Sorry ... I seem to get giddy whenever I listen to my new Bryan Adams cd ... So Happy It Hurts ...

Heh.

I just lost a pound or two dancin' around the living room. Whew!

They're probably not really lost... just hiding out in fridge. ;)

Are you equating Republican support for Dems with what the Dems did for some Republicans.

You answered my question with another question that confuses the fact that this dynamic works both ways with some kind of ridiculous declaration of "equivalency."

Please, say it ain't so!

I see your straw man fallacy and raise you a thought-terminating cliché.

Please, say it ain't so!

And, I hope those Republicans who received Democratic support to win their primaries also win their actual elections.

Well, this is nuts. Do you also hope that those Democrats who received Republican support to win their primaries also win their "actual elections"? Because they can't all win, and that dynamic works both ways, you know!?

Maybe you don't know.

What you are really saying is that CW doesn’t ban people just because he doesn’t like their lies and opinions.

~ Russ

*

Yes, Russ.. THAT is what I am "REALLY" saying when I said "{CW} doesn't ban people just because he doesn't like their facts and opinions.."

~ Michale

*
Well, that definitely confirms it. Russ just got it to admit that saying "their facts" is like saying "lies."

Point to Russ.

What was your first clue that THAT's what I was "REALLY" saying?? The fact that I specifically said it??

~ Michale

Hehehehe. You confused it, Russ!

So, to recap:

That's double points to Russ for confusing it with FACTS.

No need... your foaming at the mouth and dry humping the air like a dog in heat at the thought of watching an 80-something year old man being struck with a hammer is proof enough of how ugly you are.

Still more questions linger about the alleged Paul Pelosi "assault".

No, there aren't for anyone not sexualizing the encounter for their own enjoyment. It's pretty straight forward. Do you get as excited requesting for police cam videos when they are called to teen suicides, or is it just old men that do it for you?

Sorry, but MAGA's just do not respect the rights of victims of abuse to not have to suffer reliving it over and over in ads. That you weren't invited to see the victim's x-rays is of no concern to anyone. That you want to focus so much energy on this and cannot stop talking about it is beyond disgusting!

What's yer thoughts on the Democrat strategy of helping "unelectable" GOP candidates to win their primaries??

I think I may have already taken a stance on this - I'm against it and thought it was an asinine strategy from the get-go.

I laugh every time I hear or read someone using the word “integrity” thanks to South Park. Randy Marsh’s weed farm uses it as its’ name. But to be fair, they pronounce it “‘Tegrity!”

You wanna witness some real actual history? Back in the day, George and a few of the founding fathers did have hemp farms cuz they knew the meaning of hard work and integrity. But then our country did lose its way and began a war on drugs that was, and still is, just a war on people. And then a bunch of young corporate banker types come along telling us we're all in the new normal; as they try and turn God's green miracle into an easy buck for themselves. They even hire fancy Hollywood directors to make them look all hip and cool. But you know what? F___ those guys. They ain't got no integridy.

The truth is this country has always been people WITH integrity, all fighting for the one thing they can agree on. And that's why Tegridy is donating 100% of profits to charities that work to right the wrongs of the drug war until weed is legal nationwide.

You see, that's Tegridy. Those other guys? No Tegridy.

Do you want some f_____ Tegridy? Don't you wish everyone had some g__d___ Tegridy? Well soon, everyone can:

TEGRIDY WEED

Do You Have Any Tegridy? <--- [full disclosure: cursing]

*
Their facts?

I know, right, Russ!? Like "alternative facts."

This is such a telling statement!

Ternative Facts.

What you are really saying is that CW doesn’t ban people just because he doesn’t like their lies and opinions.

"Lies" definitely works as an alternative to "their" alternative "facts."

Because despite what you wish was the truth, there are only THE FACTS… not your facts, not my facts, not their facts, nor it’s facts — and you can bet your bippy...

Backside, rump, cheeks, derrière, posterior

... that anytime you feel the inclination to put a pronoun before “facts”, what comes next will not be FACTUAL!

It's actually their lies... or just lies in general... but definitely lies.

So, to recap: You're saying that anybody saying "their facts" is just like saying "lies." It's like they're living with their heads jammed high up into their bippies. Now that's what I call a fact.

Yes, Russ.. THAT is what I am "REALLY" saying when I said "{CW} doesn't ban people just because he doesn't like their facts and opinions.."

What was your first clue that THAT's what I was "REALLY" saying?? The fact that I specifically said it??

:eyeroll:

No department releases evidence while there is an active investigation underway.

Bullshit.. I can point to DOZENS of politically charged incidents where video footage was released DURING the investigation..

Further, the investigation is over.. The subject has been already been charged.. It's in the hands of the prosecutors now..

The FACT is, if the attack was legitimate, was actually a REAL attack, then that footage would be playing all over the airwaves to show how ugly the GOP'ers are..

It would be a HUGE Democrat Propaganda GOLD MINE!!! So much so that it might have swung the election to the Dems..

If it was a REAL attack, if the cam/surveillance footage actually revealed a REAL attack and not the hoax that it really was, you know and I know that it would be blanketing the airwaves...

The fact that the footage is STILL being hidden proves that the attack was simply another Jussie Smollett Democrat hoax...

You know it... I know it...

And once the GOP take over the House and the Senate, then the American people will know it as well.. :D

9/20

I laugh every time I hear or read someone using the word “integrity” thanks to South Park. Randy Marsh’s weed farm uses it as its’ name. But to be fair, they pronounce it “‘Tegrity!”

Their facts? This is such a telling statement! What you are really saying is that CW doesn’t ban people just because he doesn’t like their lies and opinions. Because despite what you wish was the truth, there are only THE FACTS… not your facts, not my facts, not their facts, nor it’s facts — and you can bet your bippy that anytime you feel the inclination to put a pronoun before “facts”, what comes next will not be FACTUAL!

Why won't SFPD and Capital Police release video surveillance and cam footage that will clear up ALL the unanswered questions??

That’s easy… they are still investigating the attack. No department releases evidence while there is an active investigation underway. And, no, the video and cam footage will NOT clear up ALL the unanswered questions…because you have no interest in putting this to rest! You’ve shown that to be the case time and time again!

You may continue to obsess over yourself, troll; however, I stopped reading right there.

Says the girl whose 80% of comments are about me, personally.. :D

The facts clearly show that it is YOU obsessing over me. :D

Just like you'll prove with your response to THIS comment.. hehehehehehehehehehe :D

Liz,

What's yer thoughts on the Democrat strategy of helping "unelectable" GOP candidates to win their primaries??

"Unelectable" GOP candidates who are now virtually all slated to actually WIN their elections?? :D

Your thoughts?? :D

8/20

Well, one thing is perfectly clear, certain and factual...

You're a self-absorbed troll who desperately seeks attention and cannot stop himself from posting off-topic horse shit all over another man's blog.

Maybe with all your manure, CW figures there must be a horse's ass in there somewhere. ¯\_(^-^)_/¯

You may continue to obsess over yourself, troll; however, I stopped reading right there.

1. How was Pelosi able to call 9-1-1, and why did the assault only happen after police arrived?

It's funny that the alleged "assailant" was with Pelosi for 30 minutes before the cops were actually called.. Why did the "assailant" let Pelosi call 911??

2. How was Pelosi able to open the door for the police while being essentially held hostage?

The "assailant" was kind enough to allow Pelosi to answer the door when the LEOs rang the bell..

3. Why wasn't there a security system with an alarm that went off after the glass broke and the back door was opened at 2 a.m., instantly alerting the police to a break in?

Strange how Pelosi had a state of the art security system that didn't go off and didn't alert the Alarm Response officers...

4. Why won't SFPD and Capital Police release video surveillance and cam footage that will clear up ALL the unanswered questions??

Strange how Democrats demand cam footage at the drop of a dime whenever an LEO arrests a black subject..

But HIDES cam footage that will prove the Pelosi "assault" was nothing but a Jussie Smollett-esque hoax...

I am sure once the GOP takes over the House & Senate, we'll be hearing a LOT more about this supposed "attack"..

7/20

I just don't understand why CW allows this malignant troll to puke it's shit up on his property.

Maybe with all that manure, he figures there must be a horse's ass in there somewhere. ¯\_(^-^)_/¯

It's NOT the volume of my comments that is the problem here in Weigantia..

It's my presence...

I am Sgt Joe Friday in a college class almost full of Democrat hippies... Liz is Barbara... JL is Carl...

"I've been sitting through this silly mess for a week now. I wanted to see what kind of policeman this man really is. I wanted to wait and see if he would take this nonsense that's been thrown at him, or if he was really interested in remaining in this class--if he'd come back. Well he didn't disappoint me. He's back, he's interested, and he's gonna stay. For the record, I'm a practicing attorney attending this class for the same reason as the rest of you: to learn about human nature. Well, I just took a post-graduate course with this ridiculous display. Now let me spell this out for you people in simple English: This man will be allowed to stay in this class, and complete the semester, and receive a grade in this class commensurate with his ability in this particular subject--or I'm prepared to file charges against you, Professor Grant, on his behalf."
-Carl, DRAGNET
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0565614/?ref_=ttep_ep22

:D

Kick,

I agree that Dr. Oz isn't fit to be a Senator from Pennsylvania since he's obviously a fraud.

And yet, Doc Oz *IS* the next US Senator from Pennsylvania... :D

So, obviously the American people know more than you do.. :D

Which, of course doesn't really say very much.. A slimy toadstool knows more than you do... :D

JFC,

I just don't understand why CW allows this malignant troll to puke it's shit up on his property.

Because, unlike you, CW shows more than a heapin' helpin' of integrity and doesn't ban people just because he doesn't like their facts and opinions..

You could learn something from CW... If you had any semblance of integrity yourself.. Which it's obvious you don't...

6/20

It's very gracious of you to give the troll the benefit of the doubt and assume a hearing deficit rather than point out the FACT that it is a lying ignoramus who disrespects other people's property.

I just don't understand why CW allows this malignant troll to puke it's shit up on his property.

None of what changes the FACT that Fetterman said "I run on Roe v. Wade. I celebrate the demise of Roe v. Wade."

None of "what"? You seem confused as well as deaf.

To deny this fact is simply to deny reality..

Your auditory issues are again duly noted. Not our problem.

Transcripts can be altered... The video posted tells exactly what Fetterman said for ALL to see/hear...

Unless they keep displaying repeatedly that they're deaf and can't hear properly. Maybe you should try turning it up really loud. At this point, you're just embarrassing yourself and highlighting the fact repeatedly that you're aurally deficient.

Further.. Not remembering a specific NFL team is on a BI week is NOT fraud..

It's "bye" week, and you seem to need spoon-feeding on this and help connecting the dots. Not surprising. When you're actually a resident of New Jersey who keeps holding himself out as a "fan" of the Steelers (interchangeably) and Eagles, then you appear to be a colossal "fraud" when you say stupid shit that proves you're not a Steelers fan. An actual fan would obviously know they weren't playing "tomorrow" [Nov 6], while a fraud like Dr. Oz pretending to be a fan would eff it up.

Claiming that one is fit to be a US Senator when one is CLEARLY NOT fit...

I agree that Dr. Oz isn't fit to be a Senator from Pennsylvania since he's obviously a fraud.

To deny this fact is simply to deny reality..

You can keep posting your fraud, and meanwhile I'll post the transcript of exactly what Fetterman said:

Transcripts can be altered... The video posted tells exactly what Fetterman said for ALL to see/hear...

Further.. Not remembering a specific NFL team is on a BI week is NOT fraud..

Claiming that one is fit to be a US Senator when one is CLEARLY NOT fit...

THAT is fraud...

5/20

Fetterman is CLEARLY saying:

This is fact... This is reality...

You've already proven beyond doubt you're having hearing issues. There's really no need to double and triple down on this. Maybe you had an ischemic event that affected your auditory processing.

You can keep posting your fraud, and meanwhile I'll post the transcript of exactly what Fetterman said:

And also, of course, codifying Roe v. Wade. I run on Roe v. Wade. Oz celebrates the demise of Roe v. Wade. That's the choice that we have between us... in front of us. This is one of the biggest races in this nation, and they've spent over a hundred million dollars to try to destroy me. And here we're still standing.

~ John Fetterman

John Fetterman Draws Contrast With Oz Over Abortion: I Run On Roe, Oz Celebrates Its Demise

*
You're welcome.

I won't kick an invalid while he's down, but you might want to get your auditory issue checked out.

"I run on Roe v. Wade. I celebrate the demise of Roe v. Wade."

https://twitter.com/i/status/1589049599754653699

This is fact... This is reality...

4/20

Fetterman clearly said "I" not "OZ"..

So you're saying you're deaf.

Okay.

Not factually accurate..

Fetterman clearly said "I" not "OZ"..

'I celebrate the demise of Roe v. Wade': Stroke victim John Fetterman mangles his words yet AGAIN as he appears to say he is against abortion at Senate race rally with Biden and Obama
John Fetterman misspoke at a Saturday rally in Philadelphia, saying he 'celebrated the demise of Roe v. Wade'
The Democratic Senate hopeful was joined on the campaign trail on by Joe Biden and Barack Obama
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11395171/Democrat-hopeful-John-Fetterman-appears-misspeak-saying-celebrates-demise-Roe-v-Wade.html

You only hear what you WANT to hear..

Of course, Fetterman misspoke.. Just as Doc Oz did..

Doc Oz misspoke out of innocuous and irrelevant ignorance of the NFL schedule.

Fetterman misspoke because he has a mental disability that prevents him from forming coherent words from his thoughts...

Which is more relevant to serving as a US Senator??

A mental disability??

Or an ignorance of the NFL game schedule??

:eyeroll:

3/20

Speaking of fraud...

I would wager you're going to post one.

Fetterman has now come out OPPOSED to abortion...

Nope. This actually appears to be a question of whether you're a liar or deaf or just regurgitating a fraud.

"I run on Roe v. Wade. I celebrate the demise of Roe v. Wade."

Incorrect. As anyone who actually listens to it can easily discern, Fetterman clearly says:

I run on Roe v. Wade. Oz celebrates the demise of Roe v. Wade.

~ John Fetterman

https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1589049110979817473

*
Your posting of false information on this forum that is easily verifiable is becoming a frequent occasion. This one you've puked up is from those liars at "RNC Research."

So the fraud here is yours. Good of you to notify everyone up front that you'd be "speaking of fraud," though.

Fetterman has now come out OPPOSED to abortion...

"I run on Roe v. Wade. I celebrate the demise of Roe v. Wade."
PA Senate Candidate John Fetterman

John Fetterman celebrates the demise of Roe V Wade... In his own words.. :D

2/20

Today's fraud being perpetrated on the people of Pennsylvania is Mehmet Oz (looking like a hostage) with Donald Trump hovering behind him:

Tomorrow morning, when you awaken, I want you to contact 10 people - do it at church, do it before the Steelers game, just find the time.

~ New Jersey resident Mehmet Oz, Saturday, Nov 5, 2022

*
John Fetterman easily spots the fraud:

John Fetterman
@JohnFetterman
US Senate candidate, PA

The Steelers have a bye this week

9:44 PM | Nov 5, 2022

https://twitter.com/JohnFetterman/status/1589086269271048192

*
At least Dr. Fraud didn't congratulate the Phillies who were losing the World Series at the time.

Anyways, it's a new day... :D

"Today!!!... Is a new day!!"
-Chicken Little

President Joe Biden tried (for the second time) to address this during the week. He gave a short (21-minute) speech on democracy, warning of the growing storm of political violence on the horizons. The entire speech is well worth reading, if you missed it. Biden does not mince words (we wrote about his speech earlier in the week at more length).

The New York Times chimed in with an editorial titled "America Can Have Democracy Or Political Violence. Not Both." This is where we are, as a country.

It's rather ironic when ya think about it..... :D

Biden and the Democrats have been going on and on for the last several weeks about how "Democracy is in trouble" and all other such hysterical fear mongering..

The fact is, Democracy is doing just fine.. As tomorrow's election will prove beyond ANY doubt..

It's DEMOCRATS that are in trouble.. :D

Constitutional defamation: Democrats, not democracy, are in danger this election

Historian Michael Beschloss’s warning on MSNBC — speculating that “our children will be arrested and conceivably killed” if Republicans win control of Congress — summed up the final pitch by President Biden and fellow Democrats ahead of Tuesday’s midterm elections.
https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/3721139-constitutional-defamation-democrats-not-democracy-are-in-danger-this-election/

THAT ^^^^ is what ya'all call rational political discourse??? Com'on man!! That's nothing but HYSTERICAL fact-less and base-less fear mongering...

"If elected to office Republicans are going to arrest and kill your children!!!"
-Democrats

Do Democrats actually BELIEVE this complete and utter fear mongering fact-less drivel!??

Do ya'all!?? I mean, yea.. I DO have a very low opinion of some of ya'all.. But if ya'all ACTUALLY buy into the crap that electing Republicans will result in arrest and death of Democrat children?? Well, apparently my opinion isn't nearly low enough.. :^/

The U.S. Constitution is not an elegant or poetic document, but it has one thing to commend it: It is designed to survive the worst of times and the worst of leaders, and it has done just that.

The Democrats’ democracy-or-death mantra is not just demagoguery. It is defamation of a constitutional system that has proven itself, time and again, to be up to any challenge. Democrats indeed may be in danger in this midterm — but democracy is not.
-Jonathan Turley

Our distinctive Constitutional Republic form of democracy is doing just fine..

It's DEMOCRATS who are in danger in this election..

And Democrats are in danger because of their own stoopidity, their own greed, their own hate and bigotry, their own incompetence and their own blind unquenchable thirst for political power..

And tomorrow, the American people will pass judgement on the Democrat Party..

As it should be...

1/20

Thankfully, Bryan recorded it on his latest album release in 2021, So Happy It Hurts ...

I've Been Lookin' For You

Wishbone Ash - Full Album

Did I ever tell ya about the night I drank too much cherry whiskey?

Heh

sending you all the fancy ketchups.

JL

Five Alarm Funk!

tenacious d

garfunkel and oates

christine lavin

This really tight band is led by Chris Knowles, multi-instrument musician extraordinaire and features the brilliant vocals of Rod Raslack.

If you're in Atlanta and surrounding environs, you can catch Rod playing at Sugarlands.

Parallel 49 - Rock Candy (Montrose cover) ... their second live gig, ever!!!

Nickels and Dimes

"I turned on my boy scout smile; I stood up and gave her my seat. I winked my eye and unzipped my fly and later we went up to her penthouse suite! Oh, we blew those nickels and dimes..."

I've been trying to find Dolly Parton singing her new rock tune last night at the ceremony, Rockin', without success, so far. But, here is her version of a rock classic...

Dolly Parton - Stairway To Heaven (Led Zepellin Cover)

Since I am not sure I am allowed to go over 20 comments, I will use my last comment to make my promised appearance at the CW Sunday Night Music Festival & Dance Party...

This is actually the FIRST time I have actually HIT 20 comments since the rule has been imposed.. :D Didn't think I could do it, did ya'all!!?? :D

Anyways.. Without further ado... My Contribution to the CWSNMF&DP.... :D

WAR- Why Can't We Be Friends...

:D

Ni Ni all.. See ya'all in the AM.. Bright and early.. :D

Michale 20/20 :D :D :D

Barenaked Ladies - If I Had A Million Dollars

I've been dying to play this one all day long. :-)

I think it fits in nicely with our theme for the evening - humour in music and, of course, it's just a lot of FUN ...

Cindi Lauper - Girls Just Wanna Have F-un

Why do you think that the race would make police respond differently in this situation? You think if Pelosi was black and his attacker white, the police would have shot the 80-something year old home owner?

No, no, no ... I don't think THAT! I think if the attacker was a Black man, he probably would have been shot by at least one of the officers (or was there only one officer) who witnessed the attack. See, that's the thing that jumps out at me - the police actually witnessed the attack and no one, surprisingly to me, got shot! I mean, did they even pull their guns out? It's just amazing to me ... and, yeah, I take your point about stats.

Now, are you ready to have some fun!

Seriously, Russ?

Russ!? Why are you picking on Russ over practically nothing!?

Haven't we been over and over and over on this sillyness too many times already. Why is it so hard to have a discussion without telling me how stupid I appear to be?

Kindly apply that entire sentiment of yours to the troll you defend, and if you cannot, will not, or outright refuse to see it, then you need never wonder why nobody here should ever take your admonishments seriously.

Seriously.

You do realize that all the statistics that state things like, "per capita, blacks were 7x more likely to experience a use of force against them when they encounter the police than whites" those are not meant to be used as predictions for future police actions, don't you? Those simply state what DID occur, and every case has its own set of facts and details that vary for every person involved. No one is interested in WHY the use of force was justified in the case... and it is assumed to be justified as it isn't being labeled as "excessive force" or "police brutality". People just assume race is the factor that caused the use of force... which is ignorance and deserves ridicule. Again, a "use of force" is one that is justified or else we would call it "excessive force" (I know I am repeating myself, but it needs to be repeated, sadly).

A use of force can be anything from an officer placing their hands on a subject to prevent them from moving to drawing and pointing a gun at the person. Some types of calls require police to respond using force. For instance, if police pull over a car that comes back as stolen, that "occupied stolen" call requires officers to respond with guns drawn regardless of what race, sex, sexual orientation, or age the occupants are.

Example: The pastor of a Black church forgets that the choir director took the choir in the church van to a singing competition and reports the van stolen. And on their way home, the van is pulled over by police because the plates come back as stolen when run. Because there are so many occupants in the van (12 total), there will be 4 officers responding to empty the vehicle and place everyone inside in custody. It's called a "felony stop"... all four officers have their guns drawn and occupants will exit one at a time, hands of their heads, and they will follow the officers instructions so that they can be safely handcuffed and removed from the roadway so that the next occupant can do the same until all are in custody. The choir are safely removed from the van. The police are able to determine that the driver is employed by the church as the choir director. The vehicle owner, the pastor, is contacted and he is horrified to realize his mistake. All parties are safe and able to return to the church without further delay.

Each officer is required to file a report each time they have a use of force during a call (drawing their guns) listing the number of people the force was used with, and the race, age, and sex of those the force was used with, and the reason for the use of force.

That one single call had 4 officers EACH drawing their firearm on the 12 choir members in the occupied stolen van. That means in one call, the police recorded 48 uses of force on Blacks. Completely justified. It was a mistake on the pastor's end, not the police's. But do you see how the stats don't really tell you the whole story? It happened to be a Black church van. It could have just as easily been a White church van and then 12 White choir members would have had use of force reports filed on them.

In fact, race played NO PART IN THE USE OF FORCE! NONE. Yet the police still record the info so people can take the information and use it however they choose to.

It could be that Blacks were 7x more likely to experience a use of force because Blacks were 7x more likely to be stopped on a call that requires a use of force regardless of the subject's race. So we are using race as a factor in statistics compiled from date where race isn't a factor. That doesn't really make any sense.

I'm not Russ, but I have been known to speak for him from time to time (with his approval) and I gave him a chance to make you look stupid, and he was much more nice about your easily verifiable incorrect numbers than I'm going to be.

Russ is being nice; however, I don't intend to sit here in silence and let the day go by without calling you out on your patently false information and total bollocks.

In Georgia in the here and now, there have been 2,504,956 votes cast... A record...
.
A midterm record. Say what you mean and mean what you say.

To give you some perspective, in the entire 2020 election in Georgia?? There were 2,600,000 votes cast TOTAL...

Incorrect. Not just incorrect but wildly incorrect and total utter asinine bullshit.

If the entire 2020 election in Georgia had consisted of a paltry 2.6 million votes, it is highly likely that Donald Trump would never have had to resort to breaking the law by interfering in the Georgia election in phoning the Georgia Secretary of State and asking him to find "11,780 votes." When more people vote, it favors Democrats, when less people vote it favors Republicans. This is precisely why gerrymandering and targeted voter suppression have been practiced in Georgia unabated.

https://results.enr.clarityelections.com/GA/105369/web.264614/#/summary

There were dang near almost 5,000,000 total votes cast in Georgia in the presidential election in 2020.

In the recount, there were (still) almost 5,000,000 total votes: 4,997,716 a difference of 11,779 votes... hence Trump's attempt to "find" 11,780 nonexistent votes while simultaneously filing a fake certificate with a slate of fake electors to the National Archives.

So, in the here and now, Georgians has cast ALMOST as many votes in *EARLY VOTING* than were cast TOTAL in the 2020 election!!!

Laughably and hysterically incorrect.

Now, please... Explain how "Voter Suppression" works in a such a manner as to stimulate RECORD early voting??

People will generally jump through hoops in order to give you the middle finger if you attempt to deny them to freely exercise their rights. It's called "backfiring," and it isn't exactly rocket science.

RECORD early voting that nearly meets the ENTIRE voting from 2020??

Can you explain that???

The numbers you've posted are bullshit and laughably incorrect. I would wager without hesitation that you read that utter asinine bullshit on the website of Fox News and fell like a rube for it and rushed here to regurgitate it.

Of course you can't...

Of course he can. He's just being a whole lot nicer about your obvious ignorance than I am.

I'm just surprised that they didn't.

In future, I'll try to write more clearly.

What part of my comment do you consider silly? Are you not lumping all police together with your comment that "they've shot for far less"? By all means, tell me who "THEY" are then!

Biggest reason, because there was probably no clear shot to be taken. Even without video footage to know the positioning of all involved parties, it would be next to impossible for the police to have a clear shot that did not put Paul Pelosi in the line of fire given the physical proximity required for the assault to take place.

I think you are making too many assumptions there ...

Sorry, I thought I had properly addressed [89] was to you, but I just saw that I didn't use your name. Wanted to make it clear that I wasn't ignoring you. :)

R

Seriously, Russ? Haven't we been over and over and over on this sillyness too many times already. Why is it so hard to have a discussion without telling me how stupid I appear to be?

Biggest reason, because there was probably no clear shot to be taken. Even without video footage to know the positioning of all involved parties, it would be next to impossible for the police to have a clear shot that did not put Paul Pelosi in the line of fire given the physical proximity required for the assault to take place.

I mean, they've shot for far less, many times before??

Police in Canada and in the US are extremely well versed in when they are legally justified to use deadly force. Police are required to use the minimum amount of force necessary to effect the lawful purpose intended. If your actions pose an imminent threat to life of others, then deadly force is the reasonable minimum require to protect life. It's why officers don't try to shoot the kneecap of someone trying to stab you with a knife... there is good chance that won't stop the person from killing you. And let me be very clear, once that threshold of making deadly force the minimum amount of force necessary to stop someone is met, the officers have a duty to stop that person.

So if you have seen officers shoot someone where deadly force was not justified, then I am guessing those folks are no longer officers and are in prison.

Other reason: every officer is different! You seem to want to lump all police into one monolithic brain. THEY do not move and think using one brain, no matter how hard the public wants to lump them all together. We don't fear all doctors when one rapes a patient. We don't call all nurses murderers because one demented nurse "frees" those she was caring for of their suffering. But we judge all police when we disapprove of the actions of one officer.

When you say "they've shot for far less", are you saying that you are aware of the officers responding to the Pelosi home being involved in past police shootings??? Because if not, then THEY have not shot others for far less! Do you see how that is dishonest and not how you would want to be judged?

One point that few people realize is that when deadly force is justified, when that officer chooses to attempt a different way of stopping the imminent threat, they do so at the risk of their own life. They don't want to kill anyone unless they have to...and they will put their own lives at risk to stop the person without killing them. And trust me, this happens far more often than police simply using deadly force when it is reasonable to do so.

You have a point. I've been nay saying this whole troll rehabilitation endeavor from the Get go because I've concluded it doesn't care about anything whatsoever except for being paid attention to. I've watched it escalate the outrageousness until it gets someone to bite.

Current parameters suck, Mr. Weigant. They aren't working, so I say,

put it on a word limit/column inch limit per each comment section, period. The moment it hits whatever the limit is -- boom! Done, see ya next time!

BIGOT
noun
noun: bigot; plural noun: bigots

a person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.

Yes.. Which EXACTLY describes you and your bigoted hatred of President Trump supporters..

So, yes, I am a bigot.. I am prejudiced and antagonistic towards child molesters, terrorists and Trump/America hating Democrats..

As you have proven, you are ALSO a bigot... As you are prejudiced and antagonistic against Trump/America supporters...

The only difference between you and I is that I recognize the reality and human nature.. While you continue to deny the facts and deny reality.. :D

Jean Luc,

I read gt's commentary when it was posted. as cynical hyperbole it works, but it isn't strictly true. CW set the rules, and m has followed them. gt would have been mistaken and I wouldn't have commented at all, except that you have been criticizing a specific practice i consider helpful, namely mushing a bunch of responses into the same post so they don't spill out into endless diatribes.

"I know, right!?"
-Felix, WRECK IT RALPH

:D

19/20

A master class and dead on accurate.

Every word.

I read gt's commentary when it was posted. as cynical hyperbole it works, but it isn't strictly true.

Hyperbole or not, he nailed down perfectly the reactions of you and EM... at least so far.

CW set the rules, and m has followed them.

Your opinion is patently false in regards to particular aspects of the promulgated rules, and no amount of your posting otherwise is going to change that fact.

gt would have been mistaken and I wouldn't have commented at all, except that you have been criticizing a specific practice i consider helpful, namely mushing a bunch of responses into the same post so they don't spill out into endless diatribes.

If you think CW promulgated the 20-comment rule with the idea that Michale should then thereafter begin the practice of mushing a plethora of responses regarding multiple different subjects to multiple different posters into a single long response and refer to it as one comment, then we can agree to disagree. If you actually read those rules in their entirety and you came away with that belief, then *shrug* you're claiming CW's numerical limitation was an invitation to get creative and increase that specifically promulgated quantity in a way that would render it superfluous.

As for the remainder of those rules not relating to quantity, if you can also read those rules and the commentary within them in their entirety and make the claim that Michale has followed them, then in the immortal words of yourself: "As cynical hyperbole it works, but it isn't strictly true."

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/virtuous%20circle

So you are a bigot? A proud and out loud bigot? It's not my birthday, but thank you for such a wonderful gift... bigot boy! But first, let's look at the definition of "bigot" before we go any further, mmmkay?

BIGOT
noun
noun: bigot; plural noun: bigots

a person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.

Hatred towards child molesters and terrorists (like your MAGA crowd on Jan. 6) would not be considered "unreasonable". In fact, your disdain for these folks could easily be deemed as justified and/or "reasonable". But I agree that the hatred YOU constantly demonstrate on here is unreasonable and that you clearly are (as you so proudly proclaimed) a BIGOT!

You know it's bad when someone is trying to reclaim and change how a word like "bigot" or "racist" is defined and viewed! You realize that the words fit you, but instead of changing your views, you want everyone else to change how they define and feel about the words that describe you.

Yes, yes you did and I believe that is the correct answer. I just wanted to hear what Russ's thoughts are on the subject.

I read gt's commentary when it was posted. as cynical hyperbole it works, but it isn't strictly true. CW set the rules, and m has followed them. gt would have been mistaken and I wouldn't have commented at all, except that you have been criticizing a specific practice i consider helpful, namely mushing a bunch of responses into the same post so they don't spill out into endless diatribes.
JL

Did they provide any FACTS to support their claims??

Actually, the WAPost was simply reporting on the retraction issued by NBC and the reporter who first put the story out.

Also, look at the charging papers for what the police said occurred. Pelosi was being attacked when police first encountered him.

blaaa blaaaa blaaaaa

So, what you are saying is that the GOP *TRIED* to voter suppress, but they failed at it.. As per your norm, you provide absolutely ZERO facts to support your claim that the GOP even TRIED to voter suppress...

But at least you admit that there was no voter suppression...

OK... That's all I wanted to hear... Your concession that there was no voter suppression...

I accept your concession... :D

BBBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

18/20

Easy. MAGA Republicans are failures. They screw up everything that they attempt. Like Trump Steaks, Trump Airlines, and multiple casinos (which is next to impossible to NOT make money running, but Trump still managed to bankrupt), cult members have proven themselves to be as inept as their leader. Just like their failed attempts at insurrection, Republicans' attempts to suppress the Black vote have failed...and failed spectacularly! They failed because Abrams and others in the state worked extremely hard to canvas communities to make sure people had their voter registration info current and knew how to get ballots by mail to avoid the long lines that many voting locations experience on election day.

Republicans also failed because they gave the people lots of reasons to vote against them! Voting against providing medical coverage for servicemembers suffering the effects of burn pits, stripping women and members of the LGBTQ+ community of the right to determine what medical procedures they can seek, and Republicans continued support of traitors who led a violent, but failed, insurrection attempt on January 6 are all reasons the voter suppression laws have failed to keep people from voting.

Is this really beyond your comprehension levels? Do you enjoy looking foolish by making such ignorant arguments that can be refuted and explained away so easily?

goode trickle predicted it in great detail just two weeks ago.

Yes, sir, exactly what I meant... right down to the JL and Liz sentiments.

Mike breaks out his AHD victim card.

~ goode trickle

http://www.chrisweigant.com/2022/10/21/friday-talking-points-student-loan-relief-in-sight/#comment-199714

You are correct..

Yes, I am definitely correct; it's a terminal condition, but I've learned to live with it.

As for yourself, you are now on (archived) written record admitting that you forego Sunday night because you don't want to be disruptive and spoil the fun for other people.

That wasn't exactly factually accurate..

Of course it wasn't, and that's because you only applied it to Sunday night. Now if you could extrapolate that out and see your way clear to applying it on a 24/7/365 basis.

That should be amended to read, "My presence causes other people to be disruptive."

Okay fine. So amended: You are disruptive, and your presence causes disruption. I believe that was the "moderator's" entire reason for placing you into the "penalty box." Nice of you to step up and admit to it, not that it was at all necessary, obviously.

As you yourself have proven several times in this commentary thread alone..

My opinion of you is as dead-on-balls accurate as your opinion of yourself, and that's definitely why I quoted it and did not miss the opportunity to agree with you.

Thank you for pointing out that out.. :D

Thank yourself for pointing "out that out."

No appreciable difference, but the hall monitors are giddy!

Rather predictable, wouldn't you say?

You are correct.. That wasn't exactly factually accurate..

That should be amended to read, "My presence causes other people to be disruptive."

As you yourself have proven several times in this commentary thread alone..

Thank you for pointing out that out.. :D

17/20

Why can't you just come to the damned party!!!?

~ Elizabeth Miller

First off, my presence would likely be disruptive and I don't want to spoil yer's and JL's fun..

Well, now... this is certainly progress, and who am I to remain silent and pretend I don't see it?

Since you obviously know for a fact that you're "disruptive" and "don't want to spoil" the "fun," why can't you allow yourself to apply CW's "penalty box" rules and that 100% dead-on-balls-accurate assessment of yourself to every day of the week rather than reserving it for Sunday night?

At this point, you cannot deign to pretend not to know exactly what you're doing here after you basically just admitted it here in writing.

The Independent
2022

A young journalist discovers a conspiracy involving a U.S. Presidential candidate that could change the election and the fate of the country.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3416670/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0

You can't go wrong with this movie..

An awesome Election Movie that will knock yer socks off.. :D

16/20

Ha!

'Silence gives assent' is a ridiculous meme.

I am reminded of both Joe Biden and CW who have, in the last week or so, made the claim of "Silence Is Complicity." and "Condoning By Silence" respectively....

Personally, I completely agree with you... Such a concept IS ridiculous.. But it's ridiculous no matter WHICH side of the political aisle uses it..

I'm just sayin'... :D

But, in the interests of Weigantian amity, I'll refrain from belaboring the point... :D

Even Kick said it shouldn't count when I said it should. I have come around to her way of thinking on this. :)

Far be it from me to belay such an universe-shattering consensus.. :D

JL,

I believe you had a movie request in yer queue.... :D Did ya'all get to it yet?? :D It's definitely a great Election Night movie to watch.. :D

15/20