leh-nerd skin-erd

That’s an oversimplification of the problem. If the story is accurate, they have a team of individuals showing up at your home, some in quasi-paramilitary gear with “official papers”, suggesting that for the greater good you offer your family up for a blood draw? They rely on psychology and theatrics to manipulate people into believing submitting is compulsory? In 2020?? If only there was a way where the government could reach out quickly and efficiently to the masses for volunteers, set up a professional screening center with a visitors bureau, offer an explanation of the process on a small, high quality hand-held monitor and a sanitary blood draw station. Instead, the geniuses have launched a program with a decidedly Mediziniche Aufzeichnungen feel to it. . My response might not be as visceral as some, but I’m no less inclined to tell them leave me and mine alone and if they truky feel the program is worthwhile, reach out to me through my physician’s office.

Rich boy.

This is why men are so confused these days. You women all want to get so yappity-dappity when the poor bastard forgets to pick up flowers on Valentines day, but when a guy who just happened to shut down a hemisphere needs to see his lady, to share his feelings and just talk...he's the subject of mockery. Men hurt too. I guess when you are all self-sufficient and can skin your own goats, no room for romance anymore, huh BG? #sad

A few years back, I was volunteering at a high school wrestling tournament. A friend of mine is a politically connected attorney from downstate NY, who sort of exemplifies the stereotypical metro NY mindset. He's loud, shares his opinions freely and speaks his mind. Anyway, he was working the bracket table, announcing which wrestlers went to which mats, who was on deck and who was 'in the hole'. Lather, rinse, repeat. "RHINO, WEST SENECA WEST, YOU'RE UP MAT 1. 3RD, MARYVALE, ON DECK, MAT 1. TIBERIUS...MAT 1, IN THE HOLE!'.". Anyway, this one guy rolled up on the table complaining that he had not heard his wrestler's name called. I was looking though the brackets, trying to do what I generally do in life, which is solve problems and not take things personally. My friend gets done with his latest call, the coach in front of me looks at him and says rather forcefully "Look, this is the second time our coaches didn't hear the announcement, and our kids are out there warming up and we don't know it!". My friend looked at him, looked at me, and said in a voice loud enough for everyone to hear "I DON'T CARE." and got back to calling names. The coach looked startled, looked back at me and I shrugged my shoulders and said "We're calling the name's coach, you guys have to pay attention.". To this day, that makes me laugh just to think about it. Every now and again I text my friend and start with "I DON'T CARE". To him, it's a perfectly natural and comfortable response, to me, it would be like wearing wool underwear. I bring it up because it seems fairly obvious that's Trump's response, and where someone like Kemp is concerned, it's probably the appropriate response. Seriously...these people walked in lockstep with Russian collusion for three years and should be ashamed they were duped so badly by their guys. It wasn't Trump's doing, it was the politicians they will line up to vote for again...and again...and again...and again. @Kemp and the like = Alice the Goon.

Thank you. I think we agree then, his response was appropriate and proportional to the accusations.

Hmm. If you believed that the Benghazi video back story was accidentally created, I see your point. If you believe that the Russia investigation really just boiled down to a series of unfortunate events spanning a 4 year period, I can see your point. If you believe that the majority of American political candidates over the past few decades have spoke eloquently on the need to resolve the obvious issues at the southern border, only to errantly forget to address it over a 2, 4 or 8+ year term(s), I certainly follow you. But therein lies the rub--since we disagree on these fundamental issues, there can be no common ground to be found, and your definition of dignified behavior is largely irrelevant. The concept of dignity is a myth, though I would acknowledge that superficially, Joe Biden may have appeared Senatorial--and thus, on some level, dignified-- just prior to and immediately after sniffing hair/groping women/fishhooking staffers in back alleys. Of course, I don't know what you think the appropriate dignified response and demeanor of a sitting president should be to being accused of treason by the opposition party because you errantly missed that part of my reply. No worries though, I expected things would go this way, they generally do. Apologies to all for taking this off topic, I'm like one of the Four Wise Men, asking questions when people raise an issue, only to find that to certain questions there are no answers.

Hogwash. W. Bush, according to logic, liberals and Barrack Obama manufactured a war out of thin air, sent American men and women to die and was also responsible or the deaths of many, many innocents abroad as a result. In most part of the world, he would be correctly labelled a war criminal for his actions as described. Barrack Obama, according to historical record, spearheaded the assault in Libya, which resulted in the deaths of innocents, acted as an agent of regime change and due to his actions generally, was directly responsible to the emergence of ISIS. Later, he was directly responsible for the deaths of American citizens in Libya, and when things went south, he created a backstory to deflect blame for his missteps and which served as a propaganda puff piece served to the American voter. Both presidents sat back and allowed the southern border to fester on their watch, both by extension oversaw the death and victimization of perhaps hundreds of thousands of citizens on both sides of the border. It remains to be seen their actions were prompted by apathy, greed or something darker, but the facts remain. Finally, as the Russia hoax unfolded over a nearly 4 year period, started under the watch of Barrack Obama, replete with broken rules, broken regulations, lies to the FISA court and a cast of unscrupulous characters the likes of which are often seen in a James Bond thriller, it became clear to many that there was an active, sustained attempt to undue an election. As Barrack Obama rode off into the sunset, a massive plume of carbon emissions following in his wake, he was oddly silent on the investigation. W. Bush, he the man calling for peace and tranquility as we battle the virus together, remained silent as well. There are more examples of course, but based on my measure, none of these activities equate to anything close to 'respect' for the highest office in the land. There's no such thing, it's a myth. I'll ask you the same question I ask all the other high-falootin' presidential decorum advocates: What is the appropriate response to being called treasonous by members of the opposition party, to an attempt to unseat him from office, to unfounded allegations being made that threaten the individual, his wife, his children and anyone in his circle?

Do you own a Giglio service for wealthy older women in South Beach? If so I think you missed out here.

I have a friend who is a former LEO. Honorable guy, most definitely tough enough that he doesn't need to prove he's tough enough. The game here was lost when they dragged the original guy down to the ground like a pack of hyenas, and assuming this was actually a scenario where that guy was within 4.5 feet of others, would be the sort of thing that my friend suggests represented a total loss of control by the police. Ugly &^^$ will get uglier as the temperature increases and the willingness of people to be treated like sheep decreases.

I think he's a horrible communicator, he seems to think every person listening is an adult with special needs. I gave him credit in the early days for getting out and speaking to citizens directly under difficult circumstances. He was dealt a losing hand from the start, and while I personally think he's a total douche, I tried to be reasonable and factor that into the equation. In the near calm light of day as the crisis moves on, any reasonable analysis points to a massive leadership void from the get go. In retrospect, he should have acted more quickly, marginalized DiBlasio, taken control and locked NYC down. He should have had the state much better prepared to face the pandemic w/ respect to ventilators, hospital readiness and expansion capabilities. As luck would have it, the feds bailed him out. All of this comes under the recognition that in a free society, bad ***** can happen sometimes.

Nah nah nah ho-ho-ho'don a second. Your stunning, almost incalculable hypocrisy while pledging you support to a person who is a gross caricature of a powerful Washington insider who has taken liberties with women for decades, and stands accused of a horrific crime against a female member of his team, not withstanding, your story has evolved. You suggested previously that President Trump told people to inject the bleach themselves. Now you're suggesting he commissioned scientists "look into it". Which was the lie? Check the transcript of your PresidentTrump's comments and let us know. It should be easy.

Thanks for posting this breaking news about the dangers of tuning in to caucasian male talk show hosts. I found a separate article that I thought is on point as well. University of California at Berkley study finds statistical evidence suggesting that “greater viewership of Hannity relative to Leave It To Beaver reruns is strongly associated with a greater number of COVID-19 cases and deaths in the early stages of the pandemic” WRITTEN BY HOLDEN MAGROIN PUBLISHED 04/22/20 1:51 PM EDT According to the article, the study authors “calculate that Fox viewers who watched Hannity rather than Beaver were less likely to adhere to social distancing rules, and that areas where more people watched Hannity relative to Beaver had higher local rates of infection and death.” Researchers suggest that in spite of the dangers associated with COVID-19, there is no data that suggests Beaver watchers have any greater risk of catching the virus than the population as a whole. "Our message to the American people is clear, and it's good news for most. Enjoy all the Beaver you can, it's completely safe." said lead researcher C. Howett Fealz.

I am not a fan of your posts or logic in general, but there are some things that transcends politics. I’m very sorry to hear you are going through that.

All the best to your motherTT.

Your Hannity fixation notwithstanding, I believe the record will show he was accurate on the Benghazi cover up, on the Trump election and HRCs and DNC shenanigans on Sanders 2016, Russia investigation, partisanship impact on Mueller investigation and the eventual outcome of the probe, corruption at the top of the FBI, surveillance on American citizens, FISA abuse, and it would appear the sustained effort to entrap and coerce Michael Flynn. By contrast the WaPo has msm awards for inaccurate reporting, but yeah, 82 sources. That’s way more than they had for Russia. Or not. Why do you like reading these op-eds with all the inflammatory rhetoric? They just seem to get you all worked up.

I always hate to hear when someone’s business fails. However, this article implies that “lesbian bars” don’t seem particularly popular with lesbians, and haven’t been in decades. Seems more of a business model problem than anything else.

You have the wrong guy for this post. I'm not feeling shamed about anything. I'm doing an emotional calculation, and that emotional calculation is no different than others that I do with regularity. People I love are in the target zone, and that impacts my thought process to a large degree. I believe strongly that the numbers quoted as fact are anything but factual, at least insofar as how mortality rates are typically calculated during normal times. When all is said and done, it costs me .50c and blocking my winning smile to maybe make a difference. I don't see that as a major step toward being shipped out to a govt re-education camp, but I understand that you might. There are elements of the govt overreach that I believe are, for example, this whole tracing scenario with apps being downloaded concerns me greatly. On the other hand, Google location services does as well and here I am. Wear your seat belt. Literally gave him the bird. That's something.

That sounds complicated, moving posts around like we're animals foraging for food in some post-apocalyptic world. Kemp inquired, I replied, and that's that. It makes me feel alive to flout the rules! As for seat belts, interesting point. I started wearing mine religiously in the mid-80s. I was spending a lot of time on some very busy roads and kept thinking about going through the windshield. I've never understood people not wearing them, and often think about the unfortunate first responder on the scene dealing with some pretty graphic stuff after the accident occurs. I'm not militant about it, I just sort of shrug and think "what's the big deal with buckling a seat belt?". That said...the potential impact to those in/around you when you don't wear a belt can be catastrophic. I used to tell my children that when sitting in a car with no seat belt, you're less a person than a potential projectile. Part 2 of that as they got older was "when you and your friends pile into a car and there are not enough seats, don't pile into the car. If you do, make sure you get one of the seat belts.". Oddly, I'm not there with face masks. I wear one out and about, will certainly continue to do so as long as it makes sense, but as I see some folks walking around with what appear to be very ineffective masks (to my admittedly non-medically-trained mind), I feel a bit like when they used to tell us to hide under our desks in elementary school.

Hey Kemp- Responded to some questions you posted yesterday, wondering if you might have a chance to reply at some point? Let’s try and find common ground: 1. I think your President Trump did not want an English language translator in the room. Follow up question #1: Has every president that ever met with a foreign leader had an English language translator in the room? Follow up question #2: Was a law broken when the President chose not to have a translator present, and if so, when can we expect Impeachment proceedings to begin? 2. I think your President is and was exceptionally concerned about the incalculable damage done to his reputation and administration perpetrated by the democrat leadership and uninformed liberal voters who alleged he was guilty of treason. I think the democrat leadership and uninformed liberal voters created a situation that was very dangerous to the president personally, and to his family as well. Follow up question #3: How did the dem leadership and the mainstream media so badly misread the Russian collusion issue that after an exhaustive investigations by partisan political prosecutors, with an unlimited budget and unrestricted powers that they were unable to provide any usable information re: Trump and Russia collusion? Follow up question #4: Your President Trump told you early, and often that the narrative that he was a traitor to his country and that he colluded with Russia to impact the outcome of the election was a hoax, that the Steele dossier was rubbish, and that actors in the Obama admin and dem leadership lied, cheated and surveilled members of his campaign. Since then, all of that has come to pass. How does that make you feel? 3. I believe virtually all establishment politicians and Washington agencies were in the bag for Hillary Clinton, including DOJ, FBI, most career government lifers, and GOP polis, including Lindsay Graham. That changed as he gained critical mass in the race to the White House, but seems to be a matter of public record. 4. I think your President Trump understands his rights as an American citizen, knew the collusion narrative really only appealed to dimwits and simpletons, and that the FBI often focuses on process crimes and strong-arming to accomplish it's stated goal. Follow up question #4: Why would an innocent man answer a series of questions on something that never happened, written by political adversaries with unlimited investigatory powers and a history of strong-arming witnesses? 5. Improper format, question is ambiguous. Follow up question # 5: Are you suggesting your President acted illegally in this regard? If so, when can we expect impeachment hearing to begin? Warmly, LS

Ah...Kain?

I can’t really fault the police officers generally here, and personally don’t see any crazy power trip. I definitely see/hear three frustrated people arguing and displaying very little respect for one and other. I’m not quite certain about the exchange at the end...they apparently knew who the lady was as they were at her house and the first officer called her Amy. The give me your name and middle initial question was grade schoolish, but as they were putting her on a naughty list probably par for the course. Observation: the officers were not wearing masks and clearly were with 6 feet of one another when this started. I also feel like I hear a wood chipper struggling off in the distance, almost as it it’s trying to shred a human leg. Weird.

I think we should ask President Trump why he was guilty of fake collusion when he gets out of fake jail. That will clear up all fake haziness. I'll answer your side questions, though they are very well crafted and exceptionally difficult to answer. With your permission, I'll ask one or two follow up questions so you can help me help you help me: 1. I think your President Trump did not want an English language translator in the room. Follow up question #1: Has every president that ever met with a foreign leader had an English language translator in the room? Follow up question #2: Was a law broken when the President chose not to have a translator present, and if so, when can we expect Impeachment proceedings to begin? 2. I think your President is and was exceptionally concerned about the incalculable damage done to his reputation and administration perpetrated by the democrat leadership and uninformed liberal voters who alleged he was guilty of treason. I think the democrat leadership and uninformed liberal voters created a situation that was very dangerous to the president personally, and to his family as well. Follow up question #3: How did the dem leadership and the mainstream media so badly misread the Russian collusion issue that after an exhaustive investigations by partisan political prosecutors, with an unlimited budget and unrestricted powers that they were unable to provide any usable information re: Trump and Russia collusion? Follow up question #4: Your President Trump told you early, and often that the narrative that he was a traitor to his country and that he colluded with Russia to impact the outcome of the election was a hoax, that the Steele dossier was rubbish, and that actors in the Obama admin and dem leadership lied, cheated and surveilled members of his campaign. Since then, all of that has come to pass. How does that make you feel? 3. I believe virtually all establishment politicians and Washington agencies were in the bag for Hillary Clinton, including DOJ, FBI, most career government lifers, and GOP polis, including Lindsay Graham. That changed as he gained critical mass in the race to the White House, but seems to be a matter of public record. 4. I think your President Trump understands his rights as an American citizen, knew the collusion narrative really only appealed to dimwits and simpletons, and that the FBI often focuses on process crimes and strong-arming to accomplish it's stated goal. Follow up question #4: Why would an innocent man answer a series of questions on something that never happened, written by political adversaries with unlimited investigatory powers and a history of strong-arming witnesses? 5. Improper format, question is ambiguous. Follow up question # 5: Are you suggesting your President acted illegally in this regard? If so, when can we expect impeachment hearing to begin? I see a pattern. I saw it as Russia (they fooled you, chump), Stormy Avenatti (they fooled you again, chump), The Very Honorable Brett Kavanaugh nomination (you lost this one too, chump), Ukraniamania (yup, you were chumped again), and now, they have you defending China and getting ready to cast your vote for a guy with an inability to speak in full sentences who has an acknowledged history of inappropriate behavior and appears to be a sexual deviant who wants everyone to be judged by one set of rules while he plays by another. The pattern is not your friend.

I understood your point the first time, and I responded accordingly. Lumping individuals into categories based on one's own limitations and intolerance invariably leads to discrimination and bigotry. You probably wouldn't know that, because you've suggested 98% +/- of the individuals who think Trump has done a good job with the virus are "stupid", and another 2% are "evil". Based on polling data--which I generally steer clear of quoting, but will make an exception in your case---you've got roughly 100,000,000 adults in the stupid category and a whopping 5,000,000 in the evil category. This assumes worst case scenario of an approval rating of 40%. Your perspective is no different than that of any other true believer on the extreme left, or the extreme right. Same pattern, same wording, and if it was 1955 America, you'd just have a different boogeyman to point your finger at.

I think when a person characterizes people with different opinions as evil, it's less of a diary and more of a manifesto. It takes a while, psychologically speaking, but eventually the author gets around to figuring out ways to deal with the evil that walks among us. It would appear @Kemp is still early in his ramblings.