Yes his communication team wants reporters questions in advance before a press briefing . That will limit the amt of times Jen Psaki has to say in a presser "I'll have to get back to you "

White House Reporters: Biden Team Wanted Our Questions in Advance (yahoo.com) (https://news.yahoo.com/white-house-reporters-biden-team-020024623.html)

Better than having no press confeernces at all - like your hero.

Questions in advance = complete and informative answers

Trump spent hours answering reporter's questions . That is an undeniable fact . Questions in advance reminds me of Evita at a debate

Trump spent hours answering reporter's questions .
...until someone asked a question he didn't like, so he then stomped offstage. And his answers were too often nebulous and inconclusive. It took hours because he didn't have the necessary information.

Questions in advance = complete and informative answersQuestions in advance equals a news media completely invested in making Biden look as good as possible. I would say he needs to prove he can think on his feet, but I guess just being able to think in any capacity is about all we can hope for.

Questions in advance equals a news media completely invested in making Biden look as good as possible. I would say he needs to prove he can think on his feet, but I guess just being able to think in any capacity is about all we can hope for.
Apparently, you didn't watch his inauguration speech and other recent public speeches. At least he's not mentally ill....

So no ad lib then

So no ad lib then
He could read entire phrases, not. just. each. word. like. in. second. grade.

He could read entire phrases,It's just trying to THINK in entire phrases that's giving him trouble.

It's just trying to THINK in entire phrases that's giving him trouble.
Nope! You obviously haven't been watching. I'm betting he's also an adventurous yet gentle lover.

Is he choosing truth over facts now?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_wlQZ5N_2k

Is he choosing truth over facts now?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_wlQZ5N_2k
Wow! I LOVE those two men!!!

Unsurprisingly.

Unsurprisingly.
And you too!

Trump spent hours answering reporter's questions . That is an undeniable fact

The undeniable fact is that no president ever used the bully pulpit like Trump did to promote a pack of lies. The last press conference he had was so incredibly full of lies about his failed re-election, every single network - including FOX - immediately pulled the plug on covering it and left Trump talking to himself. This was unprecedented in American history.

And you too!God bless you as well, WG. Seriously.

Today marked a first as the Biden daily press briefing ran out of questions and press secretary Jen Psaki ended it. WOW!

Yes the Biden presidency will be dull

Yes the Biden presidency will be dullI wouldn't count on it. Incompetency breeds excitement, but of an unpleasant variety.

A perfect description of the dufus years.

We can all just hope that the Biden presidency is "dull" by having record low unemployment, positive GDP growth, energy independence, rolled back troop commitments to the Middle East, hundreds of thousands of new jobs in manufacturing, enormous growth in personal income, and the appointment of federal judges who believe in the rule of law. I could stand a lot of that kind of boredom.

An absence of daily lies, is refreshing, and exciting.

I'm sure having boys compete against girls in high school and college athletic events will be less than dull. Killing high paying jobs by the thousands will be likewise. Turning our energy infrastructure from a positive to a negative might arouse some interest. But the most exciting future event, for certain, will be the looks on the faces of the professional pols when the day comes that they actually have to figure out how to pay for what they are "buying" to purchase our votes since borrowing and printing money will no longer be an option. I eagerly look forward to that day. We'll really see some BLM "protests" when that happens.

I'm sure having boys compete against girls in high school and college athletic events will be less than dull.
You refuse to understand, don't you. smh

If all teams are made up of such like, then no problemo! And there have always been differences in abilities. That's why good coaches are needed.

If all teams are made up of such like, then no problemo! And there have always been differences in abilities. That's why good coaches are needed.How would that solve the problem? If, for instance, the best fifteen basketball players in a high school are boys (and they will be practically every time), then how will the girls get to play? Even worse, how will the lesser talented girls even get to put on a uniform? And every time a boy is allowed to play on a girl's team, then that is one girl who will not be on the team, or who will receive much less playing time. And that is pro-female how???

If we follow that insane plan, then girls athletics will be effectively over with.

How much coaching have you done? (I'm betting it is zero).

How would that solve the problem?
What does talent have to do with it? Athletes should play for fun, not for trophies.

What does talent have to do with it? Athletes should play for fun, not for trophies.Most colleges already have intramural leagues where they play for fun. High schools have P.E. classes where kids play for fun. But for that significant group of young people who want to test their skills against each other in competitive sports, it's kind of silly to ask them to give that up because you think they should.

You still haven't told us of your coaching experience.

You still haven't said why a girl should be moved aside so a boy can play on a girls team, and that's the real question here. Why are you against those girls?

You still haven't given any real evidence for those "broken chromosomes" you were so proud of last week.

I think it is becoming very obvious who the one is who refuses to understand.

Back in the day WG, the wife and I enjoyed the weekends of volleyball, kickball, basketball, and flag football with other couples and friends...for the pure fun of it. Organized sports may be different, certainly professional sports but we already see female officiating the men games and even more female coaches so who knows what the future holds.

They already serve in the military. Women have been redefining their roles in society for decades so sky is the limit as far as I'm concerned.

Gdaughter agrees with her Gdad!

But for that significant group of young people who want to test their skills against each other in competitive sports, it's kind of silly to ask them to give that up because you think they should.
They can do that on their own time.

You still haven't told us of your coaching experience.
And get accused of bragging?

You still haven't given any real evidence for those "broken chromosomes" you were so proud of last week.
I asked admin to pull out our trans posts from the Giuliani thread and start a new thread under an appropriate heading. That Giuliani thread was subsequently closed and no new thread started.

I've consulted with several transwomen friends about their experiences and have more to say, but nowhere to say it.

They can do that on their own time.Why? Because you say so? That's pretty lame.


And get accused of bragging?You've never coached a minute in your life. If you had, you would know that girls have no chance to compete with boys.

You have nothing to support the outlandish idea of broken chromosomes. As to your TG friends, my heart goes out to them, but their experiences give us no reason at all to allow boys to compete with girls. Sadly, you don't give a rip about those girls who get pushed aside. It's just another sad instance of your liberal political ideology overwhelming any science or common sense on the issue. Wake up and smell the coffee, WG.

Why? Because you say so? That's pretty lame.
When I was in high school, I was asked to be a Lassie League coach. That got me noticed, so I was moved into coaching Little League. I soared from there!

girls have no chance to compete with boys.

Anybody who wants to play should be allowed to join a team.

Anybody who wants to play should be allowed to join a team.This is what tells me you have never done any serious coaching. In competitive sports, there are nearly always more people wanting to play than can be accommodated. That's why you have tryouts. You cannot have sixty kids on the basketball team, or 75 kids on the baseball team. It's why you have youth leagues. It allows kids who cannot play on high level teams a chance to play and compete. By the time those kids get to HS, it is plain that most of them cannot compete at even a moderate level. No high school can provide, for instance, five basketball teams or six football teams just because you think it's nice for all kids to be allowed to join a team. At some point, money becomes an issue. Facilities become an issue. Coaches become an issue. Time becomes an issue. That's how it is in the real world I lived in.

When I was a school admin, I thought it would have been good to get all athletics off the campus and let outside agencies do that. It's a distraction and eats up a ton of money and resources that schools need. But allowing boys to play on girls teams, and thus deny girls a chance to play, is a terrible idea. Putting both genders on the same team means the girls will get to sit a lot, and so is a likewise terrible idea.

Get out of your bubble, WG. Join the real world. The coffee is good.

This is what tells me you have never done any serious coaching.
No wonder I've never considered buying a house and moving to Mississippi!

Oh well. The usual non-rational responses. Have a nice evening.

They can do that on their own time.

And get accused of bragging?

I asked admin to pull out our trans posts from the Giuliani thread and start a new thread under an appropriate heading. That Giuliani thread was subsequently closed and no new thread started.

I've consulted with several transwomen friends about their experiences and have more to say, but nowhere to say it.

You could always start your own question. Just remember DON'T FEED THE TROLL!

You could always start your own question. Just remember DON'T FEED THE TROLL!
Yeah, I considered starting a new question. Might still do so -- but I want it to attract responses from more than just one other person. What to do, what to do!

Go for it and see what happens. 8D

Go for it and see what happens. 8D
Under which topic? Biology?

I don't know. I for one cannot speak on the science of transgender people. Just the social and psychological pressure they endure from other humans.

I don't know. I for one cannot speak on the science of transgender people.
...which makes me think I should invite one or more of my trans friends to AMHD to post and answer questions.

You would risk exposing the lunatic notion that transgender people are perverted as pedophiles, or akin to those that practice bestiality and should be suppressed, and oppressed? We can't have that can we?

Worse...some fringer may accuse them of being a liberal! GADS!

Oh no! Not that! Anything but that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It get's worse.......you're all going to hell! No wings...no halo...no harps!

You would risk exposing the lunatic notion that transgender people are perverted as pedophiles
When they pretend they have to use a bathroom!!! Oh, nooooo! I'll have to think harder about this. Hope I don't have nightmares tonight!

Much talk. Much whining. No action. Surprising for a bunch of libs? Not at all. It's expected since it's what people do when they have a losing argument.

Much talk. Much whining. No action. Surprising for a bunch of libs? Not at all. It's expected since it's what people do when they have a losing argument.

No action required but a sense of humor is.

Time Magazine did an expose on the cabal that really stole the election and how they did it .

https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

Some cabals are much better than others.

Time Magazine did an expose on the cabal that really stole the election and how they did it .

https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

Tom, you got it TOTALLY backwards!

When you post a link, you should do more than guess at its content. The link you posted from TIME is a long article SUPPORTING the actions taken to confront Trump's lies re the election.

You're making a habit of posting dopey things here.

the solution for you is to not read or comment on them . You'd be doing all a favor . I know very well Time Mag supported what they did . But in their reporting they revealed where the true election fraud occurred admitting there was a conscious efffort by the Dems to use the pandemic as a quasi justification for changing voting rules that had been constitutionally created by the state's legislatures . I'm right ...apology accepted

At least the writer was unbiased. "...and oppose Trump’s assault on democracy."

Note: Sarcasm meter pegged.


You're making a habit of posting dopey things here.Strange comment. Tom's posts are the most accurate and civil of anyone on this site.

Dont take notice of him jl the demise of trump has robbed him of subject matter

the solution for you is to not read or comment on them . You'd be doing all a favor . I know very well Time Mag supported what they did . But in their reporting they revealed where the true election fraud occurred admitting there was a conscious efffort by the Dems to use the pandemic as a quasi justification for changing voting rules that had been constitutionally created by the state's legislatures . I'm right ...apology accepted

I don't agree at all that allowing Americans easier ways to cast a ballot amid this very real pandemic is election fraud. It surely didn't produce any, and even repubs had to concede that FACT. I can ALMOST understand how your head would explode with the FACT that turnouts was up to record levels and the dem vote dwarfed repub best efforts in years.

Of course repub state legislatures are redoubling their voter suppression efforts in the aftermath of the last election. Their longstanding greatest fear has been realized.

the solution for you is to not read or comment on them . You'd be doing all a favor . I know very well Time Mag supported what they did . But in their reporting they revealed where the true election fraud occurred

The favor I'm doing here for all is to point out the falsehoods and half-truths you consistently post on several different subjects. You have no regard for the truth but slant things to whatever your bias is.

For instance, your "true election fraud" is utter nonsense and has been refuted by almost 100 courts including the Supreme Court and even several Trump sycophants like AG Barr and McConnell, et al.

Your right-wing crowd is descending further and further into the world of QANON and Infowars and the like.

Look before you leap.

You know you're a fringer when you embrace the fringer position and confuse truth and reality with fringer BS!

Note I place no right or left designation on the term "FRINGER". That's because they're both kooks in the extreme sense to me.

The article conveniently doesn’t reference the unconstitutional changing of election laws that can only be changed by state legislative action. They boast of the cabal that made it happen . Gross abuses detailed in this article are openly celebrated by the left as achievement. I think it reflects more on you than me .

Read the Navarro Report . All alleged in it is affirmed in the Time article .

Navarro Report (https://navarroreport.com/)

I hate getting a huge homework assignment on the eve of the super bowl, especially when it's about one of my least favorite (UNDERSTATEMENT) dufus sycophant. Wished you had shown the same zeal when the Mueller Report came out.

On the subject of electoral fraud more votes were recorded for Biden than were actually cast. How do you determine which were invalid, the fraudsters know you can't. It took three months to resolve the election of one republican candidate because of the mire. This election was a victory for vested interests and with the demonrats in power there will be no electoral reform. You can expect more of the same but world events will overtake all this. Iran, China, Russia are unresolved issues meanwhile Buffett and Soros will prosper

On the subject of electoral fraud more votes were recorded for Biden than were actually cast. How do you determine which were invalid, the fraudsters know you can't. It took three months to resolve the election of one republican candidate because of the mire. This election was a victory for vested interests and with the demonrats in power there will be no electoral reform. You can expect more of the same but world events will overtake all this. Iran, China, Russia are unresolved issues meanwhile Buffett and Soros will prosper

I don't know where you get your FACTS from but boy they are as loopy as the fringers utterings.

On the subject of electoral fraud more votes were recorded for Biden than were actually cast.Not sure what you mean by that.

Not sure what you mean by that.of course you do jl
It is all a massive fraud but nothing to see here

I don't know where you get your FACTS from but boy they are as loopy as the fringers utterings.i get my facts the same place you do but some media present facts more selectively

I look forward to your massive fraud sources which the dufus and fringers love to lie about. If debunking a lie is selective in your country then one only need to expand the sites you review as truth.

Or adjust your meds.

I look forward to your massive fraud sources which the dufus and fringers love to lie about. If debunking a lie is selective in your country then one only need to expand the sites you review as truth.

Or adjust your meds.
Sky news was spruking the theories the other day, I'm not assembling sources for you to read

No need I have my own feed for Australian news. You have your own loons to worry about.

No need I have my own feed for Australian news. You have your own loons to worry about.

Yes we have a few but yours are more interesting

i get my facts the same place you do but some media present facts more selectively

I've been SHOUTING because you're getting my Irish up. Find a dictionary and look up "fact" and "opinion".

Then get out from under the sun with all the 'roos and stop nipping at the Jameson's, mate.

I've been SHOUTING because you're getting my Irish upI have long wondered why, with liberal dems, their moral failings are always someone else's fault.

I have long wondered why, with liberal dems, their moral failings are always someone else's fault.

Does it hurt?

If it does, then it would be my responsibility. Now see how it works??? It's called "personal responsibility". You should try it.

Yes we have a few but yours are more interesting

So are our trolls.

People who disagree are trolls . Interesting take on dialogue

Those are you're words not mine Tom, and for the record I don't see you as a troll even with you leaning further right in your old age.

Those are you're words not mine Tom, and for the record I don't see you as a troll even with you leaning further right in your old age.

I don't see Tom as a troll, either. His posts are sometimes densely packed showing a lot of research. Although I generally disagree with his opinions, when I read one of the posts, more than once I have given it serious thought and checked it out as best I can on the net.

What I don't understand about Tom is how he can be seemingly on board the Trump BS about winning the election in a landslide and the Democrats responsible for rigging the election so Trump would lose. That's obviously a lie from Trump - and even his AG said the election was fair without any fraud at all.

So Tom is advancing a theory for which, you think, he has no evidence??? Well golly. Who else does that remind us of?

As to the kangaroo court known as impeachment, there is an enormous difference between inflammatory rhetoric such as, "We need to fight like hell for our country," and incitement to insurrection such as, "It's high time for someone to overthrow this Congress and do the right thing." Many pols are guilty of strong rhetoric. If you want to go down that path, then look at Sanders, Waters, HC, and even JB and KH. But for incitement, they are engaged in foolishness. It's the very reason you have not been able to post a single statement by DT in which he is inciting an insurrection. It's silliness.

Why do I put credence to the claim ? Simple; It is no accident that in the contested battleground states ballot counting “stopped” at nearly the same times and under the same voting tallies. And it’s no accident that this only happened in a select few battleground states, not even a majority of states.Those tallies showed Trump on the way to victory. Then the numbers reversed. Maybe it is a coincident ??

I give more credence to Steve Kornacke/MSNBC breaking down the states votes by county and time of reporting. Counting all the LEGAL votes is the goal.

Why do I put credence to the claim ? Simple; It is no accident that in the contested battleground states ballot counting “stopped” at nearly the same times and under the same voting tallies. And it’s no accident that this only happened in a select few battleground states, not even a majority of states.Those tallies showed Trump on the way to victory. Then the numbers reversed. Maybe it is a coincident ??

How do you explain the overwhelming response of Republican vote counters saying the election was fair and accurate? Attorney General Barr saying the same thing? The decisions of 80 judges and 2 SC decisions?

The timing of the counting of the votes - and why - has been explained, time and time again.

Do you believe the nutcase theories of Rudy and Sidney? That the voting machines were a communist-inspired plot? Invented in Venezuela and ballots counted in Germany?

Stop drinking the Kool-Aid, Tom.

not talking about all the states ;most of which were predetermined . Blue states go overwhelmingly blue . Red states red . What Republican counters said in those states is irrelevant.

There were a handful of swing states that determined the election . Those were the states that had issues with election laws being changed outside of the constitutional process of state legislatures creating the law .They were the ones that Suddenly had the vote count stopped by Dem election officials with Trump in a significant lead ;and suddenly turned when the count resumed in the morning (or in the case of Georgia when Republican counters were cleared from the room. )

The Compost had an article Tuesday I can't link to . It calculates that Republicans came within 90,000 votes — 43,000 votes for president, 32,000 votes for the House and 14,000 votes for the Senate — from controlling all of Washington. The difference was in a few key counties in a few swing state that occured in the late night /early morning of Nov 4 .

Trump won in 2016 by some 77,000 votes in a few swing states and even though Evita eventually conceded ;to this day she states the election was stolen

so two stolen elections, seeing a trend here

not talking about all the states ;most of which were predetermined . Blue states go overwhelmingly blue . Red states red . What Republican counters said in those states is irrelevant.

There were a handful of swing states that determined the election . Those were the states that had issues with election laws being changed outside of the constitutional process of state legislatures creating the law .They were the ones that Suddenly had the vote count stopped by Dem election officials with Trump in a significant lead ;and suddenly turned when the count resumed in the morning (or in the case of Georgia when Republican counters were cleared from the room. )

The Compost had an article Tuesday I can't link to . It calculates that Republicans came within 90,000 votes — 43,000 votes for president, 32,000 votes for the House and 14,000 votes for the Senate — from controlling all of Washington. The difference was in a few key counties in a few swing state that occured in the late night /early morning of Nov 4 .

Trump won in 2016 by some 77,000 votes in a few swing states and even though Evita eventually conceded ;to this day she states the election was stolen

I repeat: How explain all the courts - including the SC - not finding anything of substance to examine? The timing you mentioned seems normal - picking up the count again in the morning. The mail-in ballots could be purposely not counted until a later time or not available until then. This complaint has been debunked again and again. You can find it if you do a bit of searching.

You are drawing conclusions from thin air - have you checked your ideas elsewhere? (And HC has nothing to do with it.)

Is AG Barr irrelevant?

The timing you mentioned seems normal - picking up the count again in the morning. The mail-in ballots could be purposely not counted until a later time or not available until then.Seems normal...could be. Funny how you are so eager to give the benefit of the doubt to the process that elected Biden.

seems and could be........ What the swamp wanted was for Trump to roll over and play dead like Nixon did in 1960 . I suppose that in the key battle ground states it is possible that stopping the count with Trump in a significant lead ;and then resuming it in the morning to find in all those states Quid won is possible . Quite a coincidence however .But ' in a world that operates largely at random, coincidences are to be expected, but any one of them must always be mistrusted.' (Rex Stout ;'Champagne for One' )

When a person becomes OK with killing a baby in the 20th week of pregnancy, then that person can accept practically anything. The dark sky is the limit. Election dishonesty? No problem.

seems and could be........ What the swamp wanted was for Trump to roll over and play dead like Nixon did in 1960 . I suppose that in the key battle ground states it is possible that stopping the count with Trump in a significant lead ;and then resuming it in the morning to find in all those states Quid won is possible . Quite a coincidence however .But ' in a world that operates largely at random, coincidences are to be expected, but any one of them must always be mistrusted.' (Rex Stout ;'Champagne for One' )

Is it a coincidence that the far right media is claiming that election rules were changed in swing states by dem activist judges illegally? Nope all the fringers including the dufus has used that excuse to cry foul on any judicial ruling that goes against the narrative of election fraud.

When you cannot argue the facts of the law you cry foul. The repubs traditional voter suppression tactics didn't work and as Athos has pointed out even repubs had no choice but to declare NO FRAUD and certify the results. That's how the dufus lost, repubs lost the house and senate. Not the first time that's happened, so please spare us the the whine. If the dufus had just stopped lying and scheming and conniving after losing 60 court cases we wouldn't have the events of Jan the 6th now would we?

Is it a coincidence that the far right media is claiming that election rules were changed in swing states by dem activist judges illegally? Nope all the fringers including the dufus has used that excuse to cry foul on any judicial ruling that goes against the narrative of election fraud.

The Time Mag article I already linked to has the Dems bragging about how they did the steal in cahoots with major media and internet giants like Twitter ,Facebook Google . They boast how they created conditions where 100s of thousands of signatures could not be verified .

Quid hardly campaigned and yet received 81 million votes . Hatred of Trump could in part explain it . But not enough . The American people do not reward lack luster campaign in your basement . The media and the powerful tech companies did Quid's work for him .It is estimated that the Zuckerberg's and others donated major $$$$$ into the key districts for the sole purpose of harvesting absentee ballots (Zuckerberg $400million alone . )How Much Big Tech Companies Donated In 2020 Election | Observer (https://observer.com/2020/11/big-tech-2020-presidential-election-donation-breakdown-ranking/)


That's how the dufus lost, repubs lost the house and senate.

In 2020, the GOP grew by 12 seats; in the House and are within 6 of controlling the House. The GOP grew at the state level . They tied in the Senate because of the post election special elections during Trump's post election meltdown in Georgia . The outlier was Quid's win.

The Time Mag article I already linked to has the Dems bragging about how they did the steal in cahoots with major media and internet giants like Twitter ,Facebook Google . They boast how they created conditions where 100s of thousands of signatures could not be verified .

No body bothered to verify repub votes either right? Oh that's right the only questions of fraud were in the big cities with large minority populations. That's what the dufus and repubs kings of voter suppression for decades and the usual fraud chanters would have us believe.


Quid hardly campaigned and yet received 81 million votes . Hatred of Trump could in part explain it . But not enough . The American people do not reward lack luster campaign in your basement . The media and the powerful tech companies did Quid's work for him .It is estimated that the Zuckerberg's and others donated major $$$$$ into the key districts for the sole purpose of harvesting absentee ballots (Zuckerberg $400million alone . )How Much Big Tech Companies Donated In 2020 Election | Observer (https://observer.com/2020/11/big-tech-2020-presidential-election-donation-breakdown-ranking/)

Show me the repub donor lists including those super pacs and we can compare.


In 2020, the GOP grew by 12 seats; in the House and are within 6 of controlling the House. The GOP grew at the state level . They tied in the Senate because of the post election special elections during Trump's post election meltdown in Georgia . The outlier was Quid's win.

You're old enough to see the swing of the pendulum Tom, so a snapshot is hardly a trend.

sure am old enough . The midterms if not rigged will ":swing" both Houses to Republican control. And at the state legislature level, Republicans continue to make gains .

Doesn't matter, history says whatever gains a party makes are just temporary.

I suppose that in the key battle ground states it is possible that stopping the count with Trump in a significant lead ;and then resuming it in the morning to find in all those states Quid won is possible . Quite a coincidence however

Not a coincidence at all. As all the world knows (except for you) the mail-in ballots were counted AFTER the in-person ballots were counted. Since Trump loudly claimed the mail-in ballots were fraudulent for months before the election, naturally the Republicans were shy of using them and the Democrats used them. Trump, in effect, shot himself in the foot.

Not a coincidence at all. As all the world knows (except for you) the mail-in ballots were counted AFTER the in-person ballots were counted. Since Trump loudly claimed the mail-in ballots were fraudulent for months before the election, naturally the Republicans were shy of using them and the Democrats used them. Trump, in effect, shot himself in the foot.

It was and is always okay when repubs use the system to their advantage, but let an ordinary citizen avail themselves of that system then they call foul. Funny how it's a foul on dem voters, and nobody checks repub votes.

Could that be cheating and lying about it? My bad, it's okay if repubs lie cheat and steal.

Since Trump loudly claimed the mail-in ballots were fraudulent for months before the election, naturally the Republicans were shy of using them and the Democrats used them. Trump, in effect, shot himself in the foot.I doubt there is a shred of evidence to support that idea.

I doubt there is a shred of evidence to support that idea.

You would be wrong of course...as usual, but given where your head is at quite understandable.

I doubt there is a shred of evidence to support that idea.Quite naturally, there is no response with evidence. Why? I imagine because there is not any. But I'll wait patiently...as usual.

Mitch McConnell: Read the Senate minority leader's remarks following Trump's acquittal - CNNPolitics (https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/13/politics/mcconnell-remarks-trump-acquittal/index.html)

"January 6th was a disgrace.
"American citizens attacked their own government. They used terrorism to try to stop a specific piece of democratic business they did not like.
"Fellow Americans beat and bloodied our own police. They stormed the Senate floor. They tried to hunt down the Speaker of the House. They built a gallows and chanted about murdering the Vice President.
"They did this because they had been fed wild falsehoods by the most powerful man on Earth — because he was angry he'd lost an election.

"Former President Trump's actions preceding the riot were a disgraceful dereliction of duty.
"The House accused the former President of, quote, 'incitement.' That is a specific term from the criminal law.
"Let me put that to the side for one moment and reiterate something I said weeks ago: There is no question that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of that day.
"The people who stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their President.
"And their having that belief was a foreseeable consequence of the growing crescendo of false statements, conspiracy theories, and reckless hyperbole which the defeated President kept shouting into the largest megaphone on planet Earth.
"The issue is not only the President's intemperate language on January 6th.
"It is not just his endorsement of remarks in which an associate urged 'trial by combat.'
"It was also the entire manufactured atmosphere of looming catastrophe; the increasingly wild myths about a reverse landslide election that was being stolen in some secret coup by our now-President.
"I defended the President's right to bring any complaints to our legal system. The legal system spoke. The Electoral College spoke. As I stood up and said clearly at the time, the election was settled.
"But that reality just opened a new chapter of even wilder and more unfounded claims.
"The leader of the free world cannot spend weeks thundering that shadowy forces are stealing our country and then feign surprise when people believe him and do reckless things.
"Sadly, many politicians sometimes make overheated comments or use metaphors that unhinged listeners might take literally.
"This was different.
"This was an intensifying crescendo of conspiracy theories, orchestrated by an outgoing president who seemed determined to either overturn the voters' decision or else torch our institutions on the way out.
"The unconscionable behavior did not end when the violence began.
"Whatever our ex-President claims he thought might happen that day... whatever reaction he says he meant to produce... by that afternoon, he was watching the same live television as the rest of the world.
"A mob was assaulting the Capitol in his name. These criminals were carrying his banners, hanging his flags, and screaming their loyalty to him.
"It was obvious that only President Trump could end this.
"Former aides publicly begged him to do so. Loyal allies frantically called the Administration.
"But the President did not act swiftly. He did not do his job. He didn't take steps so federal law could be faithfully executed, and order restored.
"Instead, according to public reports, he watched television happily as the chaos unfolded. He kept pressing his scheme to overturn the election!
"Even after it was clear to any reasonable observer that Vice President Pence was in danger... even as the mob carrying Trump banners was beating cops and breaching perimeters... the President sent a further tweet attacking his Vice President.
"Predictably and foreseeably under the circumstances, members of the mob seemed to interpret this as further inspiration to lawlessness and violence.
"Later, even when the President did halfheartedly begin calling for peace, he did not call right away for the riot to end. He did not tell the mob to depart until even later.
"And even then, with police officers bleeding and broken glass covering Capitol floors, he kept repeating election lies and praising the criminals.
"In recent weeks, our ex-President's associates have tried to use the 74 million Americans who voted to re-elect him as a kind of human shield against criticism.
"Anyone who decries his awful behavior is accused of insulting millions of voters.
"That is an absurd deflection.
"74 million Americans did not invade the Capitol. Several hundred rioters did.
"And 74 million Americans did not engineer the campaign of disinformation and rage that provoked it.
"One person did.
"I have made my view of this episode very plain.

There's PLENTY of evidence....what's the excuse for ignoring it, JL?

Trumps America

https://s.hdnux.com/photos/10/40/01/2228306/7/1200x0.jpg

and carnage and chaos

https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/KA_2aSI2W17ujY.CjObAYA--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTk2MDtoPTU0MA--/https://media.zenfs.com/en-gb/bbc_us_articles_995/fec1de3ffb11da258a10690dcf001187

Still waiting...patiently.

Republicans acquitted Trump again, but this time is different (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/republicans-acquitted-trump-again-but-this-time-is-different/ar-BB1dFm3v?ocid=msedgntp)

Nikki Haley, Trump's former ambassador to the United Nations and a potential contender for the GOP presidential nomination in 2024, made a similar argument (https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/12/politics/nikki-haley-donald-trump-gop/index.html) as McConnell in an interview with Politico Magazine (https://www.politico.com/interactives/2021/magazine-nikki-haleys-choice/) published last week where she said the party needed to acknowledge that Trump let them down.
"He went down a path he shouldn't have, and we shouldn't have followed him, and we shouldn't have listened to him. And we can't let that ever happen again," the former South Carolina governor said in that interview.

good for her .She is the former Governor of my future home state . My future Senator said that the turtle's speech will be used against the GOP in 2022 and he is right . The Repubs should seriously consider a change in leadership . The turtle won reelection this cycle so he does not have to fear electoral repercussions for 6 years if he even chooses to run again. He is just as happy being minority leader as majority ....... maybe even more so . I would like Rick Scott to lead the Repub senators .... or maybe Joni Ernst . She is right ;the impeachment was a total s++t show

Thanks to Mike Lee's odd objection, one thing is now clear: Donald Trump tried to murder Mike Pence (dailykos.com) (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/2/11/2015312/-One-moment-on-Jan-6-highlights-Donald-Trump-s-cruelty-vindictiveness-and-depravity?detail=emaildkbow)

I would like Rick Scott to lead the Repub senatorsI think he would be a good choice as well. I never cease to be amazed at how republicans cannot keep their big mouths shut. McConnell is a great example of it. Criticize liberal dems in public. Criticize fellow repubs in private.

the impeachment was a total s++t show

Except for the part where Trump was overwhelmingly proven to have incited the insurrection against his own country.

Trump was overwhelmingly proven to have incited the insurrection against his own country.You still have not been able to point to a single statement supporting that position. That's what passes now for overwhelming???

You still have not been able to point to a single statement supporting that position. That's what passes now for overwhelming???

How about a whole slew of statements tweets going back many months and YEARS! Years of lies qualify as overwhelming and that's why the dufus got booted. America was just tired of you loony fringe nuts hollering ALL the time.

You have the nerve to be offended when somebody calls out your loony fringe bully BS? A squeaky wheel gets the grease, but eventually gets REPLACED! Sooner rather than later!

that word insurrection makes me laugh . We have witnessed 7 months of violence ,arson ,vandalism by the BLM/Antifa gangs ....oops I mean peaceful protests . But Trump supporters riot ;suddenly it is an insurrection . Was it a riot ? Yes Was it a deadly riot ? Yes. Was the protest mostly peaceful ? You tell me . I am working under your model where many protest peacefully and a few break off and unlawfully do violence ,and vandalism .
Insurrectionists would not be wearing horned hats ;taking selfies , even leaving their GPS trackers of their cell phones open .

We have witnessed 7 months of violence ,arson ,vandalism by the BLM/Antifa gangs ....oops I mean peaceful protests . But Trump supporters riot ;suddenly it is an insurrection .Very well said. Perhaps it could be referred to as "political exaggeration"?

that word insurrection makes me laugh . We have witnessed 7 months of violence ,arson ,vandalism by the BLM/Antifa gangs ....oops I mean peaceful protests . But Trump supporters riot ;suddenly it is an insurrection .

Absolutely amazing how you equate protests against police murdering black people with white supremacists trying to overthrow a duly elected president by storming the Capitol of the United States resulting in 5 dead, hundreds injured and widespread mayhem. Amazing!

Absolutely amazing how you equate protests against police murdering black peopleAbsolutely amazing how you conveniently leave out burned out city blocks, a fed courthouse burned, an historic church burned, people dead, and much public property destroyed.

Amazing ignore the loony wild white people the dufus organized to storm the capitol and halt the function of government, and compare them to the civil protests of people who have been seeking equity of treatment for hundreds of years despite the opposition. Can't separate the criminal from the legit except when it comes to your own?

Before you fringers beetch, I have separated the legit from the criminal so don't play dumb!

compare them to the civil protests of people who have been seeking equity of treatment for hundreds of years despite the opposition.

and who are these people who have been protesting for hundreds of years? I understand there is great disadvantage for some in your nation and attitudes are entrenched but there must be a level of frustration with civil disobedience and the attitudes of those "protesting" which breeds violence. As they say it takes two to tango

and who are these people who have been protesting for hundreds of years? I understand there is great disadvantage for some in your nation and attitudes are entrenched but there must be a level of frustration with civil disobedience and the attitudes of those "protesting" which breeds violence. As they say it takes two to tango

Any violence that is bred is rooted in the opposition to the "people who have been seeking equity of treatment for hundreds of years despite the opposition".

Any frustration is far greater among the seekers of equity than among those who are the deniers of equity.

Yes, it takes two to tango.

and who are these people who have been protesting for hundreds of years? I understand there is great disadvantage for some in your nation and attitudes are entrenched but there must be a level of frustration with civil disobedience and the attitudes of those "protesting" which breeds violence. As they say it takes two to tango

Would there be a need for civil disobedience if there was equity under the law? Why is there even opposition to THAT?


Any violence that is bred is rooted in the opposition to the "people who have been seeking equity of treatment for hundreds of years despite the opposition".

Any frustration is far greater among the seekers of equity than among those who are the deniers of equity.

Yes, it takes two to tango.

Well said!

Any violence that is bred is rooted in the opposition to the "people who have been seeking equity of treatment for hundreds of years despite the opposition".

Any frustration is far greater among the seekers of equity than among those who are the deniers of equity.That might have some value if there was any denial of equity. There is not, so the argument is not valid. The greatest negative influences, far and away, involves issues which are completely under the control of the effected population.

That might have some value if there was any denial of equity. There is not, so the argument is not valid.
Apparently, you've never gone shopping while Black or been hanging out at the park bird-watching while Black or have listened to music on your headphones, walking happily on the sidewalk, while Black.

That might have some value if there was any denial of equity. There is not, so the argument is not valid.


Apparently, you've never gone shopping while Black or been hanging out at the park bird-watching while Black or have listened to music on your headphones, walking happily on the sidewalk, while Black.

I can guess who wrote the first quote re the denial of equity. Your reply, WG, was eloquent and to the point.

I would only add that the denial of equity took the form of abject slavery - the worst and longest ever recorded in human history - that lasted for 250 years. That was followed by 100 years of legal and not-so-legal discrimination marked by Christians in white hoods who lynched human beings because of their skin color and which continues to this day with the white hoods being exchanged for a badge and a gun.

A more valid argument is hardly possible although there are still those who deny it.

That might have some value if there was any denial of equity. There is not, so the argument is not valid. The greatest negative influences, far and away, involves issues which are completely under the control of the effected population.

Any doubts where this dudes head is at?

Apparently, you've never gone shopping while Black or been hanging out at the park bird-watching while Black or have listened to music on your headphones, walking happily on the sidewalk, while Black.I'm going way out on a limb here to guess that you haven't either.

There are, of course, thousands of instances of injustice occurring everyday in this country for all sorts of reasons. Are there still some cases of what amounts to legalized racial injustice? Could be, but the point is that we have spent the past sixty years in an attempt to root those injustices out. If you want to point one out, we can discuss it, but to allege that some sort of deep-seated, systemic racism exists in America is to engage in fantasy.


I would only add that the denial of equity took the form of abject slavery - the worst and longest ever recorded in human history - that lasted for 250 years. That was followed by 100 years of legal and not-so-legal discrimination marked by Christians in white hoods who lynched human beings because of their skin color and which continues to this day with the white hoods being exchanged for a badge and a gun.To say the kluckers were Christians is on the level of your ridiculous idea that by merely looking at a crowd of tens of thousands, you could tell they were evangelical Christians. At any rate, we are talking about the historical present tense, and not the past. The more than 70% out of wedlock birth rate amongst black women is, by far, the greatest problem facing the black community. BY...FAR. You guys love to talk about the supposedly widespread problem of white racism simply to validate your standing as liberal democrats.


slavery - the worst and longest ever recorded in human history - that lasted for 250 years.If you knew anything at all about history, you would know what an absurd statement that is. Slavery in Ethiopia, for instance, has existed for at least five hundred years, and quite likely longer than that. It is hard to imagine how long slavery existed in the nations of the middle east such as Egypt, amongst the various African tribes, or in Mongolia, China, and Japan. Your alleged "fact" just exposes your bias on the issue.

I'm going way out on a limb here to guess that you haven't either.

There are, of course, thousands of instances of injustice occurring everyday in this country for all sorts of reasons. Are there still some cases of what amounts to legalized racial injustice? Could be, but the point is that we have spent the past sixty years in an attempt to root those injustices out. If you want to point one out, we can discuss it, but to allege that some sort of deep-seated, systemic racism exists in America is to engage in fantasy.

To say the kluckers were Christians is on the level of your ridiculous idea that by merely looking at a crowd of tens of thousands, you could tell they were evangelical Christians. At any rate, we are talking about the historical present tense, and not the past. The more than 70% out of wedlock birth rate amongst black women is, by far, the greatest problem facing the black community. BY...FAR. You guys love to talk about the supposedly widespread problem of white racism simply to validate your standing as liberal democrats.

If you knew anything at all about history, you would know what an absurd statement that is. Slavery in Ethiopia, for instance, has existed for at least five hundred years, and quite likely longer than that. It is hard to imagine how long slavery existed in the nations of the middle east such as Egypt, or in China and Japan. Your alleged "fact" just exposes your bias on the issue.

I rest my case!

why isn't slavery in the third world an issue, I'll tell you because it isn't happening here and by here I mean in the western world, it has been abolished, and not by the protests of the enslaved

it has been abolished, and not by the protests of the enslavedVery true.

If you knew anything at all about history, you would know what an absurd statement that is. Slavery in Ethiopia, for instance, has existed for at least five hundred years, and quite likely longer than that. It is hard to imagine how long slavery existed in the nations of the middle east such as Egypt, or in China and Japan. Your alleged "fact" just exposes your bias on the issue.


I rest my case!

The troll has returned. I don't even have to guess who that is.

I say slavery was horrible and he replies I'm biased on the issue. Next we'll learn that he approves slavery - after all the slaves got religion (Christian flavor) and that justifies it. Or the slaves were happy and contented. Or one of the many other memes the racists brought up during slavery and still do.

He denies it was the longest and the worst form of slavery, and he suggests Ethiopia where, "quite likely", it was more than five hundred years, and other places where "it is hard to imagine" what it was like and how long and how bad it was. Quite likely? Hard to imagine? No facts? And he accuses me of "alleging facts".

American slavery was the worst. It was on a larger scale and affected more people negatively. People were forcibly bred like animals. Their religions and languages and even names were stripped away by force. Unlike in other forms of slavery, they were not seen as human, simply because of their outward characteristics. For a time, the Christian Church (Protestant and Catholic) infamously supported it. It was the most organized and cold blooded form of slavery humanity has ever known. We are still facing the effects of it today.

As for the KKK, it has been composed of white evangelicals requiring all members to "profess a belief in Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior". This requirement is claimed by him to be a "ridiculous idea". The Klan has justified its violence through its interpretation of the Bible. Sound familiar? The modern KKK claims cross-burning symbolizes faith in Christ. Not surprisingly, it is "pro-life".

One ignores history at one's own peril.

I say slavery was horrible and he replies I'm biased on the issue.Unfortunately for you, what you said is part of the record. "slavery - the worst and longest ever recorded in human history - that lasted for 250 years." Are you just incapable of honesty? It's your assertion that the 250 year period of slavery was the "longest ever recorded in human history," that was objected to. There was no question of it being horrible. Try being honest.


He denies it was the longest and the worst form of slavery, Wrong again. I made no mention of it being the "worst form of slavery" and certainly never denied it. I do deny it was the longest because...IT WASN'T.


and he suggests Ethiopia where, "quite likely", it was more than five hundred years,I said it had existed for 500 years. That would be twice your figure of 250 years and shows your statement to be flatly untrue.


and other places where "it is hard to imagine" what it was like and how long and how bad it was.Wrong again, again. I made no mention of how bad it was. If you really think that slavery did not exist in those nations for multiple, multiple centuries, then it is obvious you know nothing of history. You don't allege facts. You simply make it up as you go along. When you are called to task, you get mad about it.


American slavery was the worst. It was on a larger scale and affected more people negatively. People were forcibly bred like animals. Their religions and languages and even names were stripped away by force. Unlike in other forms of slavery, they were not seen as human, simply because of their outward characteristics. For a time, the Christian Church (Protestant and Catholic) infamously supported it. It was the most organized and cold blooded form of slavery humanity has ever known. We are still facing the effects of it today.Simply not true. If you want to say that slavery in the south was a brutal, large-scale, inhumane enterprise, then you would be correct. Your other hyperbolic assertions are simply nonsense. Read a little about the galley slaves in ancient cultures, or the killing of slaves by the thousands for the mass entertainment of the crowds in Rome. Read about what happened to the Jewish survivors of the sacking of Jerusalem. Do you seriously think that the great rallying cry was, "Treat these poor souls like the humans they are?" As to numbers, Rome had an estimated 10 million or more slaves as compared to 3.5 million for the southern states. You simply don't know what you're talking about.


As for the KKK, it has been composed of white evangelicals requiring all members to "profess a belief in Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior". This requirement is claimed by him to be a "ridiculous idea".And wrong yet again. I am aware that the kluckers claimed to have a Christian foundation. This is the statement I said was ridiculous. It was, "marked by Christians in white hoods". I doubt there were many genuine Christians in that group. Why? Because as Jesus said, "You shall know them by their fruit." Their violent fruit does not lead any reasonable person to conclude that their checking of a box amounted to any real Christian faith. Profession is not the same as possession.

Climb out of your liberal dem bubble for a while. It's not that you are completely wrong. Slavery is a terrible institution, and much of what was practiced in the south was indeed brutal and inhumane, and it was all a moral outrage. You err by making dramatic statements that go too far and are thus wrong.

american slavery was the worst. It was on a larger scale and affected more people negatively. People were forcibly bred like animals. Their religions and languages and even names were stripped away by force. Unlike in other forms of slavery, they were not seen as human, simply because of their outward characteristics. For a time, the Christian Church (Protestant and Catholic) infamously supported it. It was the most organized and cold blooded form of slavery humanity has ever known. We are still facing the effects of it today.what was bad about american slavery is that it damaged the nation beyond repair, other nations had slavery but they threw off the yoke but america did not, their unique form of freedom meant they were free to keep other humans as slaves, now they protest when others are imprisoned, enslaved but they do nothing about their swollen prison system which holds more people than elsewhere on earth and the prisoners are in some instances forced to work, are these not slaves

what was bad about american slavery is that it damaged the nation beyond repair,It was after slavery was ended that our country began its growth towards being a world superpower militarily and economically, so I don't see how we were damaged "beyond repair". We became decidedly better off without it.

I would agree with you that our prison situation is a nightmare and a disgrace. However, I have no problems with prisoners working. It in no way equates to slavery.

You are damaged beyond repair because more than a century after the civil war you still have serious race problems, yes you are better off without slavery, that isn't the argument. That prison population is also an issue of race

You are damaged beyond repair because more than a century after the civil war you still have serious race problems,Damaged, yes. Beyond repair? We'll see. I doubt that, but we'll see.

Damaged, yes. Beyond repair? We'll see. I doubt that, but we'll see.
So what's your plan to repair the damage?

full intergration, I know you have that in some places, but it takes a will to help overcome disadvantage, an intervention perhaps. These things are difficult in a capitalist economy

Maybe some introspection is in order here . Australia is not a beacon of tolerance . There are 'race provisions' in the constitution that were there at Australia's founding ;and are still there today . The US Constitution amended similar provisions out a long time ago.

So what's your plan to repair the damage?Treat everyone fairly. Expect everyone who is physically and mentally healthy to earn his/her own way. Abandon forever the victim narrative and stop listening to pathetic whiners. Learn to greatly appreciate the wonderful privilege of living in the land of opportunity.


full intergration, I know you have that in some places, but it takes a will to help overcome disadvantage, an intervention perhaps. These things are difficult in a capitalist economyWhat possible impact does the type of economy have on integration?

In a land of freedom where people are given the opportunity to choose, you will never have complete integration. Freedom of opportunity is the key. If you know of an area where that does not exist, then let us know. You might also want to catch us up on the efforts in Australia to integrate the aboriginals into the societal and economic mainstream. For those natives who don't cooperate in such initiatives, what "interventions" are you using to spur them on?

full intergration, I know you have that in some places, but it takes a will to help overcome disadvantage, an intervention perhaps. These things are difficult in a capitalist economy

Integration has nothing to do with a capitalist economy. Capitalism is a wholly owned and operated monetary system of rich guys for power and influence. They control the flow of money through whatever the market will bear which basically is a marketing ploy to justify whatever they can get away with. Many buy into it for the crumbs they trickle about but make no mistake it's at a high price that they gladly pay for that privilege to have those crumbs. Easy to administer such a system of legalized extraction of wealth when everybody has a price and a value that allows them to have and ignore subjugate oppress and suppress those that don't have.

They are the throwaway cheap labor working poor who are necessary to service the rich. Maybe they live better here than elsewhere, but that's really not saying much, except some kind of comparison to make everybody grateful for what ever crumbs they can gather.

So what's your plan to repair the damage?Having thought a bit more about it, I'm not even sure what "damage" you are referring to. Slavery ended 155 years ago. Jim Crow ended 50 or more years ago. The biggest problems facing minorities now have nothing to do with racial prejudice. Schools, for instance, would be a fairly simple problem to solve. Let parents send their kids to the school of their choice. Give them vouchers for private schools.

Slavery ended but didn't spell freedom for slave as did Jim Crow which morphed into yet a more insidious form. Of course you can't tell some white people that.

Maybe some introspection is in order here . Australia is not a beacon of tolerance . There are 'race provisions' in the constitution that were there at Australia's founding ;and are still there today . The US Constitution amended similar provisions out a long time ago.

we also amended them, Tom, after a referendum which allows the government to makes laws regarding the aborigine and including them in the population. what we have failed to do is reconcile the hurt felt by the aborigine from colonisation. I think it is a tear in the fabric of the nation which will never be healed because they don't want it to be. In the same way people in your nation have suffered, ending slavery created an under class. Words don't heal the rifts, no words in the constitution can undo what men of ill will have done

Words don't heal the rifts, no words in the constitution can undo what men of ill will have done

The rifts were created by men of good will but not so good values. Healing requires words and actions.

we also amended them, Tom, after a referendum which allows the government to makes laws regarding the aborigine and including them in the population. what we have failed to do is reconcile the hurt felt by the aborigine from colonisation. I think it is a tear in the fabric of the nation which will never be healed because they don't want it to be. In the same way people in your nation have suffered, ending slavery created an under class. Words don't heal the rifts, no words in the constitution can undo what men of ill will have done

I guess your aborigines need more than words and amendments just as our own minorities would like more than words and amendments.

Healing requires words and actions.Healing also requires a desire to be healed. The left prefers to keep racial wounds open. It's good for their politics.

Healing also requires a desire to be healed. The left prefers to keep racial wounds open. It's good for their politics.

Giving band aids to gunshot wounds is far from my idea of healing, especially given an unwillingness to listen to the size and scope of the problem.


Having thought a bit more about it, I'm not even sure what "damage" you are referring to. Slavery ended 155 years ago. Jim Crow ended 50 or more years ago. The biggest problems facing minorities now have nothing to do with racial prejudice. Schools, for instance, would be a fairly simple problem to solve. Let parents send their kids to the school of their choice. Give them vouchers for private schools.

This says it all about your understanding of the problem.

Healing also requires a desire to be healed. The left prefers to keep racial wounds open. It's good for their politics.

I cannot agree more!

The left prefers to keep racial wounds open.
How did those wounds occur?

How did those wounds occur?In all reality, what real difference does it make? I would hope that the real question would concern what we should do in moving forward.

clear the swamp, little chance of that now, so standing still

In all reality, what real difference does it make? I would hope that the real question would concern what we should do in moving forward.
The goal is to not only heal those wounds, but also heal the situations that created them.

How do you heal benghazi? a total betrayal of trust

The goal is to not only heal those wounds, but also heal the situations that created them.OK. So what do you propose we specifically do to accomplish that?

OK. So what do you propose we specifically do to accomplish that?
1. Look at the person inside, not their outside.
2. Seize opportunities to show respect, empathy, love, plus find ways to lift up, to reach out to another.

1. Look at the person inside, not their outside.
2. Seize opportunities to show respect, empathy, love, plus find ways to lift up, to reach out to another.Two great suggestions and I agree with them. Do you see the government playing a role in this? If so, what role?

government has no role in this

government has no role in this
We are the government.

Yes government by the people for the people, how is that working out for you?

We are the government.No, we're not. If you cook out hotdogs in the backyard, you cannot say that the government is cooking out hotdogs. Government is supposed to be of the people, by the people, and for the people, but it is not THE people.


Do you see the government playing a role in this? If so, what role?I would still love to know what your answer is for this, WG. I see this more and more in liberals. They can describe a problem with great moral passion, but only rarely are willing to say what they would suggest the government do about it. That's the sticking point. So what do you suggest the government do about it?

No, we're not. If you cook out hotdogs in the backyard, you cannot say that the government is cooking out hotdogs. Government is supposed to be of the people, by the people, and for the people, but it is not THE people.
Um, who fills government offices and makes decisions? Zombies? You said it yourself: "government is supposed to be of the people, by the people..." I could be elected and so could you, if we had useful credentials. The owner of our favorite pizza take-out place a few blocks from our house has been our town's mayor (yes, that's government) for almost eight years and may run for a county or even state job. Then we'll have to find another pizza place unless he sells it to someone who offers the same menu and uses the same pizza-making ingredients and techniques..."sprinkling on the cheese, sprinkling on the cheese. We shall come rejoicing, sprinkling on the cheese!"

I would still love to know what your answer is for this, WG. I see this more and more in liberals. They can describe a problem with great moral passion, but only rarely are willing to say what they would suggest the government do about it. That's the sticking point. So what do you suggest the government do about it?
I asked first. And yes, I have very strong and doable suggestions.

Yes government by the people for the people, how is that working out for you?

Probably works better without the monetary influences and incentives, but works as well despite any issues as any other in this world.

on the outside looking in I would say you are deluded or deceived

Ahem, we BIG dog...you LITTLE dog! Maybe not better but just bigger. Doesn't matter where or how you look at it. REALITY.

Um, who fills government offices and makes decisions? Zombies? You said it yourself: "government is supposed to be of the people, by the people..." I could be elected and so could you, if we had useful credentials. The owner of our favorite pizza take-out place a few blocks from our house has been our town's mayor (yes, that's government) for almost eight years and may run for a county or even state job. Then we'll have to find another pizza place unless he sells it to someone who offers the same menu and uses the same pizza-making ingredients and techniques..."sprinkling on the cheese, sprinkling on the cheese. We shall come rejoicing, sprinkling on the cheese!"If you work for the gov, and you go out and buy a car, you cannot say the government has bought a car. I am "of and by" my parents, but I am certainly not my parents. You are completely confused.


And yes, I have very strong and doable suggestions.So strong and do-able that you cannot even put them in text form? Strange.

reality is big dog; you need us little dogs and just maybe we keep you centred, and not too up yourselves with this big dog nonsense, you have a three hundred year head start on us, that is all that distinguishes us. You forget we gave you a base when you needed one after getting your arses kicked being the big dog. just like you we know loss

So strong and do-able that you cannot even put them in text form? Strange.
Why are you so afraid to answer?

WG. To answer what?


you have a three hundred year head start on us, that is all that distinguishes us.As is oftentimes the case, you begin making a pretty good point, and then get over-hyped and go way too far. Just in the area of natural resources, you cannot compare the two countries.


You forget we gave you a base when you needed one after getting your arses kicked being the big dog.If you are referring to the second world war, your memory is appallingly selective. You'd be speaking Japanese today if not for us.

reality is big dog; you need us little dogs and just maybe we keep you centred, and not too up yourselves with this big dog nonsense, you have a three hundred year head start on us, that is all that distinguishes us. You forget we gave you a base when you needed one after getting your arses kicked being the big dog. just like you we know loss

Common interest often forms coalitions. A pack if you will, in which every member benefits for survival and within that pack there is always a dominant force. That's not a bad thing but you seem sensitive to the analogy. Is that why you always bark at the big dog? Why are you surprised that the big dog would bark back?

you have a three hundred year head start on us, that is all that distinguishes us.I'll just add that it is an interesting point to consider. Since 1950, our population has grown by more than 150 million. Australia's has grown by 17 million. What accounts for the difference? Seriously.

So strong and do-able that you cannot even put them in text form? Strange.
I had said:
1. Look at the person inside, not their outside.
2. Seize opportunities to show respect, empathy, love, plus find ways to lift up, to reach out to another.

One example: AOC, a NY Representative and not a Texas resident, went down to Texas and followed the above to the letter.
What NOT to do: Ted Cruz, a Texas Senator, ran to warmer climes with his tail between his legs and no empathy for and reaching out at all to his own constituents.

Yes, you've said that, and we all agree with it. The question was what role the government should play in this. In other words, would you propose any new legal initiatives?

I would agree with you that TC made a fool of himself. AOC is purely a political creature.

AOC is going after the Schmuckster . Her play in Texas was similar to her play on the border in the white dress. It's the pols who make sure the cameras are rolling when they serve a holiday dinner at a shelter on a holiday . Gestures .

AOC basically say, "I'll support a ridiculous, impossible Green New Deal which is DOA, but then go to Texas (at taxpayer expense) to make a show of supporting people in order to appear reasonable and caring.

WG. To answer what?

As is oftentimes the case, you begin making a pretty good point, and then get over-hyped and go way too far. Just in the area of natural resources, you cannot compare the two countries.

I don't know that that is necessarily correct, we have abundant reserves of coal, uranium, bauxite, iron, rare earths, vast agricultural industry, but you do have more water and oil


If you are referring to the second world war, your memory is appallingly selective. You'd be speaking Japanese today if not for us.

Australia was a bridge too far for the Japanese. We stopped them in New Guinea. You stopped them on Bougainville. The Japanese sought to isolate Australia, not conquer it, still they did a great deal with what today would be considered small forces. No interest in us really, we didn't possess oil fields. It is your memory, like most of your countrymen, that is appallingly selective. I put that down to your education system

The question was what role the government should play in this. In other words, would you propose any new legal initiatives?

I would agree with you that TC made a fool of himself. AOC is purely a political creature.
The government DID play a role. Its representatives were AOC et al. and Ted Cruz.

The government can make laws and initiate procedures that:
1. Look at the person inside, not their outside.
2. Seize opportunities to show respect, empathy, love, plus find ways to lift up, to reach out to another.

E.g., retrain police departments, improve teacher education, and put together better, more caring guidelines for nursing homes.

The government can make laws and initiate procedures that:
1. Look at the person inside, not their outside.
2. Seize opportunities to show respect, empathy, love, plus find ways to lift up, to reach out to another.But that's what I'm asking you. What laws are you proposing? How will they be enforced? What will be the penalties for non-obedience?


E.g., retrain police departments, improve teacher education, and put together better, more caring guidelines for nursing homes.You are putting out generalities. That's fine, but I'm trying to get you to be specific. What, for instance, should be changed in teacher education, and how do you know what is presently being taught in those programs?

I'll just add that it is an interesting point to consider. Since 1950, our population has grown by more than 150 million. Australia's has grown by 17 million. What accounts for the difference? Seriously.

We started from a smaller base around 10 million, however Aussie population growth rates exceed those of the US. US population growth is around 0.6% Australian is around 1.0%. long term trend is we are both declining

But that's what I'm asking you. What laws are you proposing? How will they be enforced? What will be the penalties for non-obedience?
Will this manuscript be graded? Will I attain a degree? Will it be published?

You are putting out generalities. That's fine, but I'm trying to get you to be specific.
Why? So you can shoot me down like you are doing already? Why not make this a discussion instead of hanging me by my thumbs? Certainly you have specifics now that I have laid out the generalities:

1. retrain police departments
2. improve teacher education
3. put together better, more caring guidelines for nursing homes.

Please don't be like Dale Ballard, Meemaw's boyfriend on "Young Sheldon"!

Why? So you can shoot me down like you are doing already? Why not make this a discussion instead of hanging me by my thumbs? Certainly you have specifics now that I have laid out the generalities:

1. retrain police departments
2. improve teacher education
3. put together better, more caring guidelines for nursing homes.

Please don't be like Dale Ballard, Meemaw's boyfriend on "Young Sheldon"!Never mind.

Never mind.
Yup, that's what I figured!

P.S. Here's another one:
4. prison reform

There's no point in it. It'll just turn out the same way it always does. "Certainly you have specifics now that I have laid out the generalities." That pretty much says it all. "I don't know, so maybe you can come in and supply the specifics for me." Why not simply say you haven't really thought it through and don't know what the specifics would be? At least that would be an straight-forward reply. And what will you say about prison reform? "All the guards and prisoners should be nice to each other?"

As they say, the devil is in the details.

As they say, the devil is in the details.
So you don't want to discuss this? Here's my suggestion for police:

1. retrain police departments - to think beyond using force and guns to solve a problem. Add well-trained and experienced mental health workers who would accompany police on calls, especially those calls about a teen walking in the plowed street instead of on the snow-covered sidewalk or a woman undressing in an alley or a white woman, walking her illegally unleashed dog, complaining about a bird-watching Black man who asked her to leash her dog.

1. retrain police departments - to think beyond using force and guns to solve a problem. Add well-trained and experienced mental health workers who would accompany police on calls, especially those calls about a teen walking in the plowed street instead of on the snow-covered sidewalk or a woman undressing in an alley or a white woman, walking her illegally unleashed dog, complaining about a bird-watching Black man who asked her to leash her dog.How about the six thousand calls a year where a black person has been shot and killed by another black person? Why is it you never mention those? Do you just not care at all?

I think that when you have gotten into a police car and gone on some of these calls yourself, then you'll be able to speak more realistically. And it evidently completely escaped your notice that the bird watching person was not arrested. but the dog walker was charged with a crime. So how better would you have handled that? All of it happened after the man said to her, “Look, if you’re going to do what you want, I’m going to do what I want, but you’re not going to like it.” Sure could sound like a threat, couldn't it? It ended up being a tempest in a teapot.

You missed this about the teen walking in the street.

"Plano police (https://www.plano.gov/214/Public-Hearing-Notices)responded to a welfare call shortly before 11 p.m. on Feb. 16. A caller reported that a Black man wearing a short-sleeve shirt and shorts was walking down Hedgcoxe Road and was stumbling. Officers found the man, later identified as Rodney Reese, who was wearing a short-sleeve shirt and long pants. Temperatures were in the teens, and there was snow and ice on the road.

Officers were concerned for the man’s welfare and the possibility that could have been in a mental crisis, delusional or impaired, according to a post on the Plano Police Department Facebook page.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/charges-dropped-against-black-teen-arrested-for-walking-in-middle-of-icy-plano-street/ar-BB1dUoO1

See what I mean about those pesky details???

What would you think about a return to two-parent families where there is a dad present who more effectively controls the boys of the household? You NEVER mention that, but it's the only real solution.

You NEVER mention that, but it's the only real solution.
How? With whippings? I raised two very well-behaved sons who became a blessing to society and never whipped or spanked either of them.

How about the six thousand calls a year where a black person has been shot and killed by another black person? Why is it you never mention those? Do you just not care at all?
You had ducked out of the discussion, so I figured, why bother. And yes, I have discussion input about that.

How? With whippings? I raised two very well-behaved sons who became a blessing to society and never whipped or spanked either of them.Which household was that in, the "modest income" one, or the six figure income one? You have claimed both. And I didn't mention spankings. I mentioned dads.

It never changes with you. There can be no discussion when you are so afraid to engage with serious questions. "I have discussion input about that." Fine. Put it down. But I don't think you will.

Which household was that in, the "modest income" one, or the six figure income one? You have claimed both. And I didn't mention spankings. I mentioned dads.
The larger income, two inheritances, has come about since my mother's death on January 15, 2018, and our 42 y/o son's death on May 4, 2018. From 1967 to 2018, our income was modest.

Whippings have been mentioned earlier in this thread as a means to make children obey. What do dads have to do with making children behave?

It never changes with you. There can be no discussion when you are so afraid to engage with serious questions. "I have discussion input about that." Fine. Put it down. But I don't think you will.
I did and hoped you would add to the discussion in a positive way.

P.S. Instead of taking the boy home, the Plano police put that teen in jail. (Walking on an icy street beats slogging through a foot of heavy snow on the sidewalk.) The last sentence says it all ("race was the issue") --
https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/article249422695.html

Fine. Put it down. But I don't think you will.And I was right.

Sorry to hear of your son. 42 is far too young.

Please reread my post. I added a link to it about the teen in Plano (be sure to read it). Btw, your link doesn't work.

The loving thing police could have done with the Plano teen:

"Hey, guy, it's cold out here. Where's your jacket?"

"I don't have far to go, so I didn't bother. And yup, I'm freezing!"

"How far away is home?"

"Not too far."

"I've got a blanket in my squad car. How 'bout if I drive you home and you can warm up in the blanket meanwhile."

"Don't you have police stuff to do?"

"You're my 'police stuff' right now. Let's get you home asap!"

My link works now.

Do you guys ever, ever, ever read your own links? Yes, the teen said he thought it was race, but if you had bothered to go down further, you would have seen this from police body cams. You can't just reflexively blame the police on every occasion. READ YOUR OWN LINKS THOROUGHLY!!


Reese lives with his mother and he was just a few blocks away from home.
The teen repeatedly told Plano police that he was fine, but officers continued to follow him for a few minutes, according to video of the incident.
“Dude, stop we are trying to help you,” Plano police said in the body camera video released on the department’s Facebook over the weekend.
“I’m trying to get home,” Reese said.
“All right, but you’re walking in the middle of the road,” an officer said.


“I understand that. My bad,” Reese said.
Reese later told KDFW-TV he was walking in the middle of the road because the sidewalk was covered in ice and snow.
“Are you cold?” an officer asked.
“No. I’m not,” the teen answered.
“Do you want us to give you a ride?” a police officer asked.


“No. I do this every night,” Reese said.
In the video, the teen kept walking away from Plano police until an officer said he was being detained.
“Let me go,” Reese said as he was being handcuffed.
Plano police said the teen resisted their efforts to handcuff him.
The arresting officer noted in his arrest report that although the teen committed the Class B misdemeanor offense of interference with public duties by resisting officers’ efforts to detain and handcuff him, the officers decided to seek to charge him only with pedestrian in the roadway, a Class C misdemeanor.

When the police stop you, you don't just keep on walking. That was insanely stupid.

Now, read MY link in its entirety. The conclusion of this case.

“There’s a lot information that we know about this case that we didn’t know at the time,” Drain told the television station. “Those officers didn’t know his age. They didn’t know he was 18. They didn’t know he worked at Walmart. They didn’t know where he lived.”

AND THEY DIDN'T ASK HIM!!!!

“No. I do this every night,” Reese said.
In the video, the teen kept walking away from Plano police until an officer said he was being detained.
“Let me go,” Reese said as he was being handcuffed.
Plano police said the teen resisted their efforts to handcuff him.

Wonder why he resisted....

Now, read MY link in its entirety. The conclusion of this case.Your link was what I read. That you didn't read even close to all of it was obvious from this, "The last sentence says it all ("race was the issue") --" LOL. You thought his comment was the "last sentence".

There is a real simple concept here you are missing. When the cops tell you to do something, barring the ultra-unreasonable, you do it. It's not complicated. You just knee-jerk are anti-cops. Typical liberal dem.

“There’s a lot information that we know about this case that we didn’t know at the time,” Drain told the television station. “Those officers didn’t know his age. They didn’t know he was 18. They didn’t know he worked at Walmart. They didn’t know where he lived.”

AND THEY DIDN'T ASK HIM!!!!

“No. I do this every night,” Reese said.
In the video, the teen kept walking away from Plano police until an officer said he was being detained.
“Let me go,” Reese said as he was being handcuffed.
Plano police said the teen resisted their efforts to handcuff him.So if you are 18, work at WM, and live nearby, then it's perfectly alright for you to walk in middle of the road at night, refuse to stop, resist arrest, and generally act like an insane idiot? Really?

So if you are 18, work at WM, and live nearby, then it's perfectly all right for you to walk in middle of the road at night, refuse to stop, resist arrest, and generally act like an insane idiot? Really?
Why was he stopped? The police must have seen the snow-packed sidewalks and that the easier walking could be done on the street. Why didn't the police let him go when he said he does that every night? Or engage him in a fruitful conversation instead of acting like punitive police?

"We're worried about you. It's darn cold out here and we don't think you are dressed warmly enough."

some people are just loners and there is always the question are the police trustworthy or do they have a hidden motive

Why was he stopped?According to the article you linked, "Plano police responded to a welfare call shortly before 11 p.m. on Feb. 16. A caller reported that a Black man wearing a short-sleeve shirt and shorts was walking down Hedgcoxe Road and was stumbling."


Why didn't the police let him go when he said he does that every night?Why didn't the cops just let a teenager walk down the middle of the street at night? Well...


"I've got a blanket in my squad car. How 'bout if I drive you home and you can warm up in the blanket meanwhile."

"Don't you have police stuff to do?"

"You're my 'police stuff' right now. Let's get you home asap!"They offered him a ride home. He refused it. Did you ever bother to read your own article???

Did you ever bother to read your own article???
I just love love love playing dumb and making you actually read my link. ;-D

They could have just followed him home instead of arresting him and making him spend the night in jail if they were so concerned. Or taken him to a hospital instead of jail, where they rendered no medical treatment. They later dropped charges that didn't need to be filed in the first place. Who was served and protected in this case?

I just love love love playing dumb and making you actually read my linkI guess it's a good thing that at least one of us read it.

That's like killing a guy for jaywalking, or 7 cops spraying and handcuffing a 9 year old. At what point do we call out bad police decisions and actions?

when you start firing their arses

when you start firing their arses

They have "qualified immunity" which is a get out of jail free card. The Dems are trying to modify that. Also, they always say "I was in fear for my life", which the juries usually buy. Even when the video shows the cop shooting a fleeing suspect in the back.

It all comes down to gun culture, the perps can be assumed to have a gun, the cops have guns

They have "qualified immunity" which is a get out of jail free card. The Dems are trying to modify that. Also, they always say "I was in fear for my life", which the juries usually buy. Even when the video shows the cop shooting a fleeing suspect in the back.

Let's not forget those AG's who refuse to even bring charges. So much for the law and order conservatives who want no reforms and holler about defunding by dems as a bad thing to appease the fringer screamers they depend on.


It all comes down to gun culture, the perps can be assumed to have a gun, the cops have guns

It's not the gun culture but the loony culture.

yes looney gun culture

Here is an example of our mentally alert pres at work. He can't remember the name of the Sec. of Defense, and he refers to the Department of Defense as "that outfit".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPJ6AAoBUTA

yes looney gun culture

Guns aren't the problem...the loons are.

Here is an example of our mentally alert pres at work. He can't remember the name of the Sec. of Defense, and he refers to the Department of Defense as "that outfit".
Please send me your endorsed $1400 stimulus check.

Please send me your endorsed $1400 stimulus check.You don't need it. I don't need it. Most of the people getting it don't need it. Many people in prison will get a check. Ridiculous. It's just an attempt to buy votes with borrowed money and we have become dumb enough to fall for it.

You don't need it. I don't need it.
Mine will help the homeless, animal shelters, and military vets. Who will yours help?

It's just an attempt to buy votes with borrowed money and we have become dumb enough to fall for it.
Ha, ha! Trump missed the boat on this one!

Please send me your endorsed $1400 stimulus check.

How can I get mine, this is too good to pass up

So the feds are supposed to send us borrowed money with no idea of how to pay it back so you can boast about helping the poor? Well...OK.

Actually, I applaud your charity. It’s just ridiculous to think of needing borrowed fed money to do it. This all seems to be funny to you. I think that’s sad.

So the feds are supposed to send us borrowed money with no idea of how to pay it back
Trump and his pals could have easily put up the money out of their own pockets.

Actually, I applaud your charity. It’s just ridiculous to think of needing borrowed fed money to do it. I realize this is all a joke to you. That’s sad.
No applause, please. Those, and others, are the charities and groups I regularly support. Now I have to figure out the exchange rate for Australia. *grin* P.S. $100 USD = $129.42 AUD

If you think trump and his pals could have put up the money, then you have no idea how much 1.9 trillion dollars is.

It’s six thousand dollars for every man, woman, and child in America. But if it’s all funny to you, then I can’t help you.

If you think trump and his pals could have put up the money, then you have no idea how much 1.9 trillion dollars is.
His pals are all those who have a million dollars or more.

You know nothing of math. A trillion is a million million. So all you have to do is find a two million people to give a million dollars each so WG can donate to a dog shelter. Yeah. That makes sense.

Trump and his pals could have easily put up the money out of their own pockets.

No applause, please. Those, and others, are the charities and groups I regularly support. Now I have to figure out the exchange rate for Australia. *grin* P.S. $100 USD = $129.42 AUD

I'll settle for $1500AU

You know nothing of math.
There's the insult again. You just can't stop, can you.

A trillion is a million million. So all you have to do is find a two million people to give a million dollars each....
I said a million or MORE. Many of those wealthy people have far more than a million. And the money would keep "the feds" (as you call them) from being burdened. I was heartened to read where many of those stimulus checks will be going.

First you said this. "Trump and his pals could have easily put up the money out of their own pockets." I showed you that was flat wrong. Then you said, "His pals are all those who have a million dollars or more." I showed you that was flat wrong. Unless, of course, you really think he has two million "pals". Then you decide I was insulting you when I pointed out that your math knowledge is faulty. It's not an insult. I'm simply pointing out that your thinking is wrong because your math is flawed. And even worse, you still have not answered why we should extort money from honest people in order to give you money you don't need. And I also notice that you have not suggested that the government take any money from you, now a wealthy person by your own description, in order to pay for this looney bill.


There's the insult again. You just can't stop, can you.Instead of complaining, start thinking clearly. There are only a few hundred thousand people who make a million a year or more, and this is far, far short of the two million you need. This is not a joke. Think seriously about it.

First you said this. "Trump and his pals could have easily put up the money out of their own pockets." I showed you that was flat wrong. Then you said, "His pals are all those who have a million dollars or more." I showed you that was flat wrong. Unless, of course, you really think he has two million "pals". Then you decide I was insulting you when I pointed out that your math knowledge is faulty. It's not an insult. I'm simply pointing out that your thinking is wrong because your math is flawed.

Trump's pals -- used facetiously -- are all those who have a million or more in the bank, invested in stocks, in property, etc. I'm so very sorry I have to explain this to you. Now I see you really are, 100%, a literalist.

So you seriously think that the government should force honest people to sell their homes, cash out their savings and investments, and give it to the feds so they can send you money to give to a dog shelter??? And what about wealthy you? Are you prepared to sell your house? Cash out your savings? Why not you? Why is it always someone else with you liberal dems? WHY NOT YOU????? Can't we give your money to people to give to dog shelters? Or is that level of sacrifice only for others?

That's why I don't respect your views. You don't think. You just repeat the words you hear from others. It is always, always someone else who must carry the load. It is never, ever you.

So you seriously think that the government should force honest people to sell their homes, cash out their savings and investments, and give it to the feds so they can send you money to give to a dog shelter???
This has nothing to do with me. It's so the wealthy can help those less fortunate in a way, en masse, they would have never considered before.


And what about wealthy you? Are you prepared to sell your house? Cash out your savings? Why not you? Why is it always someone else with you liberal dems? WHY NOT YOU????? Can't we give your money to people to give to dog shelters? Or is that level of sacrifice only for others?
Wealthy me? Now you're dreaming. Of course, I'd do my fair share.

This has nothing to do with me. It's so the wealthy can help those less fortunate in a way, en masse, they would have never considered before.The wealthy already pay over 85% of income taxes, so your point is ridiculous. And to ask them to sell their homes and cash out their investments to give money to people like you to support dog shelters is lunacy. It is just so typical for a non-thinking, liberal dem.

And just as I suspected, now that it suits you, you are back to your "modest income" motif. You said a week or two ago that you have a six figure income, so why wouldn't we ask you to sell your house?

It's completely sickening. Talk with someone else. If you can't figure out that making people sell their homes so you can give money to a blasted dog shelter is completely stupid, then I can't help you.

The wealthy already pay over 85% of income taxes, so your point is ridiculous. And to ask them to sell their homes and cash out their investments to give money to people like you to support dog shelters is lunacy. It is just so typical for a non-thinking, liberal dem.

And just as I suspected, now that it suits you, you are back to your "modest income" motif. You said a week or two ago that you have a six figure income, so why wouldn't we ask you to sell your house?

It's completely sickening. Talk with someone else. If you can't figure out that making people sell their homes so you can give money to a blasted dog shelter is completely stupid, then I can't help you.
As usual, you totally misread and misunderstood my comments.

I never said I have a six-figure income! I'm RETIRED!

And I never mentioned dog shelters.

Sure I did.

Animal shelters was your reference.

You voted to raise taxes on yourself. Remember?? Check out your reply to this post.

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?t=847952&page=9&p=3864802#post3864802

Sure I did.

Animal shelters was your reference.

You voted to raise taxes on yourself. Remember??
Animal shelters include far more than dog shelters. I've never had a dog, nor do I ever want one. I'm a crazy cat lady, for years have rescued neighborhood strays/ferals and help my local cat shelter.

Yup, and so it was regarding taxes.

Dog shelter or animal shelter, the point remains the same.

Remember this? "The larger income, two inheritances,"

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showth...02#post3864802 (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?t=847952&page=9&p=3864802#post3864802)

The search feature on this site is very good.

Since this topic is actually about press conferences, heard today that Biden has now gone 48 days without one. That is the longest period for a new pres in over a hundred years. It sure seems to be some confirmation that he's just not up to it mentally.

Dog shelter or animal shelter, the point remains the same.

Remember this? "The larger income, two inheritances,"

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showth...02#post3864802 (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?t=847952&page=9&p=3864802#post3864802)

The search feature on this site is very good.
I don't deny that. It's not a regular income, but is fixed -- and being put to good use.

It sure seems to be some confirmation that he's just not up to it mentally.

How about this for being "up to it mentally"?

Biden's legislation is being passed that will bring millions out of poverty, allow more millions to afford health insurance, help local municipalities survive, and kick start the economy.

Biden's legislation is being passed that will bring millions out of poverty,

On borrowed money, the question arises, if this can be done now because of a virus, why couldn't it have been done earlier, after all it is only OPM

On borrowed money,Precisely the point. If we can end poverty by spending 2 tril a year of borrowed money, then why not do that every year? And if we can't do that every year, then can you guess what will happen to those millions when the borrowed money stops flowing? It's a completely stupid idea. Even worse, it compounds the problem by convincing poor people that a government check is the way out of poverty.

If liberal dems are really serious about giving poor people money to get them out of poverty, then they would take a sizeable portion of their personal incomes and give it to a poor person. They could buy a poor person health insurance. They could send a poor kid to college. Why do they always wait for the government to do these things? That they don't do it is certainly good reason to question their motives.

Read this today and thought it was interesting.

Representative Jim Jordan reminds Americans how stupid this administration is. He said, "We have open borders and closed schools. We can't build a wall at the border, but we can build a wall around the Capital. We can't protect the country, but we can protect the politicians."

Why do they always wait for the government to do these things? That they don't do it is certainly good reason to question their motives.
Where does that government money come from?

The 1.9 tril for this bill is borrowed/printed money. There is no tax money to support this. Tax monies have been in short supply since Bush 2 took over. It's why we are approaching 30 tril in federal debt, amounting to about 90K for every man, woman, and child in the country.

so your theorem is that those receiving the money owe it

so your theorem is that those receiving the money owe itWhere did I say that?

You said every man woman and child owes $90K

Do they teach reading in Aussie land? I said our debt amounts to 90K for each one of us. I never said anything about people receiving the money would owe it back. You just completely missed it.

"your theorem is that those receiving the money owe it"

Do they teach reading in Aussie land? I said our debt amounts to 90K for each one of us. I never said anything about people receiving the money would owe it back. You just completely missed it.

"your theorem is that those receiving the money owe it"

No I was just calling you on your rhetoric, you need a course in comprehension or maybe sarcasm

Stop with the argy bargy - I'm trying to sleep.

Go back to sleep athos, nothing to see here

You know JL, I get you, you were the school bully when you were in school

You know JL, I get you, you were the school bully when you were in schoolNo, but I was able to think when I was in HS. Don't know why you're not prepared to do it here.

No, but I was able to think when I was in HS. Don't know why you're not prepared to do it here.

because this is a diversion, not an occupation