. Which one are ya, Transpy?

Not always. She's pretty comfortable with a man sexually assaulting a woman, but only so long as it's the right type of man (rich, powerful, connected and with something to offer her) and the victim is disposable. That's basically politiking in the Kennedy mode, and while it does show progress in the American political landscape in that traditionally disenfranchised people were not afforded that sort of hypocrisy, why on earth would you support that type of progress?

Your assumption is that every interaction between a hostile civilian ends and a police officer ends in death for the hostile civilian? This is beyond moronic. There are a number of variables that are demonstrably different between Blake and the jackass in the video shown. These include, geez, I don’t know...different scenarios, different locations, and different people.

Which points to the whole problem with sending well-intentioned but overmatched social workers to respond to DV complaints. Honestly, I’d think the average local police officer would choose to avoid DV calls 100/100 times save for the ability to help a victim out of a difficult and dangerous situation. The desire to recreate the narrative is really fascinating.

He’s a brilliant entertainer in the sense he pushes buttons and has some folks off quoting him as if it matters. They see his brilliance and recognize that in spite of nearly 4 decades of saying whatever pushes his ratings or furthers his career, THIS time he’s being completely vulnerable and candid. Interestingly, during the 2016 election, when “DJT as President” made people laugh, he spoke highly of him and supported his candidacy. It’s like, suddenly something changed. (Hint: it didn’t, just recognize the pattern) Howard Stern, statesman. ?

Your point as laid out in your original post reflected arrogance typical of bigots throughout history. Your attempt at characterization of the 60,000,000 (and growing) supporters of President Trump ignores the breadth of life experiences, issues of particular importance that may have lead them to support him, and paints a racial profile that works only when you’re communicating with the dim witted. I listened to Howard Stern faithfully back in the days of WNBC. I laughed at many of the jokes, enjoyed it when he pushed the boundaries of good taste, and on occasion shut him off when he went too far for me. One thing I never confused him with was a purveyor of factual information or as a wisened old sage that I should look to for guidance. But, if Houch is your go-to, have at it.

This type of condescension represents the worst type of liberal intolerance. It also reflects poorly upon you as an independent thinker, and displays a level of bigotry hard to fathom in 2020.

I don’t think it’s weird that anyone would put a lanyard in their pocket and leave the armband at the table, or that there was a mix up and he wasn’t given one...or it was misplaced...or he wasn’t properly instructed. 5 things could have caused this, and as I said earlier, it’s a shame that his moment in the sun was tarnished by the incident. It does not make him a bad guy, 100% at-fault, predominantly responsible or even partially at-fault. I have no idea why there was a breakdown, but there clearly was a breakdown. Why not just acknowledge that? I think the security guard was dopey, I think he overreacted. As for your billy club example, I think it’s the wrong analogy. The exec wasn’t doing anything wrong, I never suggested he was. A better example would be going to a concert knowing you have tickets but not stopping at the gate and just proceeding through. At some point, someone restrains you even though you ponied up the $175 and $27 Ticketmaster service charge. And yes, maybe an aggressive ticket agent pushes you to stop you from moving forward. I don’t think they let you go because you’re well-dressed, or look like you could be in the band, or because you are employee of the year at Krispy Kreme. Sometimes sh7t happens, and sometimes it’s just because the dominoes fall the wrong way.

Damn you. I burned “Dred Scott” on something we agreed on? I wish now I had kept that one in my intellectual holster.

Last time I dipped my toe in the water, the way I see it I was rational, reasonable and checked the sources available to me. I don’t believe I ever questioned your legal opinion, I acknowledged I was not an attorney and simply made a common sense argument. When my friend provided feedback I acknowledged that and credited you with your analysis. Help me out here on what I should have done differently. My friend and I have had many conversations over the years about what’s legal, just and the hypocrisy of the system. He worked for Eliot Spitzer, knew him quite well and encouraged me to give him a chance. I did. He was hopeful the man would get things done, but acknowledged he was a bit of a douche. When Spitzer spitzed, we talked about it, he acknowledged things didn’t go as planned and was very disappointed. That lead to a discussion on the weaponization of the system, and how dangerous that can be. I will refrain from checking with him on this issue because he works for the current AG. However, I am quite certain, 100% comfortable that as a liberal leaning attorney and decent man, he would suggest that availing oneself of his/her rights makes an awful lot of sense where politics are involved. I will also refrain from asking him if working through counsel implies guilt or weakness, mostly because it’s a silly question. I gotta scram, I got some gals to meet at the soda shop and gotta pick up my letterman jacket from the cleaner.

This was not his finest hour. Or, maybe it was because he was waiting and finally got to bust out the 40s gangster lingo. I felt I was watching S3 doing Cagney at the Improv. “Ya gotta nip it in the bud, see?” ”The kids clammin’ up see, setting off alarm bells”,

I know. You sell gold, man. -or you’re a prospector.

Ok one more thing, and remember I categorized the behavior of both men as “dopey”. Why on earth would one of the most high profile personalities in the arena not have the special armband distributed by the NBA that signifies you have access to the floor? So, he approaches the checkpoint with neither of the easily identifiable visuals that are apparently required to access the floor, hits the checkpoint where the guy charged with security has been told “No armband, no lanyard, no entry”, is rummaging in his pocket to get one of the two pieces of ID and he has no accountability here? None? It’s just a rogue security guard targeting a well-dressed exec to bust his balls? Generally speaking, “dopey” behavior is unprofessional so no argument from me. At the same time, unprofessionalism on the other side contributed to the problem. Whether he wasn’t issued the required armband, stuck it in his pocket with the ID or left it at the table, he showed up at a chaotic time with none of the required ID and attempted to access the court. How hard was it to follow the two part protocol?

Okey doke. In spite of the details outlined in this compelling case study, I reject both the premise and assertions you have made here. I feel like I am dumber for having engaged.

What's best is to exercise your rights as an American citizen in a manner that best protects you as an American citizen. If a person did nothing wrong, there is no reason to do anything other than that. You're no more or less innocent one way or the other, and if you feel that you're the victim of political persecution, you lock it down. As for your characterization that he's clamming up, sure, maybe the G-men are putting the cuff on him before he scrams, but absent that, the wisest course of action is always---always, 100% of the time---to seek counsel and follow the directive. You know it. I know it. You know I know it. I know you know I know it. Stop this silliness.

It’s sad to see you slide down this path. Maybe not sad for anyone else you interact with, but sad for me. I’m running out of lefty’s to try and gather feedback from. I acknowledge hating the abject silliness of ‘nothing to hide means no reason to hide”.

What’s the bad look when one exercises his/her rights? Would you advocate all defendants in civil or criminal matters waive their right to counsel? Comply with all requests for unfettered access by law enforcement/AG? Spoiler alert: I don’t think you think any of that.