leh-nerd skin-erd

Those are some hip cats for sure!

Horrible. My first boss, who died recently, was a Vietnam veteran. He told the story that while at a base in Vietnam, there was a local family that befriended the soldier on the base, trading goods for food, candy etc. So one day, the mom brings her children with her as usual, and a helicopter full of soldiers lands nearby. As the local lady and children continue on, she reaches into her basket, pulls something out and throws it in the chopper. The things explodes, multiple deaths and casualties are obvious to anyone in the area. A soldier near my former boss, aims his weapon, shoots the family and according to his account, 'cuts them in half'. I was young, amazed and horrified by his description of events. I guess if you see enough of this stuff, some really horrific things can happen.

Some people are french fry people, some like their tater's totted.

Man, that’s a lot of words to describe children killed in a rocket attack.

That’s a fair assessment. Enjoy the hoops.

And Biden was mentally fit for office. That was a gas, man.

Within reason, certainly. Tax is an important part of the system of governance. The challenge is that in spite of the enormous sums of money going into the tax pool from a near endless variety of source, how much actually makes it to the point of improving “the quality of life for all Americans”. To boot, for those that pitch the notion of affordable health, what’s the current model for doing that efficiently? Medicare? Medicaid? The VA? The US Government in general? Like any household planning for a successful journey through life, it starts with identifying waste, inefficiency, consolidation and rational spending to see where you’re at before you throw more money at the problem.

https://www.warren.senate.gov/oversight/letters/warren-klobuchar-wyden-and-pocan-investigate-vulnerabilities-and-shortcomings-of-election-technology-industry-with-ties-to-private-equity Someone is always worried about something.

Josh is a highly paid professional, and I have a forum where I can watch him. It’s not the Olympics. I’m not at all certain I would watch him and the US Football Team playing the South Korean Nationals as an Olympic sport. I understand others see it differently, that’s ok with me. I recognize and respect the time, commitment and athleticism that defines those athletes, it’s just not for me. As for the true amateurs, I agree 100%, though many of these sports seem less amateur than professional just based on the commitment required to make it to that level. Your Russian friend sounds like she knows the deal. 🤫 I know, generally, but that doesn’t move the needle for me one way or the other. In fairness, the NBA doesn’t interest me much either, beyond the occasional dazzling array of 3s.

I can’t do it. A bunch of highly paid professionals winning games they should win. Boring. Maybe raise the hoop a couple feet?

Hmm. Perhaps not surprisingly, different children have different perspectives. I'd say conclusions are varied and evolving. There have been times when they questioned my perspective (and when I suggested that the agenda of the folks offering guidance should always be questioned, that included mine), times we argued or disagreed here or there, times we agree. Mostly, the conclusion seems to be that they need to think for themselves, and make personal decisions based on what they believe to be in their best interest all things considered.

I think what you’re actually saying is that North must communicate in the way you have judged acceptable to be acceptable to you. That’s fine, of course, for you. Beyond that, though, it has nothing to do with anything remotely resembling what you claim it means. It seems to me that most people would be appreciative of the light of love and understanding as laid out by North in his post about his family members. The arbiter of fairness, equality and decency here would really be North’s brother-in-law and his partner, wouldn’t you agree?

Encouraging your children to think independently is a good thing, I think. I use virtually the same approach to climate change, for example.

I think Stevestojan was simply pointing out that in some Olympic events, balls are very necessary elements of the game, so balls are good and anyone objecting to ball sightings must, by extension, be closed-minded.

Let’s look at the tape on this one. Frankish, sensing the opportunity for a Fokker-sequel slam, weighs in with a story on Elon Musk and world class insult against other board members. BOOM! @B-Man, points out that the very subject Frankish teed up for his troglodictian kill shot had been discussed not months, years or weeks ago, but quite literally on the preceding page. Frankish, unbowed, presses onward. Well done! On Musk, I would tend to agree with you on his skills as a parent, all other things being equal.

Well, in support of the notion that everyone has the right to an opinion, I wouldn’t characterize all those on the left as snowflakes (though certainly some might meet that definition for me on any particular issue of the day). I will say you display at least a certain degree of bigotry that, at a minimum, likely rivals that of people you mock. As to what would Islam do, I think most Muslims would be offended by a similarly targeted display, express their outrage in whatever format available and get on with life. That would provide you with another opportunity to drop your snowflakes line, etc etc and the circle would be complete. The issue for me isn’t as you described it, that “Some drag queens did an admittedly distasteful scene”. The issue is that it was a choreographed and intentional part of the grand spectacle of the Paris Olympics, and all that that implies. To the extent it mocked or insulted was intentional and calculated. In that regard, it’s really just about intolerance, which is pretty ironic imo.

Yes, if you completely ignore/rationalize the actions of the Democrat party and liberals generally over a 5 year window—-it was all on Trump. Sensible people shouldn’t ignore that though, Frank.

Oh, there were some people hooked on the “Biden’s still got it!” mantra, that is not in dispute.

Only the Willie Brown one.

I’m getting very woozy watching those guys balance precariously on that sloped roof. I feel like one wrong step, one reckless turn, an eight of a mile sprint to the edge followed by a long-jump style leap and they would fall 7-9 feet to certain doom. At a minimum that SS agent is going to get grass stains on his suit and mess up his weejuns.

All cool, and when you can get both/all parties to agree to follow those guidelines, let me know. You can add this to the list of things that include surveilling political opponents, utilizing the Intelligence Community to make one-off declarations that turn out to be untrue and impact elections, figure out some sensible approach to safeguarding our classified documents and nations secrets to avoid the appearance of impropriety, launch character assassination campaigns to destroy SC nominees and send a message to those that might one day follow. Until then, I prefer to deal with things as they are, as they exist…not how they play out in your pinko fantasy world, Judy Blume.

Let’s start with the obvious. Dem leadership ran with Biden in spite of his clearly deteriorating mental/cognitive/physical state because they thought he was the best person to win the election. They shielded that from voters to the extent they could, and I don’t think the debate “changed” things so much as revealed what they were hiding. As for “idiots”, that’s not my characterization. People will convince themselves of just about anything, and my point was simply that acknowledging their leadership had been lying to them all along would require an acknowledgment they were duped. That’s not how most hard core supporters are going to react…they just move on and vote party line.

Fair enough, though that allegation did not include declarations of treason, either. I was not a fan of the Whitewater probe, was young enough to think it was a personal matter only. I knew nothing of Clinton's proclivity toward sexual predation, power dynamic, and the credible allegations of assault against him. I further didn't spend much time worrying about, or considering, the role of HRC in enabling his behavior and assault on the women victimized by her husband. And, while we're agreeing and whatnot, let's not forget that the political powers that be declared Clinton above the law as it related to perjury, and fully embraced the slippery language that he deftly displayed during his testimony. Turnabout is, indeed, fair play. It wasn't a mistake, it was an intentional (cynical, some would say) power play to destroy an administration. It was also part of a larger plan to destroy the President. As a stand alone, I might agree with you on the post-January 6 impeachment, but as a matter of common sense, it would be flat out silly to support impeachment. The dems had spent nearly 5 years declaring Trump guilty of treasonous behavior, been revealed to have surveilled their political opponents, unmasked American citizens, and spread election misinformation to divide the country. I cannot say for certain that 1/6 never occurs without democrats running the Russia scam, but I would suggest I might well look at it differently. Turnabout is fair play. I have referred to Mike Pence as one of the heroes of the day. Perhaps had the dem leadership had a Pence-ian figure urging restraint and common sense when they were spreading stories of treason, the whole mess could have been avoided. Instead, they spoke with one ugly, sustained, political voice for 5 years, and their base bought it. I can see what you're saying, but I think it reveals a naiveté that borders on pathological. What fences? The ones erected by people who call others nazis, uneducated, treasonous, and who's claim to fame is their version of spreading distrust about our elections is way cooler than the other guy? No, thank you, Frank--I'd prefer those fences remain in place. For reasonable people who can see the duplicity of the argument on illegitimate elections (cool!) v stolen elections (scandalous!), there are no fences to tear down.

Well in fairness, he's been kinda, sorta dead for quite some time, presidentially speaking.

Sure, politics should be clean, green and above board. We should all respect and demand normal, sensible standards be followed. You may not want to hear it, but standards of acceptable behavior vary greatly. Set aside Jan 6 for a moment ( a dark day in our nation's history, though questions remain on whether not the scales of justice operated fairly for all defendants). What happened in the lead up to the Trump inauguration on 1/20/2017, and continued thereafter, was the leveraging of emotions of the American people with historic distrust in a cold war adversary in a manner not seen since the days of Joseph McCarthy. The democrat leadership understood the hatred for the duly elected President, understood that their base would accept virtually anything said or done to Trump, and proceeded accordingly. The democrat party and many supporters cared little for unity, little for respecting the results of free and fair elections, and embraced the chaos. At the same time, sensible American citizens, intent on seeing through the agenda of the duly elected President, watched as one political dirty trick after another was launched, watched as the msm spread fanciful stories based on anonymous sources, and became increasingly frustrated with this new version of attempting to remove the President from office. Conservatism, as it turns out, is not something that fits neatly into a box, or that is defined by one individual based on his/her expectations. I cannot recall a time when I read, or signed up for, a passive and apathetic mindset when the events of 2016+ are viewed in the context of the actions of the opposition to free and fair elections and acceptance thereafter. What you seem to consistently lobby for is not conservatism, it's acquiescence. Certainly, it would be nice if after Trump was elected, the world did not go sideways, if many people who who voted for HRC didn't lose their minds, fully and completely embrace election denialism and national discord, but things did not play out that way. That they were surprised to see a similar, though admittedly more aggressive version of a stolen election scandal, reveals a lack of understanding of human emotion and the nature of escalation. It was completely predictable.