leh-nerd skin-erd

We’ll add this to the list of things you don’t know. It goes right after “A complete and unabashed look at Margaret Sanger’s legacy.”.

You have unknown civilians telling people someone is a hero, doubtful conflicts, gambling references, Robert Downey Jr movie quotes and a Butker jersey being worn to a Bills game. It’s just all too much, Frenkle. Too, too much.

If they have it in writing, there's no reason for the AG refuse a lawful subpoena. Let's be fair--a transcribed recording doesn't provide a full accounting of what actually happened. Tone matters. Attitude matters. The recording may show evidence of evasiveness or deception. Plus, if information was omitted or incorrectly transcribed, who would know? Why is it ok for this AG to operate outside the law, just because he wants to?

He was talking about unprecedented complaints about the DOJ and the work they do. I'm guessing here he was talking about AG Barr, the Mueller report, and the criticism Barr got for describing the political persecution of DJT?

A veritable ***** of intolerance, with something for everyone!

Are you using the word “worse” as commonly accepted in the English language, or as defined in LaRon’s Newfangled Dictionary of Words With Fluid Meanings? This will matter. It’s interesting because the parents, grandparents and maybe great-grandparents of many of today’s Biden supporters knew exactly who he was, and laughed him out of the race on multiple occasions.

Joe..makes things up...more...than he lies. Joe doesn't...lie...he makes things up. Joe, therefore, is honest as the day is long, which he may say is 1 hour and 14 minutes long. While not necessarily true, it's not a lie, it's just something that isn't true stated as a fact. 🤣 Joe lies, L' Ron, and you know it's true.

I’m just trying to keep my bingo card current. So far, I’ve got Frankish advocating for voter suppression, Andy1 concerned about uninformed voters but only in swing states, Fergie with always trust the Pew, and Tibsy in a presumably unrequited virtual but committed emotional relationship with a deep affection for Joe B. Just trying to keep it real.

Biden interrupted Paul Ryan frequently and it was quite effective. Trump supersized the approach and clearly confused Biden the first time around. As for lies, that’s only a Trump thing debate-wise? Biden is a teller of truths? On the other hand, I do agree it will be a national embarrassment. Neither will provide any substantive answers, not that any debate reveals much one way or the other.

Nothing oozes relevance more than dropping a movie quote 4 decades old. Rumor is he wanted to go with “I pity the fool!” but he kept saying “foot”.

”I SHALL REVIEW THE EVENTS OF THE DAY, CONSULTING ONLY APPROVED SOURCES AND DIRECT YOU AS TO HOW TO FEEL ABOUT IT” -The Frankish Town Crier

I answered your question, and encouraged you to seek out enlightenment. I'm like Leh-nerd Dali Lama.

You asked a question, I answered it. That apparently caused you to lose track of the original question you asked, and how you actually are one of the people you seemed to be mocking. I apologize for shaking you out of your monkey tree.

Then why did you ask the question, silly? This was you 46 minutes ago:

duh, you're one of the tens of millions.

2016? Tens of millions at last count.

Everyone has their own truth Frank, and who is anyone to suggest they are wrong? We have to embrace that.

You see rage, @RoundyboutI think many people see President Izzy Mandelbaum.

Agreed. Trump went full Biden on him last time—interrupting and mocking him and JB couldn’t handle it. The guy famous for blurting out “Malarkey!” couldn’t handle the malarkey 4 years ago. Now he needs safe spaces, empty halls and mics that can be toggled on/off. Next will be subjects off the table—Israel, Palestine, the Russian incursion into Ukraine, his family business with China…

I don’t think that’s the “only” inference at all. It may be as you suggest—the likelihood that he could prove collusion because it occurred. There’s also the possibility that they felt strongly they would prevail, but that a jury might find in favor of CK regardless. Or, that prolonging the matter further would do irreparable harm to the brand, and that the cost of winning might prove to be too expensive during a very tumultuous time. Or, that they did not want to become involved in a trial that would reveal the inner workings of the league. Finally, let’s address that CK, on his quest for justice, also settled. One can infer the dialogue with his counsel included all of the elements as well—win, loss, settle. He chose to settle as well. On the larger point, what CK, HB and AR did are not the same thing.

The Kaepernick story has reached urban legend status. He had a contract with 9ers and opted out. According to the Broncos, he was offered a deal and passed. There are also rumors he turned down an offer to play with the Seahawks. Finally, he made in excess of $43,000,000 while in the NFL. All the persecuted should be so lucky.

You’re probably correct on the victims and families. I wasn’t attempting to speak for them, that’s not my place and I would not presume to do so. I’d understand just about any reaction from them, from wanting 5 minutes in a room with the murderer, to watching him strapped to a gurney to wanting to see life in prison. I don’t always understand how people can forgive, though the capacity of some people to forgive always impresses and amazes me. That said, there is a reason family members and friends are not allowed to sit in judgement of perpetrators. I was speaking societally, in the big picture. I doubt a criminal psychologist would spend 5 minutes with the guy, close his notebook and declare “Racism, nothing else to see here.”. Btw, in retrospect, “dumbing it down” was a poor choice of words for me to use. I was simply trying to suggest there likely is a lot more beneath the surface of this guy, beyond racism, and by exploring what that might be, perhaps more can be learned to prevent it from happening in the future.

The challenge with drawing a line in the sand over what one side does that the other does not, is that if you wait a hot sec, the other side will do what you complained about originally. That assumes, of course, that they weren't doing it to begin with, while complaining about it. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/12/democrats-in-debate-criticize-trump-over-china-tariffs-and-trade-war.html

@sherpa after he is banned:

It was a racist attack, of course. However, I'm not sure we extend any sort of justice to the victims by dumbing it down to "He was white and hated black people.". What sane person, however hateful, systematically plans and carries out atrocities like this? The root cause here was insanity. He didn't scratch someone's car with a key, didn't throw a rock through a window, he hunted people down and executed them. Completely off the rails, alternate reality insanity. I'm not a psychiatrist, but it occurs to me that there are two ways to address this situation. 1. Death penalty, end of story; 2. Work to figure out how this guy got so far detached from reality that he would act out in this way against mothers, fathers, sisters, and brothers. I get the desire for the first option, I used to feel that way in situations like this. Or, really any situation involving murder. I think thought that option 2 is the right path, to gather information in an attempt to stop the next mass murder, or the one after that.