leh-nerd skin-erd

I agree the decisions GF made that day were part of the problem, and of all the issues that day, his fentanyl use is the biggest issue I have with the question of what actually killed him. I also see a tremendous downside to being on the jury and voting to acquit—angry mobs would be a problem. I can certainly understand a person looking at the video, the prosecution case—and thinking it’s a whole lot easier to convict the guy than deal with the fallout from acquittal.

These are hot topic items Mup, and strong feelings are to be expected. Personally, I don’t have a problem discussing all aspects of the case, I don’t think we do anyone any favors pretending things that are obvious are irrelevant. Anyway, enough of this for one night.

I didn’t read it that way, I read it as Mupp’s feelings of a human being appearing to show disregard for another human being. The reality is a jury found the guy guilty, and sentenced accordingly. I recall somewhere along the line you indicating you wrestled, as did I a long, long time ago. One of the first things the coach taught us was if you were complaining about being choked, you weren’t choking. Still, there were some days it sure felt that way especially under duress. I also understand what you’re saying about officer safety, but in a few conversations with friends in law enforcement, they point out the reasonableness of response given the situation they are in. At the point GF is cuffed and on the ground, perhaps a more reasonable officer handles things differently.

I asked you for your thoughts on the Michael Brown case because you made the comments on video evidence. I wasn’t talking about Chauvin, but you were apparently. That sorta got us back on the fentanyl issue. I forgot to mention in the car accident scenario, you were also driving under the influence with a BAC of .14 before you hit the other car. Be that as it may, all good. Nor did I take it that way, Mup. 4th likes a good negative spin though.

If the perp dies due to a drug overdose, the cause of his death was his decision to take a drug and overdose. If you rear end another vehicle and the driver subsequently dies because of fentanyl abuse during an argument, how much time you willing to do?

Hmm. What do I think? Video evidence is important, but doesn’t tell the whole story. If fentanyl caused the death of a suspect in a scuffle with an officer, charges may be appropriate against an officer but murder seems unreasonable to me.

I wonder your thoughts on the Michael Brown shooting? I’ll summarize and suggest that a multiple reviews lead to the conclusion was justified, though obviously tragic for the officer and Brown’s family. I ask because your comment about the incident not being on camera and what might have happened here. The lack of video evidence in the Brown case allowed for all sorts of narratives. Btw, if you prefer not to get dragged into this further, I understand. Just wondering.

I think the plan was to remove establishment loyalists from the DOJ, and certainly the Trump admin has attempted to do that. Unfortunately, the federal court system makes the removal of many of these people exceptionally difficult. Classic case of tail wagging dog.

Great point—that would be Trumpian indeed.

There’s the emotional side of an argument, and the legal side of an argument. Considered from the big picture perspective, the vast majority of people would tend to support due process and a fair and just legal process from start to finish. Of course, we know when humans and personalities get involved, fair and just are subjective terms. OJ Simpson comes to mind. On the other hand, on a local level, when the system fails an individual or community, the lofty notion of due process becomes a bit more complicated. The takeover of the apartment complex in Colorado comes to mind. In that case, the system—the judicial system, law enforcement, ICE, etc, fails the tax paying citizen in spectacular fashion. Who could blame those people for being incredibly grateful for the removal and deportation of victimizers absent the long, laborious legal system that allowed the activity to flourish to begin with? Put another way…show me the federal judge or defense attorney supporting crime and violence in his/her neighborhood and not using every tool or trick in the tool box to protect his/her family and I’ll show you an exceptionally rare person.

Sorry to hear about the backache. It’s really tough to do anything when that pain sets in.

@Niagara Bill if Trump and Mark “Chillycon” Carney can consciously re-couple on the golden dome middle defense shield, can we maybe be friends again? I think this is a sign the ice is melting between us/you after all this time apart (it’s really like long Wednesday afternoon when viewed from historical perspective). #partnerseh?

Just a reminder—warm summer breezes and French wines and cheeses, will put your ambition at bay.

You could fix it now though, Roundy, without constantly whining that the people a notch above you on the socioeconomic scale aren’t pulling their weight and yours too. For all those programs mentioned, the typical liberal insists that their student loan debt, or that of their children, be offloaded off their expense sheet so that they can clear the credit card balance and afford to visit a H.R. Biden art exhibit. I believe it’s likely that Van Gough cut his ear off because his next door neighbor was a liberal blathering on about his art. Be that as it may—-the Dems trotted out lib-billionaires to talk about doing more, and it pretty much ended there, at the talking stage. It always does. Now you’re up to whining about boomers and wealth. Everyone always should do more except the people complaining that everyone needs to do more.

If I’m not mistaken, there is a phase out income in excess of $500k annually. That would also phase out the UMC, affluent and wealthy, no? We call them “Fergie and frenz”.

I think I already who you are off the message board. Probably a decent enough guy, good father and husband trying to do the best he can for his family. Caught a couple unlucky breaks, have some stress in your life so instead of kicking dogs, you insult people on message boards while simultaneously claiming to not give a **** about politics. Off the board, you disagree with people but certainly don't tell people they are trash because of who they voted for. In political discussions, you likely get emotional but not overly so. Most people figure out the downside to lobbing juvenile insults when they leave the teen years behind, and when they don't, they end up lonely and alone. As for growth, it's not about being on here with me or anyone else. My comment was about your version of you and who you might aspire to become. I have my own issues I'm working though, trying to get a little bit better as I go along. Sometimes I'm successful, sometimes I have to power through. I'm not here to admit anything about Trump, it's not my responsibility to do so. Thinking back, the non-exhaustive list of issues I've had with Trump, and shared on this board: Didn't like the commentary about POWs, thought it was shallow and a silly thing to say. I didn't like that comment directed at John McCain the POW, but felt McCain as a politician was completely in play; Didn't like the commentary on Obama wiretapping the Trump campaign--said he should never suggest that of a political rival and that one would have to have proof of wrongdoing. I thought that was bad for the country--but Trump was telling the truth. Obama/Biden was doing what he was saying. Bad for the country, of course that they did that. Didn't like the idea of the 1/6 speech. I had no inclination the 1/6 activities were forthcoming, I simply thought the race was over and he would be better suited to critiquing Biden/Harris while in political exile--given the obvious propensity for Bided to screw things up. I didn't like Trump's entire 'Stop the Steal' campaign--it was time to move on, regroup and start anew. A big however--though, was it was perfectly understandable and a natural extension of the dem run Russia narrative. Both were bad for the citizens, but absent the phony Russia narrative, Stop the Steal never happens. In short--it's the way politics work. I didn't like the depth and breadth of the pardons he issued to 1/6 individuals. I've explained that . I think accepting the jet from Qatar is a mistake. I was not a fan of the chaotic approach to hiring/firing in his first term. Just not my style. I think DJT says some silly things, focuses on some silly things, and I'm not always a fan of his posts. He lies, makes things up and says stupid things from time to time. I don't think that makes him any different than any other person to hold office. There's more, but I believe I've commented on just about all these issues along the way, and more. Maybe you're too busy not caring to notice, but feel free to adjust your narrative accordingly, or don't. I'm good with it either way. Oh--don't like the Canada as 51st state (and not just because I'd have to listen to @Niagara Bill talking about his time at University or his annual holiday) comments. Dumb. And tariffs---well, that remains to be seen how that all works out.

When a person makes a prediction on the outcome of an election, it’s fair to reevaluate performance after the fact. When the same poster makes a new, updated prediction using inflammatory language and insults directed at another person, it’s appropriate to discuss further. There’s no shame in you being wrong, spectacularly so in some cases. All the bravado and braggadocios behavior notwithstanding, politics moves some people to the extreme. The problem comes when declarations are made, prognostications offered, and insults directed and your argument implodes. That’s a time for reflection and growth, to reconsider all you were certain of and try to come out the other side a more reasoned individual. From you, it’s “white trash” an airplane and “curb stomp”.

I’ll make a note of your prediction 4thstrodomous—-BTW, how did you do calling the last one? I have you at 0-1, and feel like you ran with the Biff Tannen shtick then, too.

I spent the last couple days punching down at a dopey poster who made something up, but backed down like a dime store Karen when I asked him to document his claims. I'm hopeful we can avoid all that silliness here and will clarify what I was saying previously: It would go like this: The democrat party and Joe Biden lied to you about his cognitive state, and the media was complicit in the cover up; Now, the democrat party and Joe Biden withheld information on his bout with prostate cancer, and very well may have hidden that from voters when Joe was running last year. The advantage would be for the benefit of the GOP, continuing to hammer on the point that the dems are perpetually dishonest to their voting bloc and make them look easily played and quite foolish. That advantage might be significant or insignificant at the mid-terms, and significant or insignificant at the next presidential election. In the end, it's the nature of politics. We agree on that, yes? That was my point. That is all.

Well, if you read what I wrote, you would realize that it doesn't matter what I believe, it's the nature of politics. For example, Trump and his decision not to produce his tax returns. Obviously, his tax returns are his personal business and he was under no legal obligation to produce his returns. Precedent is fine, but he chose a different path in the run against Clinton. Turns out it wasn't a deal breaker in spite of precedent and liberal hand-wringing.

But pretending a fantasy is reality isn’t the answer here, and it never is. This is the world of politics, where every advantage is exploited, and the people who play in that space move in and out of hypocritical behavior without a thought about it. Biden the person has every right to maintaining his secrecy, Biden the former prez and face of the modern Dem party does not. The reason it’s a major issue is because it will be made a major issue. Individually, no one cares your opinion or mine for that matter. However, as a political cudgel it holds great promise to sway voters whose minds are not made up next time around. An effective political campaign uses the tools in the tool belt and lays out the danger of trusting the party with an increasingly long laundry list of hiding/manipulating/defrauding/weaponizing the system. Add to that the narrative of waste, fraud and abuse that goes against the best interests of taxpayers, and the portrayal of dems partnering with gang members and it’s a winning formula. In the end, it doesn’t really matter whether Biden knew or didn’t, the goal is to flush out the truth if possible, but hammer the credibility and link it to the Hur tapes. The Dems will have their own version, of course, so it really boils down to sentiment at the time the race plays out.

Maybe, but I doubt it.

You tried that angle already and it ended awkwardly for you—you know, you glitched up, abandoned the subject you thought you thought through and ended up with you thinking about salad tossing. But, we did agree on the enjoyment of your day. Let’s move on.

Trump wins again, but good luck with the unicorn thing.

"...throwing word salad..."? Again, gibberish. Enjoy your day though.