leh-nerd skin-erd

I thought your side didn’t have vehicles? Relic of the past, etc etc.

You said “can’t having them get hurt”. A guy was murdered, the presumptive nominee narrowly escaped death. The events of the last few days, coupled with Democrats commentary thereafter is a walking, talking advertisement for 2A support.

You must have been in a really deep slumber the last few days. I will now call you Tibs Van Winkle.

This is one of the most ominous statements I have ever seen, and Maddow's failure to follow up and press him is very telling indeed.

This post is a classic example of throwing punches in the air. Dramatic, yes. Eye-catching, sure. Ultimately though, it's just jibber jabber and fluff. They do not allow guns in the RNC because they do not want guns in the RNC. There are likely a dozen reasons why, some obvious, some nuanced. I don't worry why "they" don't allow guns on planes, but I'm not advocating for citizens to carry guns on planes. A 20 year old yahoo slithered past a dozen or more highly trained law enforcement agents, highly motivated to protect an individual, all heavily armed, avoided highly trained snipers and got off 8 or 9 shots literally just above the heads of said officers there for one purpose only. This scenario points to why 2A proponents want the ability to peacefully carry arms without government overreach. Once the guy shot Trump, and assuming he got off the roof top, the only thing likely to be in between he and innocent rally attendees would have been their own personal firearm had they been carrying. Again, I'm not even advocating for that, I'm just wondering how you can add 2+2 and get 8675309.

What on earth is this blather? There is no talking point that assumes everyone is armed, many people believe in the 2A and don't own firearms. Trump was indeed surrounded by scores of armed people, most of who(m) lacked the ability to see/hear/or confront the guy a couple hundred yards away, perched on a roof 12+ feet off the ground. Trump is a victim of incompetence on a massive scale, and his shooting actually points to the problem most adherents to the 2A bring up virtually every time. We have rules, guidelines, and laws supposedly designed to protect us. Unfortunately, the rules, laws and guidelines do precious little to actually protect us if not properly considered, implemented and adjusted as need be--so it's on the individual to protect himself. I'm not a gun owner, have no desire to own a firearm, but there could have been 25 agents in that building with all sorts of firepower and technology to bring this guy down, none of it mattered because the guy defeated the process.

Agreed. I'm all for waiting for all the details to be revealed, but it's very hard to wrap one's head around the notion that those protecting were in a building the shooter climbed on for the shot. "Hey Smitty, did you hear that? Sounds like someone crawling up on the roof." "That's crazy talk! Probably just really big squirrels."

Mrs. Robinson too. She was home schoolin' before home schoolin' was cool.

I think it depends on your perspective. The patently false (and quite illogical) allegations that the 2016 election was “illegitimate” and the result of a conspiracy between Trump and Russia was very effective for the Dems. It lead to a 3 year investigation by Mueller, and all the news from anonymous sources real and fabricated followed. It lead to impeachment inquiries, more news real and imagined and was especially effective at dividing the nation. You can see the aftermath with d ideologues and commentary about the shooter missing to this day. I’ve cited the Warren/Klobuchar memo expressing grave concerns about election security and the ability to manipulate the election from just prior to Trump v Biden. There was no talk of safe/secure elections, reassurance to the American people that faith in our process was faith well placed. The loser of the 2020 election was always going to challenge and run with stolen/illegitimate election. It worked well in 2016. As for 2024, maybe you’re correct, but recent history tells us there are plenty of dirty tricks to run with, depending of course, on your political affiliations. There’s a lot of ground to cover between now and January.

Interesting, thanks for the reply. I respect your feelings, but with regard to pension funds, isn’t there a strong correlation between pension funds and investment return from equities? Can one exist without the other for any sustained period of time?

You’ve got some very strong feelings on the equities market—what drives that thought process?

Fair, balanced and accurate.

Are you still in Mumbai, Doc? If not, you can copy and paste your post to Google and find the answers quickly. ✌️

You're the one they are looking for. My brother is a retired teamster, votes R consistently, and believe Trump's vision for the country is better than the Biden/D version. My brother-in-law, UAW, perhaps not as pro-Trump but he sure isn't pro-Biden. My parents were both union workers and I've never had the perspective that 'anti-union' positioning was for me. Nor, on the other hand, that a non-union shop was a panacea for the employee. For me (I worked for a large company that did not have union representation) it's about balance. I view a union as nothing more, or less than a corporation focused on the best outcome for the union as a whole. To the extent it benefits workers, that's great.

People are judgy, but I'm more concerned about the potential that you've got a gambling jones. Bets on the vocal attributes of West Virginia politicians? That is crazy, you know.(?)

"The buck stops somewhere, it just ain't here.". Bradford "Bucky" Truman, Harry's cousin on his momma's side

That's the beauty of the world, Frank. You can sit in your lay-z-boy, enjoy a cup of Earl Gray and listen to the Dr. Hook LP on the console as he beckons a lady friend to consider sharing the night together (ah yeah, all right) . Someone else with a hankering for bunions and a high arch can chase their dreams with a reasonably priced subscription service in the comfort of their own home. We're all God's children. Dude, I said 24 MILLION up thread. You're with me or against me. The friend of my enemy is my friend's enemy.

Amber Rose has 24 million followers on instagram (likely 23,999,999 after school marm/prudish law school librarian @The Frankish Reich unfollowed in a puritan huff late last night) . I don’t know anything about her, but if you’re trying expand your reach to a more diverse audience, this could be one way to do it.

Oh, I’m simple, Jack. Everyone says so!

The challenge beyond that is the govt fixation on avoiding transparency at all costs. When you consider there are still unknown from the Kennedy assassination 61 years ago, what is the likelihood the Biden admin provides a truthful accounting of what happened? Given the state of his campaign, his mental state, lights out by 8 approach to leadership, and the fact that the target was his hated opponent, it’s probably more natural than not to consider a conspiracy in play.

Not overrated, just simply not practical to assume that’s an option. Stepping back a bit, SC Justice Brett Kavanaugh had a long and distinguished career before being nominated for the SC. The price he paid for his dedicated public service was character association on a massive scale, designed to destroy him in the eyes of the country, his family, his wife and children. His crime, of course was being conservative. His chief accuser was Kamala Harris, and her reward was being selected as VP on the ticket. I’ll happily acknowledge similar stories the other way, but this one comes to mind. Who, exactly are all these stalwarts of good and decent character who will expose their necks to the wolves at the door when there is quite literally no end to what they will be subjected to?

If you don’t think it’s fair, why bother bringing it up here? It’s not that it’s not fair, it’s moronic. We disagree. It’s a chronic problem because it’s allowed to be a chronic problem. It’s by design, and for every d/r/I who wanted to solve it, there have been many who benefited from it—power, money, corruption. I’m 100% in favor of sensible immigration policy and welcoming immigrants to the US in a sensible, orderly fashion. We do not have that because it gets in the way of the business of illegal immigration. Maybe, of course we’ll never know. I thought it was pretty telling though, that BO’s hand-chosen successor—the one he politicked for, reasoned for and made excuses for when confronted with reckless behavior—-went down like the Hindenburg on Election Day. Turns out he only had so much juice. That was pretty epic. You started off by talking about fear mongering, and finish by stating that Trump is a dangerous wild card and all that entails. You mentioned hate speech and yet gave HRC a huge pass. That’s interesting to me—- I guess some people just want to get their fears mongered from sources they trust?

He gets compared to Hitler because it’s catchy and campy, and citizens who lived through the era/aftermath of the Hitler era have largely died off. Had people lobbed that silliness 15-20 years ago the general response would have been laughter and a hearty GTFOH. He’s addressing the massive elephant in the room, and that’s illegal immigration. He did say lots of other stuff. Ah, the HRC version of hate speech was a “regrettable mistake”. 😂 Those comments didn’t cost her the bid, nor did her blatant disregard for national secrets. In fact, it barely caused a stir among her very fervent supporters. What cost her the election that in spite of the lift she got because she was once married to a president, she is almost mythically unlikable and quite uninspiring as a human being.

Great in theory, but I’m pragmatic if nothing else. The system is what it is, and you have to deal the hand dealt. Overrated imo. I find much more satisfaction and joy from finding grace and leadership from people in my circle.

You asked what people honestly thought about Vance(s) comments. I answered honestly. When politicians are adversaries, it gets ugly. When politicians from the same party are vying for the same spot, it's often very, very ugly. When politicians partner, it all becomes lovey dovey. When politicians retire, sometimes adversaries become good buddies in spite of some really, nasty ugliness. I don't think this is a new phenomenon, and it doesn't mean much of anything to me, really.