leh-nerd skin-erd

So much so, his chosen, can-t-miss-heiress-apparentess is resting comfortably after a coughing fit, with her legs up in Chappaqua, and the voters sent his nemesis to the White House to place his legacy achievements in the dumpster. He trashed 45 (then, of course, known only as the guy BO said would never be president), but when you send boatloads of cash to your buddies who blow up people, you lose some credibility.

That's a hot take and if it turns out you are correct, I'll be the first to put my hand out and say "Geesh, didn't see that coming.". Thereafter, I have to support a bogus investigation into your candidate crossing the Peace Bridge and not declaring 3 bags of fruit at Customs and applaud while your candidate is mired in bullshyt all while screaming "IF SHE'S INNOCENT SHE SHOULD BE HAPPY TO BE INVESTIGATED BY THE FBI/CIA AND NSA!". The fact is no policy details are released or batted about on the debate stage, ever. Let me be clear....O...O...Obama was very polished at delivering nothing, W not so much, and Trump obviously repeating the same thing 4 times in exactly the same thing. He's great, lots of people say it, they say that he's great. On the other hand, as of right now, and it can change--Trump can speak on his accomplishments that include the economy, consumer confidence, employment numbers for Americans across the board, tax cuts, repatriation of $$$ and investment by companies like Apple due to changes in tax code, the strengthening of the SC and federal court system, his attempts to return some semblance of control to the Southern Border with a do-nothing Dem house, his experience with NATO, and at the same time, point to the dems pattern of dirty tricks: The Russia hoax/debacle coup attempt. He will hammer this hard, often and rightly so. He will point to the many tentacles from Obama on down that trafficked in illegal surveillance, unmasking and weaponization of our once trusted intelligence/law enforcement agencies and the need to continue to clean out that part of the swamp. It will get ugly, and up until now it's been a picnic. Kavanaugh visciously attacked simply because he's a conservative white male, makes you wonder when they are coming for you next. All their hands are dirty there, none more so than Harris. The desperation of the homeless in places like California, the high tax rate doing nothing to cure it, all brought to you by the elitist dem platform before it's even gone full batshit crazy socialist. When all is said and done, he has plenty to talk about, you just might not be willing to listen. In fact, he has a slate of positive and uplifting data to speak on, juxtaposed to the dem message despair, anger and divisiveness that ONLY a 70% tax rate and health care for those here in violation of our laws paid for by the heartland can solve. That's not your IRA, someone else deserves that.

Anything can happen between now and then. Personally I believe nothing until it's done. The polls, to my recollection, reflected a Hillary sweep into office, projecting both the prom queen vote and EC outcome. Certainly the analysis by the experts reflected that. I can't recall any analysis that suggested anything close to HC popular vote +3m but Trump takes the EC by 10pm on election night. Still, the dem front runner has yet to be determined and most of the fur flying has come from other dems. That changes at some point, and like trump, every candidate has warts. In other words, the current status quo is akin to all of the dems standing together at the edge of an ice cold pool on a hot summer day, each teasing the other to jump in first. When it goes national, well, the parallel is there are only two people left, and someone tosses a chainsaw into shark-filled water and one or the other has to get to it first to start the cutting. We shall see. Oh, and the wild card STILL remains that Trump has unrestricted access to all the secrets in the world, with the power to release/leak selectively.

Oh, and come to think of it. Was the Challenger disaster a successful failure as it included women, or just a partial success because many of those died were Male?

In fairness, breasts are pretty cool.

Issue #1. The ladies in question are politicians, and say inflammatory things that most people would not say to friends and neighbors. As I stated earlier, these are not ladies at a Dairy Queen eating Peanut Buster Parfaits singled out for random commentary. They are politicians skilled in the art of rhetoric. We agree on this? 2. As for your apology, it has been said that all white men look alike, and Tucker Carlson & Donald J. Trump are white men, so I can see where the confusion arises. I accept your apology though none was necessary.

Correct, he said nothing like that. You stitched in the rest because for reasons known only to you and perhaps your hot yoga instructor, that's the way your mind works. The fact that other people share your tendency to stitch in a similar fashion makes it no more/less truthful than anything else. To boot, he did not tweet about 4 random people sitting on a bench outside a mall, he tweeted about political adversaries who do their own share of crap-throwing, and in some cases label their opponents in very harsh terms. I'd think we could agree the rules are different for those in that realm?

I've been reading through the various replies and this is among the most salient points I've read. I was a reluctant Trump supporter, found his approach by Tweet unsettling when he was first elected (I was horrified when he tweeted that Obama wiretapped him, thinking a president should not say that sort of this without proof), but history has shown that on many of those "WTF!" moments he was on point and often ahead of the curve. On this most recent firestorm, it is what it is. He chose to send a tweet that was sloppy in regards to who is from where and which country, and I can understand his detractors seeing evidence of hatred or racism in his remarks. I do the same thing, actually, and see remarks like Nancy Pelosi's "MAGA really means make America white again" as incredibly divisive race-1baiting language that reflects poorly on her and her motives. I think that language is dangerous, destructive and intended to rile her base, which includes the same type of hateful thugs that will lie/cheat/steal/destroy and kill to further their cause as you see on the right. The thing about Pelosi v Trump is while Trump seems impetuous and less than artful (by design or not), I think Pelosi, Biden, Harris, Clinton, Schumer etc think through what they are going to say, focus group it for maximum effect and send out exactly what they mean. In fact, the common theme from our political leaders is to demonize the other party at all costs. So given the flesh and blood of us all, you wanted feedback. I'm happy to give mine, but what are your thoughts on the other side? Do you have the same questions on the Pelosi for Prez board at another site? Or the "Biden for Prez All hands on deck" site? Or, have you accepted the narrative that trump is the first flesh and blood individual who hates everyone and everything ever created in the history of the world? I'm looking at the totality of 45s Presidency thus far and see little in the way of institutionalized racist policies and in fact, see quite a bit of positive data for all who want to contribute and work for their own slice of the American dream. Unlike some of the others posters here who's views I respect (you're in that group), I wouldn't say whether Pelosi is a racist or not. How would I know what's in her heart, who she pals around with and how she treats everyday Americans. Some dems seem to think she is, and given their experiences maybe she fits the mold. I do think that while a person guilty of violence against someone for who they are is vile, I am quite certain I have no respect for the second spitter off in the shadows goading them on with rhetoric like "That guy hates you people.". While guy #1 is often ruled by emotion/rage/hate, person #2 is calculating and reflects a darkness that's hard for me to understand.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/13/us/tacoma-detention-center-shooting.html Odd phrasing at the beginning of this story. I'd have thought the genesis of the story was about the guy blowing up cars and attempting mass murder by blowing up a propane tank, but in fairness the police did, in fact, fatally shoot a man. The police fatally shot a man who was attacking an immigration detention center in Tacoma, Wash., on Saturday morning, the authorities said.

The only thing that really surprises me is how willing much of the electorate is to accept this level of corruption. The liberals typically are all over law enforcement, especially distrustful of those in leadership. Yet, when actual corruption is on display from Obama on down---when a candidate tough enough to beat the system by changing the rules and fighting back, they seem to line up in favor of MORE corruption. Its amazing and pathetic to watch them wander around wondering how the scales could be so tilted in the favor of their chosen one and yet they still were humbled by Prez Trump. I still laugh when I see that Obama "at least I'll go down in history as having been a president" mic drop video, and his supporters cheering and laughing, blissfully unaware that they were about to get outmaneuvered by one so brash as to tell em to "$#@@ off".

By your logic, the media should have called out every political adversary he faced (and steamrolled) for every comment made about him. McCain. Cruz. Rubio. Obama. And of course Clinton. She was about 5 minutes into the race when she called him every -ism in the book. Add to that list any sitting senator and congressman who painted him some media friendly broad brush...like misogynist, islamaphobe and so on. Major media outlets could do a month's long expose on political dirty deeds, backstabbing, and certainly an introspection on what honest journalism might look like if it existed. But, of course, they didn't. They supersized the rhetoric, treated it as mainstream up to and including the part about treasonous behavior that turned out to be the very witch hunt the perceptive president said it was. Where are the mainstream stories about the Obama admin and surveillance on the rival candidate, gathering and using intel in a political election, and the activity of the DOJ and CIA to influence the election? You should he proud of our President. He punches back, and he's redefined the rules of the political game. No laying low when your enemies break every reasonable rule governing a fair election process. Nope, fight back. Punch them in the face and better yet, tell the American people how and why you're doing it. A free and reasonably objective press is a gift to democracy and the American people. This national barnyard explosion we've come to accept as normal ain't that.

My God at times the 1970s felt like it was four football decades long. I can only imagine the misery of all those extra games. ?

bro, maybe you missed it, but this was Uber X. Think Ice Man from Top Gun. Or, if this guy in Charlotte is the real deal as described--Maverick. Arrogant? Yeah, but only because they are the best in the world at what they do. Nice? Don't make me laugh. You go "nice" at hyper speed against a MIG, you go for a swim.

I think if you're not saying it's our fault, you're ilk-ish, ilk-like, or maybe even ilk-centric. You probably just don't know it. I voted for the orange messiah, and was asked to tell you that unlike the other group who call people deplorable and irredeemable and seem to want a good national cleansing, all are welcome in here. We are Ilkclusive.

But in fairness to Koko, you said the reason she lost was "largely" due to white men hating her. Was it like 90% white man hate, 3% Comey, 2% women being victimized, 2% Russians duh, and 3% white man hate (so hateful we gotta count em twice@). Sometimes I wish we could go more than 100% on these things. So much hate, so many victims. Stupid metric system.

After five decades in the spotlight, Biden is "under attack" by his friends and associates and seems unprepared to handle it and which way to turn. One day he's proud of his record, the next day he's apologizing for relationships he had 40 years ago. He's all over the page on Anita Hill, portraying himself as weak and wondering what might have been had he just had the courage to do the right thing. Meanwhile, the toughest criticism he's received from the opposition is that he's "sleepy". There you have the next great dem candidate for president: a sleepy octogenarian who partied with segregationists when fashionable and apologized when it was irrelevant, who has what the ladies used call "Russian eyes and Roman hands" when no one called him on it but became ultra-woke when it mattered when running for president, who has a history of wielding his political power to enrich his own family, and and has a history of plagiarizing the work(s) of others, and has been passed over on his previous runs because in part of a penchant for racist comments. Sounds about right.

If so, as I said, good and honorable work. I still like the Godzilla angle though.

I'm not sure I'm reading you correctly here. You work in the aftermath of disasters, delivering some semblance of justice to people, yet you included a sad emoji. Sounds like good and honorable work. Either that or you're Godzilla, admittedly a misunderstood and decidedly tragic figure.

I'm happy with the tax cut and the impact it had on my business and personal financial plan. My personal financial plan starts with being willing to spot the Feds the fruits of my labor for what amounts to Jan, Feb and maybe March, but by April I'd like to keep more for myself. I've never understood why issues like infrastructure, border security, refugee housing and uninsured health care can't be addressed while taxes are reduced and hard-working Americans keep more of the money they earn. Too many sticky fingers as the money move through the system, I guess.

now come on, the guy is running the overcoming capitalism power point on an APPLE™ Mac Book and casting to what looks like a 4K television by Samsung. Whatever pronoun you use, these are some seriously imperceptive revolutionaries.

Your cookie analogy is preposterous, unless in your scenario: There is no evidence a cookie was stolen; The investigation that was undertaken was shackled by none of the tradition rules of appropriate law enforcement engagement, with an unlimited budget, overseen by one man who hand-selected his team of prosecutors based in least at part on their animus toward the boy; The investigation into the cookie that apparently was never stolen played out on a massive scale, with the friends of the boy spied upon with the tacit approval of the sitting president of the US, with their names selectively leaked to the press, with the former head of the CIA (one of 2 or 3 people out of nearly 7.8 billion with unrestricted access to every piece of intelligence available to the most powerful nation in the world) starting emphatically that the boy stole the cookie, with the former head of the FBI (one of the other 2 or 3 people out of the 7.8 billion citizens of the world) doing precisely the same; Prominent members of Congress claimed that they had specific, incontrovertible evidence that the boy stole the cookie, that they would release that evidence when the time was right, and never did; The investigation into the cookie included hauling known associates of the boy into interrogation rooms for questioning on issues totally unrelated to the cookie, with some of the most powerful people in the world threatening them with extended incarceration, looking for process crimes (You said the cookies were chocolate chips, but weren't they, IN FACT, OATMEAL RAISIN??), and offering sweetheart immunity deals to the friends of the boy in exchange for something, anything of value that could lead to the appearance of impropriety on the part of the boy; Sending a geared up SWAT team to the house where a kid who sat three seats behind the boy in homeroom (and who ate lunch with him after 3rd period math), to kick in the door if necessary to haul the kid away in the back of a police van--but not before calling the local media with an established pattern of publish anti-cookie-boy stories to tip them off about the late night/pre-dawn raid; Moving an associate of the boy to solitary confinement in a max security, ostensibly for his protection, where the vast majority of similarly accused criminals would be spending time in a much less dangerous facility; After a $35-40 million campaign of terror, and a 400+ page report that at be best summarized by the haters of the cookie boy as "Yeah, the DOJ/FBI/CIA, man, they were way off here, turns out we can't find enough here to say one way or the other"; After receiving and dissecting the 400+ page report, key members of Congress continued to sow the seeds of distrust against the cookie boy, claiming, in fact, that it was his denial of charges that he stole the cookie that was the REAL crime, and would impugn the reputation of the chief special cookie counsel and his minions because his report ultimately did not perpetuate the narrative that they--as sitting members of congress, perpetuated for nearly 3 years; In North Korea, the advantage folks like Obama, Clinton, Brennan, Schiff et al have is instead of having to laboriously create and perpetuate a story about a cookie that was never missing being stolen by a political adversary, they just make them disappear. As much as I despise it, Thank God for Twitter or the American people would never have heard directly from the accused and the narrative would have been entirely shaped by selective leaks and innuendo.

I can't get past "guy or gal" in your earlier post. You have this cutting edge avatar with a cleaved chef head and went 1950s Allan Freed on the narrative. You're a complicated soul, or "cat" as the gals might say (if they weren't retired and in assisted living in Boca). Otherwise, I agree with your general premise.

Whats stunning to me is the imbecile who waxes philosophically on people sleeping in front of their buildings while the city prohibits "camping" in public parks, or in front of city hall. what at a great message for business owners: Shut the #%*# up, pay your $&#%ing taxes, and never mind the foul-smelling douche on the sidewalk demanding your potential customers give him some money on the way in. You know where that doesn't happen? #%%#ing Disneyland, the happiest place on earth in part because your chances of stepping on someone's hand, leg or excrement as you approach the Buzz Lightyear ride is pretty low. austin < Disney world

serious question: does anyone know if that panel interview with Clinton was before she wasn't president, or after, when she really wasn't president? I'm wondering because if it was before she wasn't president, she had that resume booster of really :/-#ing up Libya and having those Americans die horrifically on her watch, giving her some real street cred. But, if it was from after she really wasn't president, I'm wondering why the ladies on the view were nodding their heads like she dispensing some insider knowledge when really she was just some old cat lady from chappaqua, prone to coughing fits, weak knees and wearing pastel pantsuits well past the spring fashion season had ended.

It wasn't not always because he had open receivers. It wasn't not always because he was impatient. Sometimes he ran because he could, and sometimes he was patient in the pocket. He does need to improve to be better though....and we can all agree he on that. It looks like the coaching staff was not happy with some of the other pieces around him and have made attempts to improve his opportunity to improve. What would make you happy to see out of JA in year two? Not ecstatic, btw, just cautiously optimistic that he has grown and has potential to step forward yet again in year 3?