The nation's silliness grows ever greater. Now there are women who claim to have been offended because Joe Biden kissed them on the back of the head or smelled their hair. Why wouldn't a woman simply turn and ask him to stop? Problem solved. Instead, they have to make an issue about it with the ever cooperative national media. Pitiful. I don't like Biden's political positions, but this is really nonsense.

Meanwhile, the ability of the political class in D.C. to act as though we have no sense seems to grow ever greater. Nancy Pelosi, in an interview concerning Biden's situation, claimed to be a member of the "straight arm club", meaning she believed in simply shaking hands (as opposed to hugging) and in treating others as though they "had a cold". Really? A simple web search shows this photo along with many other similar ones.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...4f2a9f66f2.jpg

JL, some guys and gals like to hug, and others don't. It depends on the relationship. Nancy and Barak, I'm sure, have great affection for each other. As for colleagues and coworkers, times have really changed regarding PDAs.

I'd much rather talk about the Joe and Hunter Biden crime family . But I have to hedge my bets because he's the only sane candidate in the Dem ranks .

Quote:

---

JL, some guys and gals like to hug, and others don't. It depends on the relationship. Nancy and Barak, I'm sure, have great affection for each other.

---

I agree with you on that. Trying to find the proper boundaries can be a chore, and both men and women need to tell each other when the boundaries have been crossed. I imagine you would agree with that. But when Pelosi leaves Biden hanging out to dry by trying to say she is a hand-shaker and not a hugger, then that becomes beyond ridiculous. I'm convinced the entire political class is convinced we will believe anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

But when Pelosi leaves Biden hanging out to dry by trying to say she is a hand-shaker and not a hugger, then that becomes beyond ridiculous. I'm convinced the entire political class is convinced we will believe anything.

---

I'm guessing most of her physical contact with others is a handshake, and she saves the affection for those she knows well and has a good relationship with. Years ago, my mother told me I had to accept the hugs or kisses or pats from male family friends as well as relatives I rarely saw and often didn't remember. Thank goodness we've gotten beyond that!

Quote:

---

I'm guessing most of her physical contact with others is a handshake, and she saves the affection for those she knows well and has a good relationship with.

---

I'm guessing she is a politician and likely prone to lying when she considers it to be profitable.

Quote:

---

Years ago, my mother told me I had to accept the hugs or kisses or pats from male family friends as well as relatives I rarely saw and often didn't remember. Thank goodness we've gotten beyond that!

---

Agree completely. A woman should never be put into a situation in which she in not comfortable. On the other hand, there are too many women who are excessively affectionate upon meeting a man. That sends mixed signals which can cause problems. I think the Bible nails it when it refers to a "holy kiss". Whatever affection is shown should done in a holy manner.

Biden's touchy feely BS would've been creepy in the days of Cary Grant,in the days of the Rat pack Sinatra days .The Dems dismissed it in the past as 'good ole Uncle Joe being good ole Uncle Joe. He talks of mores changing . But that is a garbage excuse . Never was his gropemeyster act acceptable .

What is hypocritical about the whole thing is that the only reason he is being called out now is because the progressives and commies like Sanders (who almost assuredly is behind the sudden outrage ) are trying to knee-cap his campaign before it gets off the ground. Then they can divvy up the shattered emperor's coalition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Biden's touchy feely BS would've been creepy in the days of Cary Grant,in the days of the Rat pack Sinatra days .The Dems dismissed it in the past as 'good ole Uncle Joe being good ole Uncle Joe. He talks of mores changing . But that is a garbage excuse . Never was his gropemeyster act acceptable .

---

Why is Trump's acceptable -- and by Christians!!!

Quote:

---

What is hypocritical about the whole thing is that the only reason he is being called out now is because the progressives and commies like Sanders (who almost assuredly is behind the sudden outrage ) are trying to knee-cap his campaign before it gets off the ground. Then they can divvy up the shattered emperor's coalition.

---

Nope. It's much more complicated than that. Stay tuned!

Trump's isn't acceptable and I really don't care about this side show . Here is the story we should be focusing on
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...6VllSlGzNp-1dY

I find a lot of things about Trump to be unacceptable. I'm not comfortable with those things like you seem to have been about Pelosi's, Obama's and HC's many problems. You know, that knife cuts both ways.

here is a better reporting on the REAL Biden scandal .

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-ho...obe-is-revived


btw ; Joe Biden presided over the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmations of Justice Clarence Thomas . So he knew what the social norms were back in the 1980s and what was acceptable behavior .

This may prove to be a lot more important than anything the dufus or ANY politician is talking about.

https://nationalinterest.org/feature...nas-gain-23937

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-v...Name=worldNews

if it were me I'd be enforcing the Monroe Doctrine . RT says the Chinese are there for 'humanitarian 'reasons. So do you have anything to say about Biden's collusion ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

if it were me I'd be enforcing the Monroe Doctrine . RT says the Chinese are there for 'humanitarian 'reasons. So do you have anything to say about Biden's collusion ?

---

Perhaps a less heavy handed approach would have seen better results but instead they have an open door. Let us hope that gunboat diplomacy isn't needed to change the situation, after all it didn't really work with Cuba, did it

America as an Republic is over... It will no longer be able to conduct business. Each side will be suing or using the courts to delay or stop any action of the other.

The Republicans would not stop chasing Obama's citizenship issue. This has taken a turn for the worst and the Democrats will not even accept Trump and if one attack fails, they just start others, so all of the resources are tied up attacking the President

No matter who wins, the next time, it will only get worst and worst. The Socialists have won, and at some point there will be a President for life and the other party all put in jail. (like other countries do)

I personally see the Republican doing this, since there is a better chance of the military following them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck

America as an Republic is over... It will no longer be able to conduct business. Each side will be suing or using the courts to delay or stop any action of the other.

The Republicans would not stop chasing Obama's citizenship issue. This has taken a turn for the worst and the Democrats will not even accept Trump and if one attack fails, they just start others, so all of the resources are tied up attacking the President

No matter who wins, the next time, it will only get worst and worst. The Socialists have won, and at some point there will be a President for life and the other party all put in jail. (like other countries do)

I personally see the Republican doing this, since there is a better chance of the military following them.

---

I think you have spent too much time under one party government. Socialism, as implemented in the US, is not socialism, it is benevolent despotism. People can have health care if they can pay for it, the environment can be looked after if it yields its resources, the government owns large swathes of the country with access for recreational purposes, and the Congress actually passes legislation now and again

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

if it were me I'd be enforcing the Monroe Doctrine . RT says the Chinese are there for 'humanitarian 'reasons. So do you have anything to say about Biden's collusion ?

---

Still looking into this as repubs ignored it, so don't know much except it will be a campaign issue for Biden, but Russia and China have money on the brain in Venezuela, and despite the mismanagement of it's resources it's still there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck

America as an Republic is over... It will no longer be able to conduct business. Each side will be suing or using the courts to delay or stop any action of the other.

The Republicans would not stop chasing Obama's citizenship issue. This has taken a turn for the worst and the Democrats will not even accept Trump and if one attack fails, they just start others, so all of the resources are tied up attacking the President

No matter who wins, the next time, it will only get worst and worst. The Socialists have won, and at some point there will be a President for life and the other party all put in jail. (like other countries do)

I personally see the Republican doing this, since there is a better chance of the military following them.

---

It's a Civil War Charles, 21st century style.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

I think you have spent too much time under one party government. Socialism, as implemented in the US, is not socialism, it is benevolent despotism. People can have health care if they can pay for it, the environment can be looked after if it yields its resources, the government owns large swathes of the country with access for recreational purposes, and the Congress actually passes legislation now and again

---

So we have glitches... so what... who doesn't?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

So we have glitches... so what... who doesn't?

---

Glitches, the last fifty years has been one glitch after another. Somewhere you have lost the concept that an elected government is there for a purpose, to govern, not to be opposed at every turn. Some opposition is healthy, but deliberate undermining of government isn't opposition, it is treason

When Lee surrendered in 1865 the real fighting began and it's still rages on. Going to the moon and killing Osama were just side things along the way, but the war rages on. I guess to build a better union you have to tear stuff up and start again, but supposedly there is method to the madness.

Glitches do happen when you have a works still in progress and half of us are loony as Betsy bugs.

Quote:

---

The Republicans would not stop chasing Obama's citizenship issue.

---

That was a small segment of Republicans. The better example was the Republicans committed to putting road blocks in front of his agenda . That did not stop him from force feeding his program through when the Dems had majorities in Congress ;and later by executive action.
Trump squandered his time when he had congressional majorities .He got the tax cuts passed ..good for the economy ;good for him. But the more important agenda IMO was border security ;the issue that won him the Presidency . In that case he has failed . The reasons he has failed are mostly the opposition fault . But he has not been effective in doing what is doable .

Quote:

---

No matter who wins, the next time, it will only get worst and worst.

---

Probably true . Both parties are purging moderates from their ranks . These attacks on Biden being the most recent example . I say go for it . Crazed socialists will be much easier to defeat . There is a lot wrong with Biden. But he is the only one of the group I believe who could win the swing states .

Quote:

---

The Socialists have won, and at some point there will be a President for life and the other party all put in jail. (like other countries do)

I personally see the Republican doing this, since there is a better chance of the military following them.

---

In a way the socialists have won. No one talks of fiscal responsibility anymore . President for life ? Not really ;but if they succeed in orchestrating a coup against Trump then it is reasonable to suggest that no one will be elected to the Presidency who isn't a member of the political duopoly .(unfortunately Trump was not the right outsider to break the control. )

Quote:

---

It's a Civil War Charles, 21st century style.

---

Professor Michael Vlahos of the Naval War College and the

Global Security Studies program at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Arts and Sciences has argued for years that the American identity is a permanent state of civil war. We were lulled into believing a different reality because we are the children of the post WWII era .Until the 1960s there was a brief time when our civil war impulses were turned outward .

"Today, two righteous paths are gridlocked in opposition. Both perceive themselves as champions of national renewal, of cleansing corrupted ideals, and of truly fulfilling America’s promise. Both fervently believe that they alone own virtue. Yet the banners of each course are absolutist mirrors of one another, pro and contra, all or nothing. Moreover, lightning rod issues, as in the 1770s and 1850s, make the space between battle lines a no man’s land, forcing majority moderates and compromising fence-sitters to choose or be called out as willing collaborators with the other. "

https://www.theamericanconservative....for-civil-war/

here is a shocking tale of Biden I bet you never heard .Dec 1972 newly elected Senator Biden received the tragic news that no one wants to hear . His wife had driven into a busy intersection into the path of an oncoming truck ;killing her and his young baby daughter ,and severely injuring his 2 sons. The driver of the truck Curtis Dunn was cleared of all wrong doing by investigators .Still the accident weighed heavy on him until his own death in 1999. Around 2000 , Biden started telling a fabricated tale of the accident . He claimed in his narrative that Dunn had drunk his lunch instead of eating it implying that he was a drunk driver . The family wrote to Biden asking him to stop and retract . But Biden continued to tell the falsehood smear as late as the time of his run in 2008 for the Presidency and being selected for the Vice Presidency.
https://www.newarkpostonline.com/.../article_6c9a477e...

At least he didn't claim to have flown into Kosovo under sniper fire.

While I desperately do not want him to be president, one can't help but have some compassion for the guy. Wife dead. Daughter dead. Now his son dead. That's a lot of heartache.

Any democrat look good to you? Just curious as I have this notion your mind is already made up to hold your nose and keep the dufus around to get those conservative activist judges that will overturn those "liberal activist judges" that brought you gay marriage, and abortions, and tax cuts for the rich.

That's the scary part . Biden was the only Dem I was considering . You should be thrilled with Kavanaugh . He's siding with the libs in case after case .


Bob Kerrey . I could vote for him . https://www.omaha.com/opinion/midlan...dc5375bf4.html

Most likely I'll vote write in again .

Quote:

---

Any democrat look good to you?

---

Well, they have all endorsed AOC's insane New Green Deal. As far as I know they have all endorsed the insane reparations idea. So no, none of them look good to me.

Quote:

---

Just curious as I have this notion your mind is already made up to hold your nose and keep the dufus around to get those conservative activist judges that will overturn those "liberal activist judges" that brought you gay marriage, and abortions, and tax cuts for the rich.

---

If you can find abortion rights and gay marriage in the Constitution, please post it here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

If you can find abortion rights and gay marriage in the Constitution, please post it here.

---

I think you need to understand the gay scene as an abberration, you won't find it in the constitution because it wasn't an issue in the eighteenth century

Quote:

---

you won't find it in the constitution because it wasn't an issue in the eighteenth century

---

You need to read a little more history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

You need to read a little more history.

---

No, they had more important things to think about than whether queers could marry or would want too. For the LGB such matters are later issues once you get past survival. In a society where tolerance doesn't exist such matter are moot.

What I do notice is once they are allowed to marry the heat seems to have gone out of their issues, they are rarely heard of now, faded back into their shadow world

In the US the notion that all are equal is an ongoing struggle. That's history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

In the US the notion that all are equal is an ongoing struggle. That's history.

---

Yes why do you have such difficulty with it?

Equal protection under the law is the concept. I think we do a pretty good job of that, other than the occasional Jussie Smollett.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Equal protection under the law is the concept. I think we do a pretty good job of that, other than the occasional Jussie Smollett.

---

I do not, and historical fact bears that out. There has always been opposition to equality, be it class or race, religion, or economics. Looks good on paper, but reality is rather depressing when many still are fighting for the opportunity of freedoms and equal protection under the law.

We have a long way to go.

Quote:

---

many still are fighting for the opportunity of freedoms and equal protection under the law.

---

Who, and in what way?

Women, gays, and minorities. Even grouchy old white men who feel victimized by everybody getting their voices heard and there rights gained. What you didn't know?

Quote:

---

Women, gays, and minorities.

---

I just don't agree with you.

No surprise there. No surprise that you know nothing of the struggles of those that don't look, or think like you either.

Quote:

---

No surprise there. No surprise that you know nothing of the struggles of those that don't look, or think like you either.

---

The question is not of struggles. It's of equal protection under the law. Everyone, believe it or not, has struggles.

I agree so when will we realize that equal protection under the law?

Quote:

---

I agree so when will we realize that equal protection under the law?

---

It will never be perfect, but I know of no major differences. Do you?

We've touched on this before. Women making less money and subject to sexual harassment. The law is slow in addressing that. Gays being thrown out the military and refused financial/social benefits, which is changing, but a lot of opposition, and of course minorities specifically black and brown still fighting discrimination at the polls at the job and are more likely to see heavy jail time than white counterparts and profiled more intensely, and be beat or killed by cops.

DOJ civil right division gutted at a time hate crimes rise, and racist making local policy to facilitate discrimination and harassment. The wage gap ain't no joke either. Surprised you don't acknowledge that discrimination still exists but maybe not as apparent in your locale.

I agree it may never be perfect but we can still strive to do more, and should.