Gromnir

am in a curious position: am believing national debt crisis and income inequality is the two biggest national scope problems. am recognizing how difficult it is to fix either 'cause obvious solutions to income inequality is gonna magnify debt. am also one o' the people who saw as axiomatic the pandemic would magnify income inequality. young people today will still be able to buy houses and go to college in the future, but will be increasing difficult unless those young people is from families at the more economic advantageous end o' the income inequality curve. even so, horatio alger stories is possible in 2021, but too many people use such real life stories to perpetuate the myth that the system works fine 'cause a person may indeed go from lowest rungs o' economic strata to the top in one generation. increasing income inequality is in large part what made trumpism possible. polarization political increases as does economic pain. hurlshot is no doubt aware o' the nativism which accompanied the 1920s, yes? am baffled by how little we recall o' the 1920s and how similar is the problems. nevertheless, stephen miller, god help us all, were unapologetic using calvin coolidge policies as a freaking guide for the trump administration. in 2021, inner city urban families is suffering from same core problems as working class americans in the heartland, but thanks to opportunists like steve bannon, hundreds of millions o' people functional sharing the same fox hole see each other as enemies. same nonsense as the 1920s. provide people good jobs, economic security and a little optimism 'bout the future and much o' the anger and most o' the polarization will evaporate. easier said than done, eh? and then we will still have looming and crushing debt... HA! Good Fun!

unless he decides a particular program isn't stupid. however, he will literal kill legal charged peace officers enacting democratic passed and Constitutional laws if he decides the law/program is offensive to his personal sensibilities. *shrug* you are not gonna make headway. HA! Good Fun!

which is exactly what giuliani were faced with when trying mob bosses. HA! Good Fun!

let the investigations play out before trying to predict all charges. sure, for many there is gonna be enough evidence today to charge something and believe it will stick. investigate and discover how much persons knew and when they knew and how many were involved in planning ahead and during the event. *chuckle* would be ironic if giuliani were subject to rico, no? HA! Good Fun!

am not sure why some people believe a recognition that the january 6 rioters were a mob somehow precludes the possibility that many people and sub-groups w/i the mob were engaging in seditious behavior. am also gonna admit that the video linked by @Achilles has the speaker beginning with observations which were new to us. have watched a bit of fox and cnn. have read a fair amount at npr, washington post and many national newspapers. the description o' the mob elements as highly skilled were a bit o' a straw man in our personal experience as have literal never seen that claim made in the week since the Capitol riot. am not doubting a few pundits identified some select rioters or groups o' rioters as being militarized to some degree, but we all saw bison horn guy and who amongst us thought he were an element o' a well-trained militia group? the folks being arrested so far, or who is showing up frequent in news stories, is hvac repairmen from chicago or real estate agents from new jersey. an olympic medal swimmer were arrested. the singer in the article we linked earlier didn't strike us as skilled in modern combat techniques. the retired fireman who was bludgeoning cops with a fire extinguisher may not have been a professional, but he clear crossed a line and that line were not fuzzy and tough to recognize. how many of the rioters who entered Capitol property w/o permission were hoping to at least delay the electoral college counting? not skilled professionals. however, is tough to not see trump as A inciting cause and many were bent on actions which fall w/i any dictionary or legal definition o' seditiious. a seditious mob is not an oxymoron. HA! Good Fun!

we were a bit older than three. our visual memory is excellent. our audio memory is ok. olfactory and taste? 85 were a long time past. if somebody put before us dixie cups with varieties o' not readily available cola soda and then asked us to pick out new coke, am not having a high degree o' confidence we could accurate identify. we literal tasted the stuff on less than ten separate occasions during one summer more than three decades in the rear view mirror. HA! Good Fun!

wrong new coke. https://www.foodandwine.com/news/new-coke-vs-coca-cola-taste-test HA! Good Fun!

HA! Good Fun!

have not bothered to check, but memory tells us it were something in the neighborhood o' 200k blind taste tests which coca cola used to inform their choice to change formulas. an overwhelming % o' people preferred new coke, but the rejection and even anger from the change were no less real. many people hated the idea of changing coke, so they genuine hated new coke even if they preferred new coke in blind taste tests. HA! Good Fun!

Vaccine reserve was already exhausted when Trump administration vowed to release it, dashing hopes of expanded access When Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar announced this week that the federal government would begin releasing coronavirus vaccine doses held in reserve for second shots, no such reserve existed, according to state and federal officials briefed on distribution plans. The Trump administration had already begun shipping out what was available beginning at the end of December, taking second doses directly off the manufacturing line. ... so it goes. HA! Good Fun!

precise 'cause it were a mob is the reason why is unfair to make broad generalizations. same were the case during the summer. difference is there were literal thousands who were breaking into the Capitol with the intent o' delaying or changing the electoral count. there were no doubt many in that mob bent on sedition. likewise there were many who were just going along with a crowd and thought it were being patriotic to show their support for their President. however, as we noted elsewhere, the legal definition o' sedition is a bit more broad than gd's definition. damn democratic process. the battle o' bower hill does not preclude the appropriateness o' charging many involved in the events o' january 6 with crimes o' sedition. HA! Good Fun!

rail 'gaist the bad and stoopid laws, which you observe is a personal measure divorced from any objective standard, as anti-freedom while you tout your support o' democracy is hard to square... and fact you do not realize the problem is amusing to us. just one example. is absolute nothing which precludes both of us being thickheaded. @BruceVC *sigh* as a libertarian, gd is already antagonistic to democracy. his various no compromise positions on what he deems is essential liberty rights, positions which go well beyond even what the most ardent Constitutionalist will advocate, is a rejection o' basic democratic principles. recall, gd stated he would kill peace officers lawful directed to retrieve his rusty chainsaw while acting under color o' law. he don't get it, and he is not alone. you can be a patriotic american and be anti-democratic. recent events should make that point abundant obvious. HA! Good Fun!

and again, democracy is the method by which in the United Sates of America, The Government of, by and for the people, decides which stupid ideas will be made law. prohibiting eating and drinking while operating an automobile is anti liberty and stoopid to gd, but other individuals disagree with that assessment. so, which stoopid ideas become laws? you aren't against democracy? however, you are against the corrupt and untrustworthy The Government as if the government is some kinda monolithic thing divorceable from people choosing through votes those representatives who will advance their causes. you just don't get the whole democracy thing. government is bad because through the democratic process it makes choices gd disagrees with? is anti liberty and corrupt 'cause it is possible for the government to do that which is disagreeable to gd? not all government is bad though. protect gd land and his quiet enjoyment o' his chainsaw? so, again, who decides? your ideology is transparent self-serving. new coke was not a democratic choice. the company which made the choice did blind taste tests by the thousands and overwhelming results showed people preferred new coke. unfortunate, the informed and arguable intelligent choice o' replacing original coke with a flavor people preferred ignored the predictable irrationality and unreasonableness o' purchasers. all too often, the right choice might be the stoopid choice 'cause the people are unreasonable, irrational, easily distracted and prone to making decisions based on emotion as 'posed to intellect. gd mistakes a flaw in government with an inability to recognize human nature for what it is... which were the point o' hobbes' state o' nature observation. democracy is not a system o' government intended to implement the least stoopid laws. plato's philosopher king is perhaps what you are looking to achieve? through process o' deliberation and reflection, democratic laws is passed and agreed 'pon by consensus o' the people or their elected representatives resulting in limits and restraints which the people as a whole will agree to observe 'cause o' the recognition the The People is the government. "no taxes" were the cry o' the revolutionaries o' 1776? nope. "no stupid taxes?" nope. "no taxation without representation." sound familiar? oh, and we would not be revolted if gd said he were anti democracy. he is. you just can't admit it. HA! Good Fun!

Tampa Bay singer used voice for screaming during Capitol riot Audrey Ann Southard spent years helping kids find their creative voices and strengthening her own. The Spring Hill vocal coach and piano teacher sang like an angel when she posted videos of herself crooning Norah Jones’ Don’t Know Why or belting out Memory from Cats, and when she went to Sicily in 2012 for an international music competition, she won. That led to a showcase on a stage inside New York’s Carnegie Hall. More recently, Southard used her powerful soprano to scream at police officers that they should “tell f--king Pelosi we’re coming for her! F--king traitorous c--ts, we’re coming! We’re coming for all of you!” She was part of the mob that stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. ... am now gonna read everything by christopher spata. that is an epic freaking lede. HA! Good Fun!

'Hello, Nice FBI Lady': Capitol Hill Jamoke Emailed FBI Video of His Crimes, Court Documents Say According to court documents, Lyons, who initially denied his involvement in the incident but confirmed he was in D.C. at the time, said he had a “dream” he was nearby when something similar to the far-right invasion of inside Congress occurred. But investigators clearly weren’t buying his story and showed Lyons a mountain of evidence suggesting he was involved, including Twitter and Instagram posts Lyons made while he was in D.C. Lyons, who underestimated the investigative powers of the FBI, was surprised at how quickly they had linked him to the events of last week and admitted his guilt. “Wow, you are pretty good,” he said when he was confronted with overwhelming evidence of his actions on Capitol Hill. ... HA! Good Fun!

review. you defended multiple times... and Gromnir didn't respond. our memory is just that elephantine. HA! Good Fun!

Retired Firefighter Charged with Beating Three Capitol Police with Extinguisher During Capitol Insurrection "Federal prosecutors have charged Robert Sanford, a 55-year-old from Pennsylvania, with four federal crimes, including allegations that he assaulted three Capitol Police officers by hitting them in the head with a fire extinguisher." ... got nothing to add.

stoopid 'cause gd says is stoopid. oh, and whatever the flaw, the prohibition 'gainst eating and drinking by drivers is in fact reasonable and rational. is curious how we got prohibitions 'gainst distracted driving which includes texting, but somehow eating fries and a burger while driving is okie dokie. am getting that an entire industry o' drive-thru restaurants depends on individuals being able to eat and drink while operating their vehicle, but is inherent less safe. democratic elected officials decide the social costs o' injuries and accidents is too much? stoopid 'caus gd says so. btw, you complained 'bout such as an example o' how we ain't genuine living in a free country. posed as a liberty interest, not unwise. the laws and spending which gd believes is stoopid and unacceptable exist most often 'cause democrat elected officials, representing their constituencies, decide how to spend gd's taxes and consider which o' his interests need be protected. the real problem is that they choose not the way gd wishes. is no big conspiracy or fundamental flaw in The Government. they, through predictable and messy democratic process, chose wrong. is not the freedom issue gd all too often indulges. am gonna get you to enlightenment eventual... would be satisfied with a bit more self fact checking, but we won't give up on this either. HA! Good Fun!

glad you put the question mark. the point is you don't recognize the disconnect. you appear to balk at criticizing the democratic process, but you lament the inevitable and intended results. am recalling you rail against a nj prohibition against eating/drinking by a driver in moving vehicles as an attack on liberty and no business o' the government... the government of, by and for the people. you never seem to connect how the offenses o' government you most often cite is the result o' the freaking democratic process working as designed. sheesh. HA! Good Fun!

viscous circle insanity continues. once again, who decides which stuff gets dispensed with and what is important? gd wants the untrustworthy and corrupt government to protect those rights and further goals he deems important... important enough. current we got representative democracy as the means by which the important stuff is identified. the government, our government, decides. so, who should decide? democracy isn't working for gd save for when government decisions align with gd choices. untrustworthy and corrupt. HA! Good Fun!

y'know, if trump were a habitual drunk driver, with a long record o' alcohol related moving violations, and he went ahead contributed to an accident in which a police officer died, how long do you think it would take to suspend his driver's license? perhaps drunk driving trump's supporters point out that donald's family is watching him closely and a week from now he is going to have a limo service and wouldn't be driving anymore. would anybody argue it were a good idea to let hypothetical drunk trump behind the wheel during the intervening week... or ever? it's only one week remaining? is so weird the support for trump and the excuses for allowing him to continue being President particular after january 6. HA! Good Fun!

this is hardly universal, which is why the fbi has warned of potential attacks in all 50 states contemporaneous with the inauguration. a considerable % o' the US population still believes the election were stolen from trump even if they have no meaningful proof to support such a belief and regardless o' their awareness joe biden, and the existential threat he represents, is inevitable after january 20. many o' these people are more angry 'cause the last legal obstacles to a biden Presidency is gone. what choice but force o' arms remains, eh? is madness, but tell us it ain't real. dare you. so what if trump loyalists now believe the biden transition is inevitable. the vast majority of trump loyalists in Congress and the wh knew biden were gonna be President before january 6. many such loyalists were placating the President. we were told, "what harm could come from letting the President exhaust his arguments in court?" and how many republican Congressmen nevertheless voted to object to the electoral vote count after the riot? trump is no less dangerous because is clear he won't be the President for another four years. arguable more dangerous. trump loyalists cannot stop the President from writing executive orders, making announcements and proclamations or giving direct instructions to any number o' persons in the executive branch or military. the joint chiefs o' staff released a warning 'cause they is clear concerned that at least a few in the military place loyalty to trump before their oath to the Constitution. house minority leader mccarthy and vice president pence couldn't even get trump to help them as they were under siege in the Capitol and you nevertheless believe they can stop the President from self or national immolation if he commits himself to some destructive course of action? am utter baffled by the belief that the danger trump poses has passed. even if trump doesn't manage to burn down dc before the 20th (am not personal believing such will happen,) am unable to see confidence that the executive occupant o' the oval office is mollified or harmless can be attributed to any argument save for faith. who hasn't been watching the past four years o' the trump Presidency? HA! Good Fun!

and every time trump does something unforgivable and is afterwards chastised by republicans and media, folks like collins and blunt says they cannot imagine the President doing something irrational and capricious... again. how many times does trump need do again before is too much? if you concede trump is irrational and capricious, and you acknowledge trump has the capacity to do great harm, then what is the basis for hope that this time trump won't do the unthinkable, improbable or impossible? am not picking on bruce, but having seen the same curious optimism voiced by numerous individuals here and at various news sites, am baffled by the confidence that this time is different. how many times do you need to see the scorpion sting the frog before it sets in that the scorpion cannot be trusted? HA! Good Fun!

curious. do you believe trump is not a threat because he lacks capacity to do harm or 'cause he will choose to do no harm? trump has the capacity to break much in a week. do you depend on the better angles of his nature to conclude he is no threat? do you believe he fears practical consequences 'cause breaking more would be unreasonable and lead to a less beneficial outcome for the President? trump is a potential threat now and in the future. particular with all the unity theory o' executive power adherents trump and barr ensconced in the executive, is worth noting that all authority in the entirety o' the executive branch is vested in one office: POTUS. am thinking you do not comprehend what he could break in a week. as for the future, his head is full of secrets and do you genuine believe trump will maintain those confidences for love of country if a foreign power or domestic actor with ill intent offers him a deal which is to trump's benefit? GOP Sen. Roy Blunt Says He Thinks Trump ‘Is Unlikely’ to ‘Touch the Hot Stove’ Again After Capitol Mob Riots ... is only a week remaining in the current President's term in office and those in trump's inner circle appear to be trying to restrain the President, which is good news. nevertheless, am curious at to why anybody would be willing to gamble on trump being reasonable, rational and reserved for the next twenty-four hours much less until the 20th. assume he will do something stoopid is a safe bet. assume trump will do something dangerous is the prudent course o' action. HA! Good Fun!

the next years is gonna result in a whole lotta trump lawsuits and criminal cases which trump will no longer have Presidential privelage to avoid. as bad as trump appears today, there is a good possibility he will be viewed far more critical in two or three years. many in the trump base will never believe anything bad 'bout trump, but november and the georgia runoffs made clear that the suburban republicans were already moving away from trump. trump's imminent and vulgar legal theatre will not polish his image with suburban housewives. today, many republicans is being forced to go on record with their support for trump, and such support will be used mercilessly by democrats and fellow republicans in the not so distant future. numerous senators, 'cause o' their lengthy terms, are able to take a more expansive view o' what trump support means for the party and for themselves personal. keep in mind, individuals such as mcconnell and graham just won reelection. they are safe from being primaried for a long time. however, anybody up for reelection in 2022 already started their reelection campaign efforts in earnest, and at the moment, trump is popular with his base. devil and the deep blue sea. oh, and trump is ignorant, erratic and narcissistic. he is still dangerous for the next week and beyond. am not certain why people refuse to accept that reality. potential for trump harm remains now and in the future. the current efforts by democrats puts pressure on republicans to take efforts to reign in the mistake they collective made possible through four years o' embarrassing enabling. the push for impeachment didn't have much downside for democrats. impeachment with possible senate trial looming prevents the republican party from being able to pretend as if the last four years o' complicit behaviour were just a fleeting aberration which many in the gop will in the future attempt to marginalize as you saw 'em marginalizing the relevance o' january six during the debates earlier today on the floor o' the house. recorded vigorous defense 'o trump and the events o' january 6 is gonna be replayed over and over again and for a long time to come. successful prevent trump from running ever again? nix his security detail and travel allowance? bonuses. HA! Good Fun!