leh-nerd skin-erd

Give me a president that trolls with memes over a president who tries to imprison his enemies for life, Mup. And, there is this from the article you linked. "The Marines at Camp Pendleton have been firing live rounds and training beneath I-5 for over 50 years -- without closing the freeway. There is zero reason for this sudden shutdown," Desmond posted on X. "This isn't just an inconvenience -- it's going to cause medical emergencies to be delayed, workers to miss shifts and families to have their plans and events ruined. As far as protestors are concerned, have at it. I support freedom, and if someone doesn’t like the Kinks, they don’t like the Kinks.

That thread was priceless.

Many people remember the iconic scene in “Braveheart” when William Wallace (just to clarify for 4th that was not actually THE William Wallace, instead an actor named Mel Gibson) loudly proclaimed FREEDOM as he was tortured and ultimately murdered by the King’s henchmen. Truly inspiring. In a deleted scene, after a partially intense battle during the rebellion, WW walks away from battle with blood on his heart and asks “Who does Notre Dame have in the late game?”. No less inspiring to some I am certain. One day, those that follow may recognize you as the Roundy Wallace of the Verizon Fios generation!

Don’t forget your sunscreen.

I feel like Hillary Clinton shared classified information with Chelsea but could be wrong. Where John Bolton is concerned, the most likely explanation is that most people at his level did this sort of thing with regularity and were protected by the rules of the old guard. In essence, folks at his level were above the law—see Biden, Joe. I’d think the phrase “everyone did it” applies here, and he figured he’d never end up on the wrong side of the law.

Nope, you’re lying or struggle with reading comprehension. It’s also apparently got your digestive system out of whack. See a doctor, get a pill, take the edge off.

You're twisting yourself into knots here, Fergs, maybe in a puddle of your own vomit based on your initial post. That's troubling. Let me help you here: Trump is proposing to build a memorial on federal land that has been designated, according to your link, for memorials. That's all I said. That's accurate, at least according to the article which you relied on. It's perfectly understandable that there are rules, regulations and approval processes to ensure that the memorial proposed is a suitable memorial based on the standards established for memorials. For example, let's say a president wanted to build a memorial that included one of those environmentally disastrous golf courses you enjoy so much. One would assume the memorial might be acceptable, the golf course not so much even though it's a great place for elitist liberals to discuss the perils of climate change. Memorial box....checked. Congressional (some would say political) approval and 24 step plan.....unchecked.

From the article that you linked: The location that Trump has his eye on appears to be a designated area that allows for new memorials, but only if they are of "preeminent historical and lasting significance to the United States". Of course there are approvals to be obtained, but again, it seems the memorial box has been checked based on your link.

I guess I'd rather see the money go to more worthy causes, but that's a subjective thing and private donations obviously should be left to the discretion of those who donate. Also appears that the land is available for this sort of memorial, so that box has already been checked.

Of course. Thank you. I did not know this word before today. What a gift the internet can be.

And yet, here you are again.

Again, it's fascinating that a poster could enter a political subforum, hop on a soapbox about tone and rhetoric...and completely ignore 8 years of political warfare waged against Trump (and Trump supporters) by the democrat party and its leadership. Personally, I can understand a discussion on Trump and the language he uses to describe opponents, and can understand how a supporter of democrat ideals might be perfectly comfortable with their leadership declaring certain voters deplorable and irredeemable and the like. Some people can be completely blind to the issues with their sacred cows, so you point it out and move on. But the door kicking, armed raids, the arrests on new and unusual charges, the complete acceptance that certain kinds of removing and holding classified documents is really pretty cool, but other scenarios result in a life sentence, the squeezing of people to attempt them to invent testimony to harm Trump....and implying by default that all represents no big deal, man, that's out there.

Not surprising, he takes sort of a lazy approach to trolling. As for the donation, he seems to be a sort of typical hypocritical liberal where his charity starts and ends with himself. Congrats on the accomplishments with your vineyard. My wine knowledge starts with the brand of Pinot Grigio my wife drinks, and ends if the liquor is out of stock or does not carry it.

4th apparently thought Top Gun was a documentary, so there is that. It explains his confusion in another thread where he wondered how Maverick could be a naval aviator and be working in that Impossible Mission task force at the same time.

Maybe, but it’s a bit more complicated than that. Hillary Clinton and the Democrat party partnered with a foreign national looking to impact the outcome of our election process. Turns out that was no big deal to many, many democrats. Bill Clinton paid a sh-t ton of hush money to settle a sexual assault case, and was one of the main faces of dem leadership pitching Kamala Harris as the next big thing. There are countless other stories in play here, and I guess tine will tell on who gets disqualified and who does not.

The record shows 28,000 people and counting contributed to the legal defense fund of a lunatic who stalked and murdered a man by shooting him the back. I’d characterize those folks as part of the Jonesian tree, comfortable with his stated preference with resolving political differences as he sees fit. There’s no moral high ground here, Frank.

And people were watching you watch others who watched others still. Too many watchers, not enough doers.

I do recognize the effort. This is indeed a step forward, and like you I simply hope it’s the start to the of so much suffering. As for emperor status, we can agree to disagree. However, you’d have much more high ground if JB didn’t waive his mighty hand and clear up a decade worth of criminality for those in his royal family. Again, that was after all sorts of authoritarian malfeasance by D leadership.

Didn’t you already post this, Skipper?

Let’s just hope he keeps the number of liberal senators that they wire tap to 8 or less. 0-8 is like, cool, but 9 plus is wicked authoritarian.

Good for you Andy, you got most of the way through it before falling back on dictatorial stuff. I presume you’re talking about when Trump had his DOJ raid Biden’s private residence, Inna-Fogg A, searching for classified documents and trying to put him in jail for life. Of course had Biden actually gone to jail, he would have been fine because he beat the snippens out of every gang leader from Scranton to Philly when he was younger, while earning a 4.0 in law school, graduating tops in his class and flying a lunar mission to Mars with Buzz Armstrong. True story. It’s fascinating looking at the recent history of the Democrat party and hear Liberal voters whine about authoritarianism.

Jiminy..you forgot to be outraged the first time!

I recall quite a few conversations with certain liberal legal folk here about the appearance of impropriety with Biden sniffing around thieve issues in close proximity to his dopey son. The feedback was that everyone in the international community knew there was one guy—and apparently one guy only in the country that needed to be dealt with. He was THE billion dollar man. It made no sense then, and with the benefit of 5 years of Biden/dem behavior in the rear view, it seems pretty clear Biden was doing business on behalf of Biden. I guess it goes into the category of “special rules for electeds.”

I have a friend born and raised in SF. Liberal fellow, funny, smart and from a wealthy family, and we’ve disagreed about politics many times in the past. Admittedly it’s been a while since we talked about San Francisco but he was quite disillusioned at the decline in standard of living he had seen of late last time we spoke. Garbage, trash, drug addicts, human excrement all over the place, and squarely placed the blame of extreme liberal policies. Perhaps they’ve fixed those issues, or maybe they’re kept out of view of visitors v allowing the locals to suffer, but how they even allowed it to get there was enough to keep me from voting for those people.

I always feel like the time he never spent with Susan Collins is time he wished he could never get back. It would make a good country song.