leh-nerd skin-erd

I was going to tell him that Grand Island isn't in the Caribbean, just in case.

Nice of you to Cher! Where are you looking?

Get a jump on it, Streisand! 🤣 No one ever actually moves!

Of course you would. Deniro is a really well known guy, known for his friendship and partnering with well-established liberal good guys like Harvey Weinstein, complaining about having to share marital income with his ex-wife, and berating and sexually harassing his assistants. I'm sure he's a fair share guy, too. He's perfectly suited to provide astute and in-depth analysis on political issues. I always loved his work, but I'd think he should be eliminated from consideration solely based on his roles in The Irishperson and Flowers of Paper Moon. His performances were god-awful, and I'd hazard a guess your coffee cup would have done a better job in both.

Thanks Frankish, I appreciate the reply. I hope you and your family have an awesome and Merry Christmas as well!

Interesting. Why do you think the Supreme Court said “not this time”? clearly Smith thought he had an angle, and you’ve commented as such. Why did the SC think it was an unreasonable move?

Unless, of course, we get lucky.

I give Mr. Wiesel an extraordinary amount of credit for confronting this d-bag. Courageous, resolved, and calm. The demand that he remove his flag is unbelievable while these cretins harass people.

CNN didn’t have the whole clip, a transcript of the statement, analysis of what he said in anticipation of the interview, or wasn’t in any way prepared for his response? But..they had his wife’s comments? The interviewer ended up looking weak, a trained parrot of sorts. That typically happens when people push back.

Sounds like every corporate memo sent after things went horribly awry. We’ve got communication established, the word “urgent”, and the obligatory “teams” on the job.

That the SC appeal to expedite the resolution by stepping outside the normal process followed was a very bad idea. Smith is pursuing a criminal case against a former president, with a high percentage of the population thinking its a partisan attack AND that Biden has acted unethically….do you think Smith doesn’t understand the gravity of his request? The message sent in rejecting it? He’s not in this to lose.

Hmm, rebuke might not be the right word. Smith doesn’t push the plan unless he’s certain he is right to do so, and certain to win. By sending him back to school, a message is sent as well. Ah, cr@p, I’m sticking with rebuke.

Dude from Riverside, I’m a lot of things, but suggesting Trump is not hypocritical at times would be a bridge too far. All.

What public figure preaches but doesn’t subsequently exhibit hypocrisy on a sizable scale? Trump. Biden is a hypocrite , preaches about “fair share” and jets off to his fave billionaires beach house and it sure doesn’t seem to be about a wealth tax. Or, about covering for Hunter in all that entails. Obama is a hypocrite, lectures about climate change and spends time on 400’ yachts with his fave billionaire in the south of France, Kamala Harris was a vocal advocate of “me too”, stated she believed the woman who claimed to be a victim of a violent sexual assault at the hands of Joe B and was so outraged by it she partnered with him to run the country. I’m not certain whose hands are clean here, ever, John. She’s nice looking though, on that we can agree.

From the outside looking in, It certainly appears to be a rebuke of the SC. You’ve laid out the facts as you see them quite reasonably. Perhaps that was Smith’s thinking, too. But in the end, his request was rejected, almost as if to say “Slow down, Jack, let’s follow the normal process to avoid the appearance of a partisan witch hunt deigned to 🤬 with the election”. Put another way, there is a lot riding in this. The stage is being set for what future political skirmishes might look like, and when the SC swings and misses on a grand scale, it looks like a rush to judgement and kind of sloppy. On your second point, why should “everyone” want to avoid the matter being decided after a Trump win, of course, assuming he wins? I’d assume most Trump supporters would want an adverse decision to come when there was theoretically a chance for him to push back.

I would put my money on @B-Man, Daz. Everyday and twice on Sunday. Hunter Biden is a mess, checking nearly every box an entitled rich guy could check. Abused the tax system. Abused federal gun laws. Deadbeat father. Significant addiction/abuse issues. Enriched is a foreign land known for corruption, which coincidentally was economically threatened by his very powerful father. Absolutely careless and reckless with his laptop. Protected by intelligence agencies because of the status of his father. Narcissistic tendencies. Self-destructive personality. Clear paper trail of influence peddling. Attempting to convince the American people that in all this, he’s actually the victim. Perhaps most telling that through all this, he’s had access to the most powerful and influential media types, image consultants, and fixers in the world. We’ve actually seen the best he’s able to bring to the table, and it isn’t good. B may be a bit homely by current contemporary standards, Rubenesque in stature and prefers ranch with his wings, but he’d dunk on Hunter like Bob Lanier.

I had initially responded but circled back to try a different approach. I would assume the justices of the Supreme Court considered the approach you outlined but chose to go about things differently. If I understand things correctly, all they’ve really done is suggested that the process to address this sort of thing should be followed. That makes sense to me. Why do you think they rejected the approach you outlined? What did they miss about the pure question of law, and why do you think they decided as they did?

https://nypost.com/2023/12/22/news/supreme-court-rejects-quick-trump-immunity-hearing-in-win-for-ex-president/ This one is a win for common sense. Let's slow down a bit and pump the breaks.

Saudi Arabia is a United States ally, John. This is clear.

I think to be fair to the mayor, he probably thought it was a them, not an us problem.

Always great to hear from you Mup, especially when I do not have try and encourage you to come on down to the basement. Merry Christmas to you and yours my friend!

It's easier to point what you got close to getting right. I would prefer the next President be a conservative. As for that being an "absolute", if it doesn't go that way, that president will be my President. I don't believe I've taken any significant stance on what you refer to as "book banning", but certainly believe that consideration should be given to what type of books are placed in elementary, middle and high schools. I'd bet you think that, too, though dunderheadedness on your part likely precludes you from taking that position. Beyond that, what you wrote was a combination of silliness, gibberish and fabrication.

Comprehension. Focus. Honesty. Integrity. Maturity. Understanding. Decency. Good faith. Morality. There's more, but it really just boils down to a lack of character on your part.

Of course Harvard has to deal with it. I wasn't under the illusion the government didn't already have rules, regulations and guidelines directing business to do things a certain way. That said, if you're still clinging to the notion that the government "...doesn't tell Exxon..." what to do after the revenue comes in, we're simply wasting time here. One would have to be foolish to argue that there are not socialistic...tendencies inherent in our system. Of course there are, and not all are necessarily good or inherently bad. Balance and moderation, sir. That's the ticket if you ask me. Absolutism be damned. I'm not sure how you ping-ponged from a conversation about Harvard, student loan debt, fair share and the greater good to Archer Daniel Midlands, Trumpers, maggots and victimization, but I'll leave work through the powerful emotions and thoughts you've shared with me today. At the same time, I'll remember that reasonable people can disagree, and offer for your consideration: "The poorest way to face life is to face it with a sneer." -Theodore Roosevelt

Tiberius Porter? Well I'll be darned.