leh-nerd skin-erd

One of the first album purchases I ever made, sadly not long after the plane crash. @muppy saw them at Rich Stadium, as did a good friend of mine. I was a late to the table so I missed it. Good for you for doing what you can. If I think long and hard enough on meat consumption, there are days when I think I could go vegetarian…then I eat some good wings. Or a BLT. Or whatever. So, on your issue with electric vehicles, assume you’re correct and the policy issue is indeed a scam. Extrapolate a bit—-and I see @All_Pro_Bills has done a much better job than I can highlighting his thoughts above—-and consider other policy initiatives and you begin to understand that how you get to be declared a climate heretic when you question the narrative. Welcome to the club.

Thank you.

Data varies, but suggests 1 - 1.3%, which equates to between 10,000 - 13,000 late term abortions each year, assuming the stats are accurate and that the books aren't somewhat cooked here. By contrast, 18,500 +/- murders during the same time, so relying on % may make it seem less awful, but the numbers are not insignificant. I'd agree that most sensible, sane people are against late term abortions, which simply means that reasonable people transition from "pro-choice" to "pro life" somewhere during a pregnancy. Yet, there are clearly people pushing abortion until birth, and laws that reflect that. In a normal, healthy pregnancy, at what point do you personally transition from "it's a person's right to choose" to "you have to think of the child"?

Don't be disingenuous, 4th, you weren't just "trying to figure out" where I was coming from. You were rude, ill-mannered and quite presumptuous. It happens sometimes, so no hard feelings, but I hope I've clarified why I replied the way I did. More--I'm not particularly interested in drilling down to nitty gritty of climate science. Here's why: Historically speaking, science evolves and changes. New discoveries are made, technology offers solutions, and that which we thought before is disproven. When I hear that everything we ever needed to know we now know, I wonder about the agenda of those who declare such things. There is a religious fervor on one side of the aisle, and that makes me inherently distrustful; It seems to me--and this is an area CKA took particular exception a while back--agenda driven individuals in positions of power are using the fear of climate catastrophe to leverage wealth redistribution schemes. It seems to me that while preaching that the end is nigh, and then updating as necessary to end is nigh +1..+2..etc, policy makers often reveal an unbelievable amount of climate hypocrisy. Whether it's the Clinton's, Obamas or Bush's traveling the world, burning through fossil fuels, paying to pollute, or the annual trip to Davos, it seems on a personal level they are wholly unconcerned about climate change. As I view these people as being the most in-the-know on the planet, and assuming they don't want their grandchildren to inherit the earth they describe, it makes me wonder what the real story might be; It seems to me that there is an awful lot of money in saving the planet, and more than a few people getting extraordinarily wealthy in the process. All that said, I recognize the role that govt plays in social engineering, and I recognize that many positive outcomes can stem from a partnership between government and private industry. I simply do not trust blindly, and generally try to follow the money. Here's one last thought on Kay's posts. In following her thoughts on some other issues (socialism, abortion, and taxation) I find there is precious little common ground. That's ok, of course, but it causes me to be distrustful generally about her perspective here. That's not to say she's wrong, she may be dead nuts spot on. if, down the road, I come to see it that way, I'm happy to share my gratitude. In the end though, here's my underlying question for you. In light of Kay's posts--- What are you doing, as a citizen of the planet, to change, impact, alter the path the world is on to the apocalypse? Have you gone vegan? Sworn off shish kabobs, or gone with grasshopper/grasshopper/bell pepper/cricket/onion? Converted to a heat pump? Sold your gas-powered vehicle? Tithed to the gods of green energy (15%, minimum I would expect)? Moved to a green energy commune? If you're like most people, you've probably not done much at all---but if you did, good for you for living your beliefs. Sincerely, I mean that. I live mine as best I can. I'm mindful of waste, mindful of the environment, invest in certain ESG funds that interest me, and push on. I do acknowledge throwing styrofoam in the regular trash the other day--the recyclable can was chock full with the remnants of Amazon/UPS boxes.

Settle down 4th&Smitten. I’ve interacted with Comrade Kay on this issue in the past. I’ve acknowledged her contributions, learned a thing or two, and she’s proven more than capable of responding on her own behalf without some hormonal patriarchal teenager coming to her defense. Kay has shared her thoughts on my thoughts, and I’d characterize her thoughts (in my words) that I’m wrong, a climate denier, small-minded, unreasonable, uneducated and probably a few more. Respect her enough to respect her ability to handle things for herself. It’s not 1952, she’s got a LinkedIn page for heavens sake! As for your question, Kay’s response, in part she suggested Orlando T launched an ad hominem attack. This, after CKA shares her thoughts on the general dunderheadedness* of those who disagree with her. That got me thinking and I shared what I chose to share. *Dunderhead, I think Kay might characterize me as a dunderhead, too. Btw, the item I broke in that highly educated but nuts lady’s house cost me around $2.50. Adjusted for inflation on this admin’s watch, I’m thinking it would cost me a ten spot or more. Thanks a lot shrinkflation.

It’s what I do, Tibs, I care too much sometimes.

Watching this squabble from the outside looking in, I’d humbly offer that a person can be highly educated and still be nuts. Back in my younger days, I visited the home of a lady with a PhD in somein’somein…may have been Education. I can’t recall exactly what she was wearing, maybe purple clam diggers, a blue tube top and yellow flannel shirt tied at the navel. Long, stringy gray hair, a bit unkempt, and a hoarder on a major scale. Food supplies/mason jars/prepper supplies everywhere, stacked two or three feet high, maybe an 18” path meandering through the home. I actually knocked something over, she asked me to pay for the broken jar and I did. I feared the alternative was an aerosol spray to the face, poor Leh-n waking up later chained to a bed on a Sealy perfect sleeper, while she removed my toes with a potato peeler. She had at least 15 that I saw in my brief time in her home. Then, not long ago during COVID, a poster here-decent enough guy who is apparently quite highly educated opined that non-vaxxers should be placed on an island, and if I recall correctly, their children taken away by the State. Bookended between those experiences spanning 40 years are a number of other experiences and stories that convince me that the two are not mutually exclusive.

I know what you said, it’s why I shared the article. This particular group of doctors, not the evil Death Star GQP nutjobs that lurk behind every door, cautions that policy based on your nebulous concept of “viability” is a very bad idea. Don’t shoot the messenger.

The “viability” argument isn’t good enough for that well known group of religious whackos represented by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists either. https://www.acog.org/advocacy/facts-are-important/understanding-and-navigating-viability But, simple sells.

You originally asked me three questions, I answered them. None of those questions was “Fine, they have warts, so what?” or “What country doesn’t have corruption”? I think we agreed on the answers to the first round of questions, let’s cherish the moment. Well, actually, you just made a similar point, when you asked “What country doesn’t have corruption?”. Don’t you remember? I’m getting worried about you.

I think people like Tibsy know it happens, but to acknowledge that requires acknowledgement of the innate hypocrisy of a hard and fast position on anything political. Witness what happened with Biden and top secret docs---many here went from thinking Trump was the only one who ever had docs, to nibbling on the notion of 'slippage' when offered as a plausible explanation to why Biden possessed, to eating on the whole enchilada of slippage, recklessness, documents at multiple locations, no safe guards, no concerns about obstruction, Biden revealing national secrets, and finally Biden claiming a witch hunt in play against him as all perfectly normal Washington behavior. Situational ethics in play, I guess. 🤷‍♂️

I see the aggressor as bad. I see the nation, more accurately the citizens, being bombarded as victims. I remain unconvinced that Ukraine is a bastion of democracy, mostly because there seems to be a history of corruption associated with the government. The fact that the US is providing assistance to Ukraine in no way means they are above question or reproach. There is ample history of the US government assisting governments, dictators and some not-so-great people. That said, Ukraine could be a democratic Utopia as you believe, I just don't know that to be true. Language, Tibsy, language! H E 🏒 🏒 conveys a similar meaning but doesn't expose tender ears to your vulgarity. As for election attacks, I accept that Russia has, is, and will attempt to impact our elections. It's common knowledge that governments do these things. Look at Ch. Schumer and his comments on Israel. They got you all riled up, but it's the same old same old. Think Saudi government, and you and your liberal kinfolk getting all torn about MBS for 5 minutes under one administration, raging about how your man Biden was going to bust him up when he got in until, suddenly, he's in, nothing happens, he's besties with MBS and you're booking your trip to Sandals Riyadh. Some things just are, my friend.

We already agreed on the Burisma connection. Moveon.com! I don't know what this means to you, but censorship and withholding/manipulation of the truth is alive and well---and it seems that everyone with a pulse agrees on that. You might say it's one side, I might think it's the other, but the masses are still yearning for an honest, ethical free press. I'll circle back to where I started. I could not tell you a bit about Ukraine, Russia, borders, culture, and who seized who(m)'s lands, who misappropriated what, and what percentage of the Ukrainian population might well want to return to Mother Russia (though from wiki, the population is 17% Russian, which makes me wonder). I can't tell you about hostilities, who said what to whom, and who has partnered with what foreign adversary. I will say I am extraordinarily cautious on declaring any side 'the good guys' to the extent I believe there are only a few isolated instances of torture by a rogue band of soldiers. That defies common sense. No argument. If you have to pick a side, I agree you pick the lesser of two evils, and one that more closely aligns with our nation's strategic interest. Russia hasn't fit that bill since just before the election of 2016. Besides, after JB famously got rid of that one bad apple in a country of 33 million people, we can sleep easy at night knowing our money and weapons are going to a corruption free zone.

Yes, I think that expression has broad application in life, and try to consider the perspective of the other party when speaking on subjects that are interesting to me. With respect to La Ron’s post, the added layer of complexity is the tone and direction of reporting coming out of the conflict. As we have so often seen, an administration can flex its muscles to encourage stories be told in a certain way, with certain facts revealed and others withheld. My point simply was while the Ukrainians may well be skilled, effective and disciplined fighters who follow such strict rules of engagement that acts of vengeance and rapidly dispensed field justice are few and far between, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

Interesting thoughts—a little extreme with the cult talk as you advocate for the slaughter of generations of plant life, and a tad Mao-esque for my tastes, but no one liked acid rain, and forests are mose def cool if you look beyond all those darn trees.

“Sunny”. Oh, the irony of it all.

I don’t know anything about the region, and a Burisma connection seems unreasonably convenient. It would fall into the “50+ of our most experienced intelligence experts declare a laptop to be Russian malfeasance right before a highly contentious presidential election” convenient, but that’s a different discussion. With respect to Ukrainian activity, I’d think it’s fair to consider whether or not “occasional rogue incidents” accurately reflects what’s going on there. It would seem unlikely that one side is practicing barbarism on the scale of 10/7, and the other maintaining operational and ethical discipline while in a fight to the death.

Hi Mup, We chose a similar path with our children, and considered it an investment in their future to do so. However, we had some pretty basic rules. Attention to their grades and scholastic performance was required. We focused on state school tuition, room and board, books etc. Beyond that, it was on them to figure out the math and as it turned out, they did. Part of that math, btw, involved our own commitment to work longer than we might otherwise have to. We did our level best to guide them, and while we made mistakes, two pieces of critical feedback was shared time and again: No, you can't do that; That doesn't make any sense; I've known many, many people who followed a similar path, and of course many who didn't. I have made mistakes on purchases, investments, and some things I thought I knew to be true turned out not to be true after all. I can understand renegotiating debt, changing the terms of the loan, and in appropriate cases, bankruptcy being considered as an option for students in need. I can also understand special terms for students with special needs, single parent assistance, and so many other things that address difficult circumstances. This ain't that. The democrat/Biden plan is to grab votes by treating individuals as simpletons incapable of performing basic math, devaluing higher education and at the same time, doing basically nothing to address a key player in the supposed scheme--colleges/universities/endowments that run in the hundreds of millions--is absurd and as Frankish indicated, illegal. But yes, if President Biden and the democrats offered to relieve a monthly car lease payment, or shift 50% of a person's rent/mortgage to other math-proficient citizens of the community, it does indeed remove a weight of sorts from one party....and places it on another. The problem there is it blesses some of the wrong people, politically speaking.

It's only different when you remove objective analysis from the equation. It's hard to imagine a fresh-faced law student arguing passionately how the laws designed to safeguard our national security are pliable enough to allow to accommodate the barnyard explosion of silliness we have seen with Biden, Clinton and Trump. I can see an ideologue running with it, or perhaps an experienced and completely cynical attorney who recognizes an uphill political battle where the law isn't really a big deal, but someone who actually cared?

So is this illegal of the "No one is above the law" variety, the "No one really cares as long as it's their guy breaking the law" category, the "We're against illegal activity but this is less illegally illegal than what you're guy is doing" category, the "We need the DOJ to knock down some doors and seize some unrelated attorney/client privilege" category, or the "This requires life in prison!" category? Yeah, you can usually tell the people who really need the government to reallocate their debt obligations--they tend to make connections like this.

This was a particularly fascinating time in history—the massive gatherings, the rest of the compliant world existed under threat of civil/criminal penalty, the medical community murmured and a virus apparently hovered. Meanwhile, limousine liberals supported the spread and raged about vax hesitancy.

This post is like an abstract painting, where one can see what they want to see, or see nothing at all. For me, the part about the “Jesus” clause is pure poetry. On the other hand, I was speaking with a group of friends in my book club the other day, and the topic of where we got spat out from came up. It grew contentious so we tabled it for another day.

Men lost what, Daz?

My goodness, what a timid lady. She lobs a softball question, must certainly assume he'll answer it to the extent that she can move on and provide cover for him...and he gets hung up on how to search for records? True, he tried the national security angle, which is quite laughable given what we now know, but for goodness sake she should have some level of professionalism and point out the absurdity of his position.

Does San Francisco have any nearby wet markets in case this gets wonky?