I had actually never seen that video of Sid Vicious, I had just heard recordings of it. I thought the audience was a little weird while watching it, so I was pretty surprised by the ending!

-CW

Fine..

All you have to do is point to any comments you made about Donald Trump to that effect when he was a Democrat..

In absence of that, the *fact* remains you ONLY castigated President Trump after he became a Republicans..

That all but proves that it's a -R/-D issue, not an "issues" issue..

OK, so you admit that ya'all have a Left Wing bias..

I am glad to see you finally admit it. Now we can drop the subject.. :D

I don't admit anything for other people; that is between you and other people. I've also told you at least a thousand times that where Donald Trump is concerned, I have no party bigotry. I don't give a shit what letter is behind his damn name. If he was a Democrat, it would make no difference. A con by any other party is still a con. I'm an issues person. If you want to read party bigotry into it and refuse to acknowledge that some people know how to recognize a lying con artist when they see one, then knock yourself silly. :)

Okay, I followed all your links, and I feel like I just had a workout. Wow. :)

When I think of punk and Trump, what comes to mind is:

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

And now the end is near... Heh! :)

Here's one of my favorite albums.
Not sure it's the best introduction material, but it's near and dear to my heart-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EcNclDR9U0

Playing catch up, Punk! I got myself in a situation and landed in the hospital for a couple days.

Okay, this album is pretty awesome. So I take it that "Bad" means "good" in their band title, right? These guys have to be reggae punk, right? I was pleasantly surprised to like punk, and I caught that political radio snippet in the intro around 0:45: "as the economy revives because of the steep drop in oil prices." :)

Brilliant! And so very timely...

:-)

altohone [33] -

When I think of punk and Trump, what comes to mind is:

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

:-)

-CW

One of my favorite titles ever:

Friday Talking Points [308] -- Selenofriggatriskaidekaphobics Unite!

Just read the first paragraph, it explains it...

:-)

-CW

Plus, I wanted to post two tracks from MLITBOG, just because they're both politicians and seem pretty relevant.

America Is Waiting (think about Trump when listening):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMTi73h5B_U&list=PLex101hoCJ9vxeZ394IwCu9Z6WhHv1K0d&index=1

Mea Culpa (politician apologizing... a rare event!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsuVqBddYH0&list=PLex101hoCJ9vxeZ394IwCu9Z6WhHv1K0d&index=2

But my favorite is still The Jezebel Spirit, with an actual call-in radio exorcist!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdHSurqqnmY&index=5&list=PLex101hoCJ9vxeZ394IwCu9Z6WhHv1K0d

Enjoy... (but, if you reply, remember one link per comment...).

:-)

-CW

Now, see, that's precisely the song which ran through my head, too. Thought I was going to have to look up the lyrics, so I'm glad to see you've already done it!

:-)

Don Harris [12] -

OK, that Depends line was funny! Nice...

ListenWhenYouHear [14] -

What I found even sadder was Ryan swearing he wasn't even considering working with the Dems. Never heard a Speaker say anything like that before. Usually they offer up some candy-coated version of: "We'd be happy to work with the other party once they agree to all our basic demands." I mean, not that blunt -- totally sugar-coated, but that is supposed to be the standard way of responding to the question. Things have gotten pretty extreme in the GOP when Ryan can't even give lip service to the idea, in fear of even more revolt within his own ranks.

michale [15] -

CALIFORNIANS... Not Americans... Californians..
There is obviously a difference :D

Yeah, the difference is our economy is booming because we threw out enough Republicans from our government to fix things. Our federal taxes go to deadbeat red states who can't manage the same thing because too many Republicans are elected there. We voted for a Democratic president in the hopes that all of America could enjoy what we've got (we even tax rich people more, at the same time!).

There's a difference between CA and places like Kansas and Louisiana where conservative theory wrecks the government, in other words.

Thanks for pointing it out!

:-)

altohone [18] -

Good point. But I think what's different is that Trump is watching his poll numbers go down. The more that happens, the more he's going to wildly flail around in search of something to make it better. One of those might just be "talk to some actual Democrats in Congress," who knows?

I'm not saying he'll be "presidential" when doing it, in other words, I think he'll just wake up one morning and decide today's the day to stick the knife in the Tea Party by working with Schumer. A subtle difference, perhaps.

nypoet22 [26] -

Oh, we're doing silly word songs? OK, here goes...

What are words worth? Words!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blBDWv1y7_g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQ0PHbQ-Xeo

and finally,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quFZvPX0npU

Talk? It's only talk! Elephant talk!

Or, now that I think about it, I could just post the entire album My Life In The Bush Of Ghosts, a collaboration between Brian Eno and David Byrne where all the lyrics are random bits they recorded off the radio...

Speaking of which, and because I'm feeling so good on this lovely April Fool's Day, here's one for michale with a military theme (tower radioing fighter pilot!):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmzT5vzKwvk

C'mon, get down, F-104...

:-)

-CW

I mean, honestly.. What Party nominates a TOTALLY unelectable candidate *SOLELY* because it's "her turn"...???

Careful, there.

I mean: Bob Dole, John McCain, Mitt Romney. Each and every one because "it was their turn."

:-)

We have met the enemy and he is us!
-Pogo Possum

-CW

The Tea-Party-esque elements within the Democrat Party who will refuse to work with President Trump on ANYTHING, regardless of how good it is for their country...

They are going to be the problem here..

Not really. I mean, you are correct in that any really bipartisan compromise is almost by definition not going to be supported by hardliner factions in both parties, but in reality, there will be enough moderates in the middle of both parties to pass something acceptible enough to both.

Compromises like this usually mean everyone's ox gets gored a little bit, but not too much. So no wall funding, no Planned Parenthood defunding, but also no single-payer health care or other Dem demands which would go too far (for a compromise bill).

There certainly will be Dems who swear never to work with Trump on anything and never to vote for anything he'll ever get the chance to sign. My guess, though, is that there will be far fewer of these than there were GOPers who swore never to vote for anything Obama wanted. Remember them? You used to be their biggest cheerleader, not so long ago.

To sum up: I think there are more pragmatic Dems than pragmatic GOPers, and that will probably be reflected in the final vote. Maybe 80 Rs and 150 Ds, something like that.

We'll see, we'll see...

-CW

I'm sorry. I did not realize that you needed the definition of triage explained to you. How much medicine a person is given for a particular ailment has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH TRIAGE!

Triage focuses on getting medical aid to the people who needed it most and will benefit from it most. Someone who is having a heart attack gets priority over someone with a sprained ankle. When facing a case where there are two people who need immediate lifesaving care but only time to help one, it is about assessing which patient has the greatest chance to survive with help.

BTW, you can find RACISM EVERYWHERE if you look hard enough. You can find any -ism that your little heart desires if you go out searching for it. Again, perspective plays a huge roll in making that possible.

You are exactly right, there is no right to resist. The best thing people can do is to obey any order given to them by the police (as long as obeying it doesn't result in harm to yourself or others). No one has ever convinced an officer that their rights were being violated by the police. That is the job of the courts.

There is NO inherent right to resist Law Enforcement..

If a cop tells you to jump, you jump.. If the cop is wrong, he will pay the price after the fact...

If people fight the law BEFORE the fact, the LAW will *ALWAYS* win...

As we used to say in the military and in LEO circles.....

"I guaran-fuckin'-tee it..."

It really is THAT simple....

I thought that I had replied to that question in the earlier article's postings, but if I failed to or was not clear enough with the answer: Yes, the video makes the officer look bad. However, I would need to know what occurred prior to the video and read the officers explanation as to why they chose to respond as they did before I would be able to make a judgement.

The whole point of my bringing up the Michael Brown "hands up" video being interpreted differently depending on whether a person knew what had occurred between Brown and Wilson just prior to when the video starts was to support my point that until you know all of the details of an event, passing judgement solely on what the few seconds of video reveals isn't wise.

The video, by itself, will always make the person using force look like a bully. We as a society are uncomfortable with witnessing physical violence that is one sided. I joke that it has been because we now have adults who were raised getting "time out's" instead of spankings as the consequences for their wrongdoings, but the fact is that people are often shocked when they witness the police using physical force to compel compliance. But that IS part of their job.

The Eric Garner video is probably the best example of a video that people will view and immediately think the police were wrong in how they handled the call. It's a sad video to view, knowing that he's going to be dead by the end of it. The video doesn't show that the day before two officers attempted to serve the court-ordered arrest warrant on Garner, but that he refused to comply. Because of his size, the officers chose not to engage him physically because they knew it would wind up with someone being injured or killed. So they left and came back the next day with more than a dozen officers with them.

The first time I saw the video, I thought to myself, " Did this happen at a donut shop or what?" because of the number of police involved. They took so many for two reasons:

1. To, hopefully, make it clear to Garner that resistance was futile.

2. To have the manpower to actually be able to compel compliance with the least amount of risk of anyone (including Garner) being injured.

Despite all of this, Garner chose to resist knowing that he would have to face all of the officers forcing him to comply. It was HIS choice. There was nothing in that video that came even close to fitting the definition of "police misconduct", much less "police brutality"!

I apologize for my ramblings. I have been sick for the last two weeks and after rereading my posts from that timeframe, it's clear that I have definitely been drunk typing recently!

I do try to offer my insight and the experience on the subject matter. I will disagree with your assessment that I am too quick to give the officer the benefit of the doubt in these cases -- I believe I am just not as willing to condemn the officer involved until all of the evidence is presented. I have no issue with officers who violate the law and the public's trust being held accountable.

I thought that I had replied to that question in the earlier article's postings, but if I failed to or was not clear enough with the answer: Yes, the video makes the officer look bad. However, I would need to know what occurred prior to the video and read the officers explanation as to why they chose to respond as they did before I would be able to make a judgement.

The whole point of my bringing up the Michael Brown "hands up" video being interpreted differently depending on whether a person knew what had occurred between Brown and Wilson just prior to when the video starts was to support my point that until you know all of the details of an event, passing judgement solely on what the few seconds of video reveals isn't wise.

The video, by itself, will always make the person using force look like a bully. We as a society are uncomfortable with witnessing physical violence that is one sided. I joke that it has been because we now have adults who were raised getting "time out's" instead of spankings as the consequences for their wrongdoings, but the fact is that people are often shocked when they witness the police using physical force to compel compliance. But that IS part of their job.

The Eric Garner video is probably the best example of a video that people will view and immediately think the police were wrong in how they handled the call. It's a sad video to view, knowing that he's going to be dead by the end of it. The video doesn't show that the day before two officers attempted to serve the court-ordered arrest warrant on Garner, but that he refused to comply. Because of his size, the officers chose not to engage him physically because they knew it would wind up with someone being injured or killed. So they left and came back the next day with more than a dozen officers with them.

The first time I saw the video, I thought to myself, " Did this happen at a donut shop or what?" because of the number of police involved. They took so many for two reasons:

1. To, hopefully, make it clear to Garner that resistance was futile.

2. To have the manpower to actually be able to compel compliance with the least amount of risk of anyone (including Garner) being injured.

Despite all of this, Garner chose to resist knowing that he would have to face all of the officers forcing him to comply. It was HIS choice. There was nothing in that video that came even close to fitting the definition of "police misconduct", much less "police brutality"!

I apologize for my ramblings. I have been sick for the last two weeks and after rereading my posts from that timeframe, it's clear that I have definitely been drunk typing recently!

I do try to offer my insight and the experience on the subject matter. I will disagree with your assessment that I am too quick to give the officer the benefit of the doubt in these cases -- I believe I am just not as willing to condemn the officer involved until all of the evidence is presented. I have no issue with officers who violate the law and the public's trust being held accountable.

I wasn't honoring the guy.
You know me better than that.

Of course not; that was my lame attempt at sarcasm.

I'm confident you are indeed worthy.
As for the boots, the style is less important than a willingness to use them.

Those tanker boots are the best. They have a decent amount of steel in the shank, almost feels like they're holding you to the ground. They have a most excellent curve in the heel that wraps quite nicely around a person's neck... when necessary. Seriously. :)

Here's one of my favorite albums.
Not sure it's the best introduction material, but it's near and dear to my heart-

Bad Brains
I Against I

A whole album *yikes*! Well, I did promise. I'll listen a bit later today and get back to you, but right off the bat, I'm sensing maybe a Rastafarian vibe because of the name of the album... "I Against I"... sounds exactly like something my man Bob Marley would say. So I'll make me a cup of Marley Jamaica Blue... very smooth... and report back later... mi ago a Jamrock, irie! :)

Nellie always cheers me up....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9m7tPikH0UA

Okay... well. I listened to that all the way through. I could not help but notice that the guy who resembled a microphone with ribs was singing about a circus elephant going trumpety trump... trump, trump, trump. *LOL*

what could be done with those lyrics today would be true classic punk subversion.

Especially with those "trump" lyrics. Catchy tune. I actually think I'd heard it before, and now I'll be singing that tune all day and probably for the next week. Thanks for that GT! :)

Iff'n ya want to read up on the issue :D

I used to be a big fan of the Corcoran line of products...but now that I spend most of my time in the wilds of CENTAM and SOUTHAM I prefer these....

Oh, yes. Those will do nicely, and a color for every application. I confess I prefer a steel shank in my boots... helps with balance and makes you like one of those Weebles that wobble but don't fall down.

Not quite like to old flight boots I wore, but comfy as hell.

I like to think of them as middle age punk :)

Okay, as long as you got a black pair, maybe tie a bandana with skulls on those, they could be punk. :)

It's a lefty chat board and water is wet.

Like I said... Party/Political bigotry...

That's all I wanted you to admit..

We're good now.. :D

Wooops... :D That would be Michael Brown...

For someone who professes to ignore me, you sure read all my comments and talk about me an awful lot. :D

BTW, it's funny that you mention triage in the ER.
Yup.
There's proven racism there too.
In everything from white people getting more pain medication to better care for heart attacks to higher doses of insulin for diabetics.
Even black kids with appendicitis get less pain relief.
It has even been documented in VA hospitals.

Cite???

Oh.. silly me... :D

Anyway, despite my prodding, you still refused to answer my original, direct question about whether you agree with the police beating a suspect who had gotten on his knees and surrendered, and if so, why.
You seem to have convictions, but apparently they can't be shared in this case.

I know you are not directing this to me, but since you can't help but talk ABOUT me so much, it feels like it is..

The problem here is that you want to show a snapshot of a police incident and then demand to be told whether or not it was justified..

That's ridiculous...

A person needs a LOT more than a simple snapshot to logically and rationally assess the justification of an event..

A picture DOES say a thousand words, it's true...

But many many MANY of those words are not factual...

Michale Brown taught us that...

If one takes into account the entirety of the incident, not just the snapshot, then it IS not only possible, but it's likely, that the snapshot is depicting a justifiable use of force...

But, without further information, without further FACTS to go along with the snapshot, you might as well be asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin..

Other, not so favorable interpretations are also possible

Like in the case of accusing cops of racism in black shootings??

I have always said the EXACT same thing.. Other interpretations are possible. Interpretations that are NOT favorable to the anti-cop agenda..

I am glad we can find agreement on that point..

Two fer two.. :D

nd in case you missed it, our resident trumpling and former LEO also chimed in with a comment to my discussion with goode trickle that made it abundantly clear that it wasn't about language barriers or residents on a given block with a record of threatening police in his eyes.

Cite??

No??

Didna think so.. :D

OK, so you admit that ya'all have a Left Wing bias..

It's called bigotry, Victoria...

I am glad to see you finally admit it. Now we can drop the subject.. :D

I wasn't honoring the guy.
You know me better than that.

25

I'm confident you are indeed worthy.
As for the boots, the style is less important than a willingness to use them.

Here's one of my favorite albums.
Not sure it's the best introduction material, but it's near and dear to my heart-

Bad Brains
I Against I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EcNclDR9U0

A

You know how police process thoughts?

Except for our resident trumpling obviously, and all who think like him... which we all know is a disturbingly large number (see endorsements, law enforcement, Trump).

Finally some hard evidence.

Oh wait.
A "trust me" argument isn't quite evidence nor hard.

Setting aside that the question from the survey may have been carefully worded to elicit a truthful response without triggering the "my bigotry is showing" instinct, you then go on to share an anecdote in which a racist 911 dispatcher tries to get you to lie by presenting a misdemeanor by a poor black man as a felony, which is then swept under the rug by your superiors, who then proceed to fire you for not being a racist willing to lie like them...
... all to defend the notion that racism in law enforcement tactics wasn't exposed by the survey because people are too smart to admit such a thing.

Very impressive.
You've got me convinced!!!!!!!!!!

BTW, it's funny that you mention triage in the ER.
Yup.
There's proven racism there too.
In everything from white people getting more pain medication to better care for heart attacks to higher doses of insulin for diabetics.
Even black kids with appendicitis get less pain relief.
It has even been documented in VA hospitals.

We are an exceptional country.
Maybe you can go into medicine and try to defend how they process thoughts too?

Anyway, despite my prodding, you still refused to answer my original, direct question about whether you agree with the police beating a suspect who had gotten on his knees and surrendered, and if so, why.
You seem to have convictions, but apparently they can't be shared in this case.

I might normally guess at your motivations for keeping them secret, but instead I will simply ask you what my motivation is to continue a discussion with you?

Seriously.
If you won't engage, what is the point?

A

thanks!

:)

JL

Don't you think Toy Dolls is great place for Kick to start?

Nellie always cheers me up....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9m7tPikH0UA

what could be done with those lyrics today would be true classic punk subversion.

I used to be a big fan of the Corcoran line of products...but now that I spend most of my time in the wilds of CENTAM and SOUTHAM I prefer these....

http://www.rockyboots.com/rocky-c5c/rocky-c5c-commercial-military-boots/RKYC003.html

Not quite like to old flight boots I wore, but comfy as hell.

I like to think of them as middle age punk :)

does that go for my music too?

https://youtu.be/PTSLGCCowWk

Oh my gosh, JL. You couldn't have possibly known this, but antidisestablishmentariansim is actually one of my favorite words out of all of them.

I am also very fond of hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia.

That was an awesome song... I loved it! :)

does that go for my music too?

https://youtu.be/PTSLGCCowWk

JL

Nice.
I dare say you would have made a good punk.

Oh, I'm not worthy, Punk.

On second thought, it's never too late.
I think you already have the combat boots... I'd be happy to share a list of my favorite songs/bands.

Oh, I got lots and lots of boots. Will these do?

http://www.sportsmansguide.com/product/index/mens-corcoran174-10-leather-tanker-boots-black?a=545056&pm2d=CSE-SPG-15-SZLA&utm_medium=cse&utm_source=shopzilla&utm_campaign=CI

If you post your music, I promise to listen. :)

As for the soup of the day, I think both you and nypoet are overestimating the Trumpon.

Trumpon! You honor him with a title he's not worthy. He spent his entire campaign and the majority of his presidency shitting on Democrats in word and in deed and then whining like a little bitch when they wouldn't help him screw over the people so he could notch a "win" and commence to enriching the billionaires.

If there is evidence that suggests otherwise, I missed it.

I know, right? There's little evidence to suggest he's a decent human, forget about being "presidential." He's seeking power and money, and he's the biggest threat to democracy in America... Benedict Donald.

What's worse, the divide is not over philosophical differences, it's become solely based on identity. We saw 8 years of Republicans voting against legislation that they had supported in the past. The substance of the legislation was not what they opposed; it was who would get the credit for signing it into law that caused them to reject it!

I know, right? And they spent that time using the Tea Party as cover for why they couldn't compromise and allowed them to flourish and grow. Now the monster they've appeased refuses to cooperate with their agenda, and they blame Democrats for not letting them screw over Americans and pass legislation that would harm the most vulnerable among us so Trump could get a "win" and commence to cutting taxes for corporations and billionaires with their ill gotten gains from the poor.

And now he's right back at it last night claiming he'll get a health care bill passed after the shit show he pulled last week.

Who knew health care would be "such an easy one"? :)

As for the survey question about using different tactics in different neighborhoods and the response by police officers, your interpretation which attempts to portray their answers in the most favorable light is one possible way of looking at it, but since the survey didn't ask the obvious follow up question to clarify, there isn't any evidence that your interpretation actually reflects what the surveyed police meant. Other, not so favorable interpretations are also possible (and the evidence we see regularly suggests it is the more likely possibility)...

I was answering it from perspective of someone with knowledge of how law enforcement works. You are correct that there were no follow up questions to clarify what was meant by the question. But there really isn't a need as the question was straight forward! The people in my life who I would describe as being somewhat racist or sexist would never admit they were that way. They would deny it. If the question asked, "Do you discriminate against certain people based on your own prejudices while at work?" do you honestly believe that large percentage of people would be so bold to answer, "Yup!"???

If you asked medics working in an ER, "Do you ever treat certain patients differently than you treat others when they come onto the ER?", I am certain most would say "Yes, it's called 'TRIAGE'!" Now that doesn't mean that some could have answered that question thinking they were being asked whether they discriminate or have prejudices against certain folks, but when discussing their profession -- most people don't think in those terms because they hold their profession to a high standard.

I know I can't speak for all law enforcement, but if you have been around as many as I have, for as long as I have, you do start to understand their thinking processes and how their brains tend to process things.

I was fired from my job as a 911 call receiver after I tried to report my supervisor for having me enter a police incident falsely in order to get a quicker response based on the suspect's race. She had me enter a call of a man begging for change as a strong armed robbery because the person was black. She wanted me to enter it as an armed robbery at first. She defended her instruction to me by saying, "Those kind of people usually have a weapon on them!" The agency tried to brush it under the rug (the director was interviewing for a big new job and having one of her supervisors disciplined for doing what she did would have not made the director look good) but I kept demanding they investigate her. When it became clear that I wasn't going to just let it go, they fired me.

So yes, yes I do know that it does happen. I never once said it didn't. But that sort of bigotry is not the norm 98% of the time. And I can guarantee you that my former supervisor would never have answered that she discriminates against certain people when doing her job. Those that answered "no", were responding to the question like you did. Those that answered "yes" were responding to it like I did.

As long as ya'all let Paula get away with labeling ALL Trumpers and/or ALL Republicans as racist, deplorables or whatever, the evidence that supports the political bigotry is conclusive..

You're on a lefty chat board whining like a moron about political bigotry because the lefty or left-leaning posters aren't posting to suit your tastes. You're like the fool who jumped into the water and then complained that he got wet. Were you expecting love, peace, and harmony toward the right on a lefty chat board? That's your problem, not Paula's. :)

Paula posts articles about what some dumb ass Trumpers do and says "Trumpers." When you follow her links, you find information about what either one or a few Trumpers did. If you're reading more into it than that, then you are the one with the problem.

You don't let me get away with labeling all of the Left...

Yet you DO let her get away with labeling ALL of the Right or ALL of Trump supporters..

She's a lefty on a lefty political chat board and water is indeed wet. It's not rocket science, Michale. Meanwhile, you're posting bullshit every day in trolling fashion and using terms like "Left Whinery" in nearly every post.

Ergo, the *ONLY* conclusion that fits all the facts is that it's Party/Political bigotry at work...

It's a lefty chat board and water is wet.

I am open to other suggestions.. But they need to be supported by FACTS... Verifiable and conclusive FACTS....

Got any??

Here's a fact. Only a moron would come to a lefty chat board and expect them to tailor their commentary to suit his right-wing rhetoric.

I have an idea. Think of yourself as visiting Britain. You land at the airport and make your way to your rental car, looking like a total tourist and wearing your stupid hat with the stupid words on it that screams "I'm Not British." You get in your car -- the wheel is on the wrong side of the dash -- you head out onto the open road, and then BAM... before you know it, your vacation turns to shit because you spend the majority of your time bitching out the other motorists for not driving on the right side of the road to accommodate you.

No???

The analysis stands...

Sorry Michale, but the FACTS show that you're like an illegal alien bitching about the natives, exactly like what your ilk insists is wrong with this country.

Deal with that. :)

On second thought, it's never too late.
I think you already have the combat boots... I'd be happy to share a list of my favorite songs/bands.

A

Nice.
I dare say you would have made a good punk.

BTW, thanks for posting that link the other day.

A

As for the soup of the day, I think both you and nypoet are overestimating the Trumpon.

I'm not saying it's impossible, just unlikely.
I mean, aren't we essentially back to the "becoming presidential" discussion?

It should happen, it could happen, but the odds of it actually happening are slim.
If there is evidence that suggests otherwise, I missed it.

A

I asked you a very straightforward question and you wrote a page length response in which you avoided answering it.
I don't get the reluctance.

Look, I welcome your input, but you can be a wallflower or you can get in the mosh pit.
Answer the question if you want to dance.
Don't make me get all Liz on you.

As for the survey question about using different tactics in different neighborhoods and the response by police officers, your interpretation which attempts to portray their answers in the most favorable light is one possible way of looking at it, but since the survey didn't ask the obvious follow up question to clarify, there isn't any evidence that your interpretation actually reflects what the surveyed police meant. Other, not so favorable interpretations are also possible (and the evidence we see regularly suggests it is the more likely possibility)... and in case you missed it, our resident trumpling and former LEO also chimed in with a comment to my discussion with goode trickle that made it abundantly clear that it wasn't about language barriers or residents on a given block with a record of threatening police in his eyes.

I would hope you would at least be willing to admit the other possibilities exist... and to be clear, I am not trying to disparage your husband, just discuss realty.

A

However, a two-month WhoWhatWhy investigation has revealed an important reason the Bureau may be facing undisclosed obstacles to revealing what it knows to the public or to lawmakers.

Such publicity could have exposed a high-value, long-running FBI operation against an organized crime network headquartered in the former Soviet Union. That operation depended on a convicted criminal who for years was closely connected with Trump, working with him in Trump Tower — while constantly informing for the FBI and the Department of Justice (DOJ), and being legally protected by them.

No.. The Party ANNOINTED NOT-45 because it was her turn...

Or, did you miss the whole DNC-had-their-thumb-on-the-scales bit??

Hell, Trump still can't stand the fact that she got over 3 million more votes than he did.

The FACT that all those votes were from California only probably pleases President Trump to no end.. :D

So pitiful that he tries to come up with excuses to explain how he could win when he was not as popular as she was to AMERICANS.

CALIFORNIANS... Not Americans... Californians..

There is obviously a difference :D

What's worse, the divide is not over philosophical differences, it's become solely based on identity.

Complete and utter agreement..

Identity politics really REALLY suck...

We saw 8 years of Republicans voting against legislation that they had supported in the past. The substance of the legislation was not what they opposed; it was who would get the credit for signing it into law that caused them to reject it!

And we're going to see 8 years of Democrats doing the EXACT same thing..

The ONLY difference is NOW, ya'all will support that..

What's worse, the divide is not over philosophical differences, it's become solely based on identity. We saw 8 years of Republicans voting against legislation that they had supported in the past. The substance of the legislation was not what they opposed; it was who would get the credit for signing it into law that caused them to reject it!

I mean, honestly.. What Party nominates a TOTALLY unelectable candidate *SOLELY* because it's "her turn"...???

This wins the STUPIDEST REPLY award. What actions were against their constituents' best interests? The party nominated Clinton because she won the primary election. Hell, Trump still can't stand the fact that she got over 3 million more votes than he did. So pitiful that he tries to come up with excuses to explain how he could win when he was not as popular as she was to AMERICANS.

"To-daaaaaay, all day I had the feeling
A miracle would happen --
I know now I was right."

For here you are
And what was just a world is a star
To-niiiiiight!

*LOL* :)

Sanctioned and accepted bigotry...

Nothing more....

I would actually LOVE to see that..

Not only because it would actually get things done for this country, but as an added bonus, it would tie the vast majority of Weigantians in knots!! :D

"TRUMP IS EVIL!!! TRUMP IS HITLER!!!! TRUMP IS..... whaaa?? He is working WITH Democrats!!??? errr.. uh... TRUMP IS AWESOME!!!!! TRUMP IS OBAMA!!!!"

It's gonna be a hoot!! :D

Political Partys. :^/

The worst thing that has happened to this country ever....

HA!!!

That wins the DELUSIONAL STATEMENT OF THE YEAR AWARD

Apparently, you missed the ENTIRE 2016 Presidential Election which consisted of NOTHING BUT the Democrats putting their constituents' best interests on the back burner in favor of Party politics.

I mean, honestly.. What Party nominates a TOTALLY unelectable candidate *SOLELY* because it's "her turn"...???

Yep, Yep.. I have been saying that since Day One..

Nice ta have such high level support. :D

I noticed your entire commentary ignored one relevant aspect..

The Tea-Party-esque elements within the Democrat Party who will refuse to work with President Trump on ANYTHING, regardless of how good it is for their country...

They are going to be the problem here..

And this all happened tonight... TONIGHT!

"To-daaaaaay, all day I had the feeling
A miracle would happen --
I know now I was right."

Trump is hosting a reception for senators and their spouses at the White House. It attracted both Republicans and Democrats.

He says the bipartisan crowd is “a very good thing” and predicts a deal on health care will happen “very quickly.”

He says: “I know that we’re all going to make a deal on health care. And that’s such an easy one.”

Trump also sees potential for working with Democrats on other issues like infrastructure.

He talks about how great things are going in Iraq and says: "We're doing very well in Iraq." He says "our soldiers are fighting and fighting like never before."

_____________________

So see, everybody? No worries. PT insists "our soldiers are fighting like never before" in Iraq and says a health care deal will be "such an easy one" and will happen "very quickly."

And this all happened tonight... TONIGHT!

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=89def17de436dd5dc288bcac7ae1ed75&tab=core&_cview=1

This thing is going to turn into a boondoggle quick. Since the government has moved to this whole design and build competition model it has done nothing but reward crappy contractors for crappy products while wasting tax payer dollars.

I can see where almost a billion dollars hidden in a CR can make for a good poison pill, especially considering that we have yet to see a fleshed out budget plan...

If the Dems were smart one of the conditions for " working it out" would be to see the budget footprint for the upcoming fiscal year before they start negotiating. Unfortunately, I doubt that anyone in DC will think of that since it makes to much sense and hearkens back to the days of working together.

The Boarder wall is already being queued up for lots of money to be spent. Here is a little IDIQ tidbit worth up to
$300,000,000 with a minimum of $200,00 to $500,000 just for the prototypes. and that is before the design and demolition charges....

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=8a3ce59525aa0a6ea153bb400f3028da&tab=core&_cview=1

JL

There was a time, before the 2008 election, that I believed most members of Congress voted on legislation based on its substance and the needs of their constituents. That belief was dashed when the GOP voted against renewing the Zagruder Bill - which covered the medical expenses of those who became seriously ill from cleaning the 9/11 attack sites. The excuses they gave for their opposition made no sense at the time.

Months later, when the GOP's plan to become the "Party of No" was exposed, it became clear just how low they had sunk when they would openly say things like,

"If he was for it, we had to be against it!"

I just do not see Democrats be willing to risk putting their constituents best interests on the back burner in favor of party politics! For one, I think Democrats' constituents are better informed for the most part. Hearing Republicans brag about voting against this country's best interests just to prevent Obama from getting the credit for signing it into law was disgusting.