leh-nerd skin-erd

I apologize in advance.

These hearings can be so frustrating to listen to. Collins inquires about a “Woods Review” having been completed in the Paige surveillance case, Wray contemplates, considers, and ultimately dances around the answer without ever providing a yes or no. The premise of the hearing starts off with attempting to restore faith in a rogue (at worst) or functionally disorganized (at best) agency with virtually unlimited power, and the Director of the FBI cannot answer a simple question on a procedure mandated by FBI procedure designed to ensure accountability and review? Would the answer in either case compromise our national security? We end up with this sort of debacle because it’s baked into the system, and for all of Wray’s bloviating about his 40 new guidelines, it will continue to happen. The only question is the target, and politically-speaking, whether the dems or Rs are crying foul. The one hope we have as citizens is if some top level players are targeted for justice, stripped of their political protection and brought to trial. Let them have their say, avail themselves of the finest defense team they can afford (or be provided by the wealthy who value this sort of thing), do their 24 months in federal prison or not, but at least get some facts on the table outside of this political theater. Btw, have to keep moving so haven’t watched the whole thing, if Wray clarified with a yes or no answer 5 minutes later, do a brother a favor and let me know so I can put these torches back in the barn.

I wonder if the Latins ever contemplated time where their cool new word “ergo” would be paired with “Butgig” and make perfect sense to the reader.

I voted for Romney as well, but in retrospect I might as well have cast my vote for a well-coiffed Pomeranian. I really was just offering an opinion on the response to Romney being willing to remove a president from the White House over the incident in question. With Rs like Willard Romney, who needs dems?

Well, therein lies the point. If, as some feel, the attempt to impeach was a bunch of political nonsense, one assumes a Republican senator would see it that way as well. Given his background with Trump, it’s fair to consider the level of personal animus he feels and whether or not that impacted his vote. He rejected the Constitutional arguments made by the President’s lawyers, opted instead to believe the narrative laid out by the opposition, and voted accordingly. When people feel betrayed, it’s natural to lash out at the betrayer. On the other hand, maybe he does feel like Trump will sell Alaska to the Russians in a WH Garage Sake as impeachment manager Schiff suggested. Had he the strength of his convictions during his presidential run, had he the courage to speak loudly and proudly, he might have appeared more presidential and less neutered.

I didn’t think the question was strange until you clarified you didn’t mean French kissing. I didn’t kiss my father, but I did hug regularly and often after I became an adult. It really wasn’t his thing, but God love him he’d pat me on the back and tolerate my newfangled ways. He died many years ago, and I’m grateful for every minute. Good for you, and send your friend some dead fish wrapped up in newspaper. It means “Thanks so much for sharing your opinion, it means the world to me and I’ll consider your perspective moving forward.” In Italian, but you probably knew that.

You won’t be hurt, but you would not be enlightened! Healthcare...I could write on this for hours. The bottom line—the ACA was designed to fail, it was established under false pretenses, and “improving” a substandard program of that magnitude is akin to putting lipstick on a pig. The blame for the failure rests with the architect, not those who came after. Had the program broad national appeal, it would not have been susceptible to being dismantled, That does not excuse the Rs for letting this become a mess. Your reasoning is understandable, but math matters. The ACA treats a financial issue as a political one, that always ends badly on a balance sheet. I didn’t vehemently oppose your description. I think it’s wrong. I never suggested that Trump was saintly, quite the opposite in fact. I acknowledged the fundamental issue you brought up, and placed it in context. I mention that a lot, because it’s important to understanding how the world works. I don’t blame the average person for being duped, but I think they have been duped nonetheless. I do not think of Obama et al as the average person, nor do I think most journalists covering the story are average people either. One of the more fascinating parts of this whole thing has been following the links posted here, reading the thoughts shared and looking at the time/date stamps. I know you’ll hate this one, but here’s a question: How come a handful of posters on a message board were able to scoop the national media on a story as colossal as Trump = Russian = Treason = Bull Thit a couple years before they got there? I’d credit all but would likely will miss a few...but a certain Psychotic Rhinocerotidae called this game two years+ ago. How the $&#@ did the world of investigate journalism miss all the signs? The only story bigger than “THE PREZ IS A RUSSIAN!” Would normally be “HOW THE &$#@ DID THESE NITWITS COME TO THINK THE PREZ WAS A COMMIE??”. The average person may/may not believe whatever they hear. That’s life. It’s on the President to tell the story moving forward, and it’s on AG Barr and his people to flush out the rats for all to see. For the more politically woke, it’s not even close. I understand and accept that you feel the process was fair to all parties, that errors if made were the result of human flaws, not systemic, not corrupt and certainly not intentionally designed to unseat 45. I’ll be honest now—I’m poking fun at your perspective from here on down. Good news all around: FBI Director Wray has committed to restructuring the steno pool to ensure no more typos. Steps 1-8 deal with who orders the White Out:;https://www.nationalreview.com/news/fbi-director-christopher-wray-announces-40-corrective-steps-in-response-to-failures-detailed-in-horowitz-report/. Further comment by Wray: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/wray-says-fbi-actions-to-obtain-carter-page-fisa-warrant-were-unacceptable-and-cannot-be-repeated Wray is a real bug on grammar, furious with incorrect use of there/their/they’re when begging the Secret FISA court for free reign to trample on the rights on an American citizen. Finally: https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2020/01/23/its-official-the-fisa-warrants-issued-against-carter-page-were-not-valid-n2560007 I only read until I got to the part where the whole misunderstanding boiled down to “I before e except after c”. Apparently some backroom typist thought it was “...except after p”.

Unfortunately, some people are conditioned to believe that cheap is good, health care should cost next to nothing, and the the health care companies call all the shots. And by the way, I’m not pro-health insurance companies, they are part of the problem as well. At the same time, some of those people see tremendous value in the latest iPhone, internet service, jail house ink and the latest car with all the gadgets. Politicians know that and treat the health care system accordingly. By the nature of the process nothing can happen that is outside the regulation and/or pricing structure allowed by regulation. At least, not without penalty. Yet, many want to turn it over to the regulators to work their magic. Dumb, dumb dumb. I am going to go out on a limb here and say there is so much money going through the system that reasonably priced, catastrophic insurance plan with reasonable out of pockets—-regulated reasonably, is certainly doable. It would have to start with elimination of the taxpayer funded plans extended to public employees, redefining what reasonable cost is, and that does not appear likely to ever happen.

Ok, I'll admit I'm still laughing about butting in. However, you compared a father dealing with his daughter's assault in a criminal trial with wanting to tune to the All Bolton All the time channel on Sirius Xm Impeachment radio. Yes, they are similar because each deals with people talking, but they have little else in common. Hence, off topic.

Deliberately incompetent imo.

We've reached the end here sir. I'm truly sorry to hear about the medical issues and health care coverage. I think you know that already. What I can offer in that regard is only that everything that happened there was part of the over-managed, over-regulated system set in place by the politicians in the state where you receive care. Everything--everything starts with the state and its requirements.it always has been that way. There are obvious problems with our health care system, but at the end of the day the total disregard for actuarial science is where it all starts. You can't solve a problem that involves both people AND mathematics by creating a new system that ignores the math totally. I acknowledge health care seems to be a non-issue at this point. Could focus on proving he's not a traitor for 3 years be part of the challenge? Could that be part or the dem strategy? You've seen the House and Senate and where there attentions have been focused. You are correct--the last part was tough to follow. Impossible in fact. It belies virtually everything we know now about the Russia investigation. Could people believe that it was a big innocent misunderstanding and Trump is guilty in spite of what came out, or that Comey and Brennan are the true heroes of the take, and that the FISA "mistakes" actually represent the truth? Diabetics skip insulin shots. People with heart conditions allow themselves to become obese. Pat's fans think the cheaters don't cheat. Of course people will think that way. I'm not one of those people.

Great point, although not on topic. The politics of life come into play here. If we look at the current narrative, one individual who acknowledged wrongdoing when accused of rape/assault, settled a civil suit and is celebrated as being an incredible human being. Another was accused of wrongdoing on an unknown day at an unknown time 30 years prior, with the accuser being discredited almost immediately upon making the allegation. Both parties have/had lead apparently expemlary lives after the alleged/actual event. One has lived under a cloud of suspicion and derision, the other not so much. Politics are a strange thing, aren't they? As for your scenario, if I thought the allegations were true, I'd support overlooking every civil liberty we hold dear and support having the perp drawn and quartered and his limbs sent to the farthest reaches of the earth. I don't know how to draw but I'd bet I'd be ok at the quartering. Of course, that's one of the reasons they don't put the relatives of a victim on a jury, and why checks and balances are necessary even when the outcome is painful for you.

So one lie, one “some saw it as lie-ish” and one issue of previously undiagnosed color-blindness? Not bad for 8 years. And yes, I can now see why you suggested DJT lies substantially more than past presidents. You’ll have to forgive me if I discount rallies at plants, photo ops, generalized political word tracks because every presidential candidate can be knocked on those. The repeal of ACA seemed within reach until McCain changed his vote when all eyes were on him, and from what I have seen and read, the approach to sh$tcanning it has transitioned to death by paper cut v torching it with a flamethrower. You seem to be knocking him for lawfully re-appropriating $$$ to keep a promise on an issue he and his supporters feel is a National Emergency—-that constitutes a lie? We can keep going here but as I have already acknowledged that politicians lie, and that President Trump has lied as well, why bother? I’m much more interested in the truth(s) he has told and the agenda he is following. On surveillance, no, my assertion is nit that some Tom Cruise-looking mo’fo dressed up like a Verizon tech and breached the data room at Trump Towers. Surveillance and spycraft occurred, that’s undeniable. You questions imply you desire exacting specifity on surveillance while rounding up (or down) on “lies” like Trump and appropriations made under presidential powers or the absolute ability to withhold foreign aide to corrupt nations, That seems a more political standard than one borne of the ethical standard that all lies matter. For me, it’s much less complicated. When one administration accuses an individual of treasonous activity, broadly and publicly, using the incredible power of the US government to investigate/coordinate/manipulate/and crush anyone in it’s path in pursuit of national security, they should absolutely be correct and revealed to have righteousness on their side. To be clear—-had the dems established a causal and treasonous connection between Trump and Russia, I’d have stood next to you at the “Trump 4 Prison” rally in Detroit. I can’t imagine why you’re not calling for the heads of those who lied to you, and in fact doubling down in Ukraine and whatever fantasy they are cooking up now. When it turns out the entire premise turned out to be fabricated, and in spite of arms twisted and doors broken down, absolutely nothing comes of it, the corrupt officials in charge of the scheme should be called out on it and prosecuted. Whether that happens or not I cannot say. Honestly Bob, I don’t see why you would approve of the actions of Obama on down, even in light of your feelings on Trump, given all that took place, all that was promised and a big fat goose egg offered to you at the end of the investigation. Nice spin on FISA ‘mistakes’ though. I’m hearing from the libs that all that happened was the US Govt misspelled “Febuary” 14 times, and in the other 3 spelled his last name “Paige”. ?

I swear I saw a clip where he keeps telling people not to vote for him. Why I saw it on these very pages one day. ? Someone has agreed to carry your reams of paper and typewriter around LA if he crashes, correct? Splant, maybe?

Someone sent this to me the other day, I think this is hysterical. Barr’s belly is priceless.

Would you support him if he wins but chooses to make like a tree and leaf? If you do, or don’t, what the $#@& man?

The point...I’m trying to see if there is a middle ground to be found. To that end, I thought if you shared the hot button issues as you see them, I could see if I rejected your thoughts outright or might see your view. One example: “Obama wire tapped Trump!” Let’s assume you thought that this was a Trump lie because there was no tap, no wire, no Trump tower. My thought would be there will be no middle ground to find, and I’d suggest you were wrong. Why? The Obama admin surveilled Trump and his associates and regardless of how it is said, phrased, manipulated or characterized, one political party used the power and weight of the govt explicitly for political gain, with unsavory intent, and that’s disgraceful. Feel free to choose what you wish, doesn’t really matter to me.

Apology accepted though I am visually impaired—so callously suggesting I am blind would likely get you booted from the LiberalSingles.com for sight-shaming. Watch yourself, the internet is forever. If you see a false equivalency I can live with that. I don’t see it. I’m going to let you slide on your suggestion that “Trump supporters have gall to claim someone else’s lies are wrong”. Question for you. What are the top three lies from the Trump Admin as you see it, and the top three from the reign of Barrack O as you see it?

Not so fast. If the Brady’s are conservative investors, let’s dial that interest down closer to $50m for the year. If we plug in life expectancy, we plug in whether he retires interest only, or wants to dip into his principal....bing bam boom...he’s probably ok but he’s most definitely going to want to downsize on the Uggs purchases, he’s probably going to want to cut back on the manscaping around the giblets, that sort of thing. Can it be done? Yes. Can it be done without sacrifice well that remains to be seen.

All true, but when I was in college, on many a drunken night, I’d chill out by climbing out on the 4th floor ratty fire escape some nights. Some nights I’d hop the foot or two between the fire escape and bank next door to sit on the top of the wall. There was always a fine line between tragedy and living to fight another day. In my case, I don’t reflect on the bar that served me the alcohol, the party I had attended, the buddy who bought the alcohol or the guy who owned the building. One caveat on that—it’s virtually impossible to know how my parents would have reacted if I had fallen, or how I would have if one of my own children were the Cornell student. Sad all the way around. On the brotherhood issue, I agree, but some guys are just losers. They can be bullies, dbags, self-centered prix, thugs, criminals and sociopaths. I always encouraged my children to be mindful and watch the alcohol intake. I have had moderate success at this point. One of my sons told me about a girl who was drawing lines on her arm for each shot of vodka she drank at a freshman party, he said at one point she had 11 marks and wasn’t done. Figured maybe the 11 were consumed in under an hour. Btw, on the link provided: that story, with accompanying video presentation, was required viewing at freshman orientation when my son started school. The 11 shots of vodka girl saw that video no more than 60 days before the night I just described. We watched it as parents in a group, the kids watched it in their group and discussion ensued. I’ve never forgotten it.

I declined to pledge a fraternity back in my college days, have friends who did and generally speaking they had a great experience participating. I’m not anti-fraternity, but if the organizations have any sense, they will evolve as there is a large target on their enterprise. In this case, as reported here, I’d think it’s an issue of personal responsibility, youthful stupidity and very bad luck. It seems like a stretch to connect dots from a party to alcohol to hazing to falling off a cliff the kid had to travel to get to. I’d think a Cornell student would know the relative danger of climbing a gorge in general, in October in particular, and at night most assuredly. On a related note, one of my friends has a direct tie to the horrific Penn State case where the student fell down the stairs. The prosecution of that case has been, in part, a farce. I’m not suggesting the fraternity members don’t share responsibility, that the case approximates this situation, but had I only read news reports on the prosecutions case couple with the tragedy of the case, I’d feel substantially different than I do.

I’m torn on how to reply here, but I guess I’ll just go with your reply was positively Trumpian. Ironically it’s one of the things he does that I find distasteful at times. Anyway, I think your “orders of magnitudes” argument is overly simplistic, impossible to quantify, and an odd line in the sand given the propensity for our elected officials to lie through their teeth. Accordingly, I give it the internet raspberry and move on. i think you were over the top here, and I think the response was disproportionate to the subject matter and certainly to the context of our interaction. I try hard not to send something out I wish I could get back the next day, so I’ll simply say I hope you’re feeling ok and that all is well with you and yours.

Well, you had made the argument that your liar's lies were more or less more believable than my liars lies, I just assumed you had a machine of sorts to document that your liars are less likely to lie when they don't tell the truth. If you're freestyling, that's cool too. It's sort of the Adam Schiff model, but have at it. Skepticism is healthy, and I acknowledge that you truly believe your liar's lie a lot less than Trump lies, and something you also believe something about Mike Pence. I would ask only that you acknowledge I'm skeptical of your claim, apparently fabricated, and that I acknowledge you think you hold the moral high ground on the issue of lies from politicians. I ask that you further acknowledge that I find that delightful and funny. That is my truth.

Standards have eroded. Check. Clinton earned his perjury charge. Check. I was never “aghast” at lying, I can’t recall a time when I didn’t think it was a normal for a politician to lie, so while I get what you’re trying to say on the higher standard issue, I think it’s a crock just as I think witnesses in thus impeachment will or could lead to some baseline of understanding amongst our political parties. I have no special truth-o-meter, but I do have the ability to reason. If you apply Bob’s Deluxe Less-Lie-Spectrometer to politicians, that’s great, but simply know that I think that argument is absurd. Your comments on Trump and Kelly Ann Conway are hyperbolic, but these issues tend to cause emotional declarations to be made, but as I said before...how cute it is you think your guys are less liarly than the people I support.

Btw Bob, on the column you linked from the other Bob in Mich. i agree wholeheartedly with the premise, and we can both agree that Joe McCarthy was a bad guy. We can also agree on the willing participants who went along with the scheme being a massive part of the problem. Personally, I see the application of this sentiment applying equally and forceful to Russia/Kavanaugh/Ukraine. By that, I mean those who supported that type of tyrannical governmental corruption by Obama, Biden, Comey, DOJFBICIA Schumer McCain Harris et al are precisely the type of scoundrels he is writing about. I realize you do not feel the same and this post ain’t about that. This goes to my point on the moral high ground issue, and why, when someone attempts to assert in support of any of these clowns and schemes, and wants to discuss Trump personally, my response is typically to laugh and say how cute it is that they think their liar is less liarly than the guy I support. I was wondering as well, but got distracted by the nice looking lady in the middle.