leh-nerd skin-erd

Man, how bad were your middle school dances? Let it go, it was along time ago!

Got my flu shot, got the pneumonia shot as well. Haven’t had the flu shot the past few years but jumped back in. I had the first shingles shot. Never went due second but probably will. My understanding is shingles is pretty nasty.

I can understand that perspective, at least the preferring not to cast a vote for Trump. I'll always recall where I was when Trump declared, rolling my eyes and thinking "What's happening here?" and to be candid, I found his pre-presidential persona to be much more WWE than grifter/conman. We used to watch The Apprentice as a family and enjoyed it for what it was. What's ironic to me is that all the warning signs were missed when W Bush was accused of fabricating intelligence, leading the US into a war that lefts millions dead and injured, and when his time in office ended, here's what we got: Somehow, someway, all was forgiven by the party that replaced him. The war criminal president suddenly became ole Grampa George, lovable artist and friend to Michelle and Barrack who didn't care so much about that whole war criminal thing. Meanwhile, I thought it interesting that the party of Reagan would look to trot out yet another Bush as a serious, yet ultimately lesser candidate, matched up against the Dems candidate....another, ultimately lesser, Clinton. I think there is a lot of truth to the concern about grifts and con-people, but we probably disagree on where to look first to find it.

You have to acknowledge their willingness to completely abandon their integrity and hold the company line on this subject. It’s the Biden Cognitive Analysis equivalent of the flat earth society.

Pretty close to your perspective, I’d bet. I’d prefer to see the money go to other causes…cancer research, children’s charities, that sort of thing. But it’s not my money, not my cause and in the end, if there wasn’t a ruckus being raised I wouldn’t know it was happening. I’m a sucker for old buildings especially with historic significance, I I was lucky enough to see the Roosevelt Pool in the NYS governors mansion many years ago and it was very cool and awe-inspiring. I’d hate to see that building torn down.

If Obama ran surveillance operations against his opponents, exposed some poor filmmaker to the wrath of radical Muslims by lying about the assault on Benghazi, knew the origins of the Russian hookers story but decided not to tell you, allowed his Sec of State to act incredibly recklessly with classified material, allowed his VP to take/maintain/recklessly handle classified material at home, caged children and looked the other when Vlad annexed Crimea… He would still be as popular as ever with liberals.

I don’t even want to think about what happens if he’s coronated, I’ll tell you that much. His numbers will be the roof, yet at what cost? Knights riding around on horses, poor Fergie relegated to serfdom. And the trumpets, all the trumpets.

Sure, maybe, and in that regard it's a good strategy if it works. It's pretty likely the roads were shut down for political purposes as well, to give Newsome a platform to tell his story. That's politics. As for 'it happens all the time', all that I did was share a quote from the article you linked. The guy could be lying, or he could be exaggerating, or he could be telling the truth.

I care about the political process, but it seems to me one, consistent reasonable process that both parties can agree on doesn't exist. As a result, many people don't trust the process, and at best, hold their nose and hope for the best when their party holds power, and get upset when their party is out. Most people, however, dial out, recognizing there really isn't a lot they can do about it besides casting their vote. A constant phrase you see is 'whataboutism', which is a way of avoiding a conversation on the larger issue because it exposes hypocrisy. The lack of trust in the system is well-earned imo, and here we are. In this case, you point out the SC seems poised to agree with the WH perspective. Is the SC not part of the process? edit: Oops, I missed your second post, wherein you indicated you fault the SC.

Why did they change the story from the mid-1970s to the Clinton years? Honestly Frank, seems to me the producer felt like he/she could tell a better story than the guy who actually lived it.

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.