leh-nerd skin-erd

Liberal happiness is confusing. If the Bills win a Super Bowl, I'm worried you will celebrate by going on a multi-state killing spree.

Well, the world is all judgy to begin with, that's why we have laws that regulate behavior. Speaking only for me, your assumptions are flawed, but you're entitled to your visceral response just like everyone else. If you're a supporter of euthanasia in general, so be it. In my case, relieving the suffering of a person I would have given my life for would have been a blessing, but not including terminating their life. I also think you are being naive when assuming the law will be used only in situations similar to what you described, and that medical professionals are the end all and be all of integrity. Where there are rules to manipulate and money to be made, people will manipulate the rules to their advantage. It happens now with abortion, and it will happen again.

Carter Page. But what about his mute naive twin brother Mueller Page?

Sorry Crayola, it is as reasonable to be distrustful of members of the medical profession as it is to be suspicious of any other group in America. There is no reason to give them a pass. The problem I have is that people are people, and some people do things most sane people would not. My assumption is that you would not support the abortion of a child at 8.5 months because the vessel carrying said child was emotionally paralyzed over being furloughed for 36 days. My assumption is that there are doctors who would be willing to perform the abortion based on his/her personally held opinions about life, about medicine, and his/her ability to flourish financially. I only think that because of my own experience and the quick google search using the phrase "doctor arrested for overprescribing..." that yielded 153,000 results. When I changed the search to 'doctor arrested for killing patients' the results dropped below 130,000. When I went with 'mother arrested for killing children' the number dropped below 100,000. Of course, then there is this: https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-fetal-tissue-20171209-story.html First, do no harm. But once harm is done, for heaven's sake turns a profit.

My views on abortion have evolved over the years, but it's always struck me that most sane, reasonable people are pro-life at some point. The bigger question seemed to be "when does life really commence"? I guess that's been answered now...life begins at first light. Disgusting, pathetic and sad on a crimes against humanity level. Ironically, too, it's a man who signs this bill into law.

I thought I wrote this, but apparently it was you. Too bad, I thought I made some salient points. I'm not much on weighing in on draft selections once made, I figure you trust the coaches to pick the guys they want to roll with. I don't look back much, either, as I'm 100% convinced that Tom Brady going to Buffalo does not become, you know, but rather he ends up being the captain on the Maid of the Mist. I'm not saying being the captain in the Maid of the Mist is anything to be ashamed of, quite the contrary, but Tom Brady not in Buffalo is often thought of as, well, you know. My point is I appreciated your perspective as fan who followed him closely. I'm always going to pull for our guys as long as they are our guys, but it seems to me you described him to a T. I looked forward to watching him play because he gave a 100% every play. He showed poise at times, looked like a confused rookie on a bad offense at others, and yes, he missed some guys. When he showed promise though...holy crap that was fun. thanks for the write up the first time, and for remembering to remember to let us all know again.

That's why I don't go on Twitter, a bunch of morons calling a hat bigoted will just make a person dumber.

I saw an interview with the young man and Savhanna Guthrie today. He did quite well, obviously nervous, while she was just what you would expect a journalist for NBC to be. Lots of questions about feelings, questions about whether or not he should apologize to someone for standing where he was standing, and of course a question to a kid about the "smirk" after he was singled-out of a crowd by an activist looking to engage in conflict. She did ask if he felt he should have walked away, though not in the context of whether he should walk away after this activist approached him. The implication was he should relinquish he space on the sidewalk to someone else. No time for references by SG to Twitter cowards threatening him, or the Hollywood types calling for violence against him. When he mentioned threats against he and his family, no follow up questions. She's a dullard and a horrible interviewer.

Wha wha wha what? You're a self described liberal who just used just one color to draw a picture of who these kids are likely to be in the future*. You have a whole box of crayons and your going with one? I'm always amazed when a liberal lumps people together like that. So closed-minded! *magenta. You used magenta, the color of intolerance!

I don't like this ad. I've known many WW2 vets, including my father, and while I get what Barbasol is trying to do, I find it pretty tacky. Between the ping simulating the helmet, and the guy casually tossing a potato masher back toward the enemy like it's a newspaper that flew into a fox hole, its cheesey.

Look, as long as you didn't tell him "It's on like Donkey Kong!" I think you're fine. On the other hand is there a more liberal street than Massachusets?

Even the most altruistic among of us has a price point, I just wanted to get a gauge on yours. The open borders crowd is one extreme, I suppose on the right would be the close it all down crowd. The problem is that those of us in the middle carry the weight of both extremes. Personally, I'd be willing to pay a percentage of my income to help solve the problem, over and above the overly burdensome rate that I pay. The only caveat would be that there was a reasonable likelihood that the problem would be solved. I say that because in my world, my priorities are 1. My family 2. Everyone else (with a whole subset of folks in that group). Obviously, that is not going to happen, and the establishment types are perfectly winning to keep the status quo. The cool part for them is they already collect the tribute on a state, local and federal level. The way I see it, this is as good a line in the sand as any.

I was wondering about contrbutions in addition to the alternatives. Reading your earlier post, you implied the shutdown impacts you personally, but indicated "fortunately". Was that a typo, or is it a good time to be furloughed?

You are not alone in this suggestion. We Would you be willing to contribute more of your income/savings/retirment to solve the problem in a manner that is consistent with your values? And with that in mind, would you contribute a higher percentage knowing it was voluntary and others could opt out? Lets say a plan was put forth whereby like minded people could arbitrarily contribute an extra 10%, and forgo the tax deferred element on 401k or IRA contributions. Just wondering.

One of my main concerns is shooting myself in the thigh while cleaning or handling the damn thing. "Carbine" sounds like I'm unlikely to survive when I accidentally push the junk mail into the teapot into the carbine which falls on the floor and the ensuing gun fire separates my right leg from my body. I'm not an anti-gun guy, but was always in the not-for-me camp. I do own a machete though, and have yet to put my eye out. I'm getting there.

I have come to realize it's an "us v. them" world. Doesn't mean it's a fight for survival, or that revolutionaries will be kicking in my front door...but the folks looking to push this ridiculous issue offer nothing of value to me. I am considering a handgun purchase for the first time in my life. This kid with the dopey kid grin staring at this experienced, calculating activist showed restraint not all that common at his age. For that, death threats. The coverage is disgraceful.

Every time I see an official they are chatting up the players, big smiles. It's like match.com.

That's fair, but to think there was not one official in the area to see a pass int AND helmet to helmet hit with under 2 minutes left in the NFC championship defies logic. When you factor in that the game was literally on the line it becomes even more unbelievable. Add that to different games being officiated in different ways, you end up with what you get, a product most people don't trust to get it right.

When someone is out on the ledge, threatening to jump, there always seems to be manipulative, petty and heartless cretin on the ground encouraging them to jump. Often, media members fill the role of the cretin. How these people survive professionally screwing up stories is beyond me.

I don't know about that. It's possible that somewhere in the dark soul of the SC there is a voice of reason. "Wait, we have people losing their ;:/-ing minds over $89 worth of Russians facebook ads and discredited porn star attornies...now they want to drag me into this bogus story? What would this do to the country?". Also, it would work well with DRs speculation that Mueller is working with DOJ and Trump. Same scenario, except "we gotta tamp this &$@# down hard, today."

I think I can understand the buzzzzzzzfeed guy digging his heels in. He has no integrity left so you go with the "I worked on a loading dock when I was a punk kid..." and "I use the same standards now as I did covering city hall". He's passionately outlining his entire reason for being, justifying his worth after running a bs story. He had to be absolutely stunned when the SC releases a statement calling his report garbage. How often does that happen? But at the dough boy behind the CNN mic is flat out pathetic and yet again reveals how incredibly soft some of these journalists can be in a face to face setting. He's pretending to be Walter Conkrite but he's behaving like he's the red carpet flunky on Entertainment Tonight. How about asking him how the sources was vetted, how about asking the buzzzzfeed reporter who the source is, or what his/her role in the govt is? What about some other questions about leaks previously reported on that turned out to be true? I'd respect just about anything other than this glorified conversation between a Therapist and his patient in crisis.

Don't apologize, it makes you appear weak. We learn from communicating with each other. When you clock back in, reconsider.

I'll play on this one. I don't get it. Enlighten me.

The premise is that Buzzfeed has used sources revealed to be providing inaccurate information, and that "makes sense". When people tell you what they think, believe them. For anti-Trumpers, this is the MO. In fact, read a report that Chuck Todd was interviewing the Buzzfeed editor. Instead of manning up and getting to the point, his set up was "I've known you for 20 years and know you didn't want this. Here, "this"=spreading a false narrative about physical evidence existing in the form of texts, emails and witnesses willing to testify about a sitting prez directing someone to lie to congress. Todd ran with this story like a good little propagandist and spent about 4 minutes on how evidence of this nature will surely be the end of Trump. So, Todd looks like a dimwit based on his good buddies major f-up and wants to find out his feelings?

I noticed NBC now uses the phrase "not independently verified by NBC news..." when they want to get something out there quickly, aren't necessarily interested in finding out whether the report is accurate or not, and want plausible deniability later on. By extension, when they don't include that language, but are using anonymous sourcing I can only assume they are guaranteeing the veracity of the reporting. The fact that they have reported on many of the stories listed without the caveat leads to the conclusion that they intersperse real news "baby falls in well" with inaccurate, misleading and erroneous reporting.