Gromnir

old people tend to have multiple health conditions so, duh. HA! Good Fun!

underlined is hyperbole. the most common value method in eminent domain situations is fair market value. of course there is horror stories where a property owner gets screwed, and often a property owner has a very different notion o' how fair market should be determined than does the government. "i wouldn't sell for less than $500,000" does not mean the minimum market value o' the property is +$500k. income generating property made worthless by government efforts on adjacent properties also results in holdouts getting screwed by an income approach. am also disagreeing 'bout second amendment. am thinking the framers, not just madison as there were multiple drafts which were debated and altered and agreed 'pon by the assembled, had valid reasons for adding... and the portion gd finds offensive were added after reflection. the original right to bear arms bit had no mention o' militia, but every subsequent draft did. simple declaring a general right to bear arms were considered and rejected. keep in mind that for near 150 years, there weren't all that much confusion and consternation 'bout the second amendment. is genuine a bit curious how the right to bear arms evolved. were original presumed to be unincorporated and only applicable to the Fed government. the municipal and frequent draconian regulations o' firearms and/or ammo were widespread until the 20th century. for most o' US existence, folks took for granted that firearms were subject to state and local level regulation. original intent readings o' the second amendment is problematic precise 'cause gd knows enough history to recognize what kinda weapons were appropriate for a militia which were to be our alternative to a national standing military. furthermore, a textualist reading means we cannot ignore the well-regulated militia bit. sadly, gd is afeared those freedom hating activists on the Court will ignore text and history and point out how we have a military so the second amendment may have been rendered m00t. is no reading which gives gd room to breathe safe. there isn't a way to read the second amendment to make it a blanket and unqualified right to bear arms, which is appropriate 'cause such were the original draft text and the framers purposeful changed it. HA! Good Fun!

all of which ignores the point how the dubious aspect of a single study was being used to undermine the danger of covid-19 in general. it is unnecessary to chase rabbits. the known dangers of covid-19 is terrible enough to make any sane person wonder why, just as a random example, the US efforts to combat the threat were so lackadaisical and uninspired. is there authoritarian strongmen doing the reverse and using the virus to crush dissent? yeah, but such exploitive behaviour doesn't change the already facts regarding the dangers o' covid-19. again, is no question those in power may/will exploit fear for selfish reasons. is fair to question the motives and means o' authoritarian actors when they magnify real dangers. that said, just another virus responses is not particular constructive or wise given how readily this virus spreads in addition to the known mortality and additional long-term health consequences faced by many survivors... not that am accusing majestic o' such. opposite. even so, is best to not let the naysayers distract with relative irrelevancies. one dubious study, accurate reported, does not somehow undermine the known dangers o' covid-19. HA! Good Fun!

much in the post is inaccurate, but more important, with the memory o' a goldfish, you already forgot the gateway pundit claim you made. you had never heard o' it. sheesh. HA! Good Fun!

Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie says the United States is fighting two pandemics “We have to own the questions of leadership and the questions about policies,” Lurie said. “There is a lot to be discussed here on that and in the future. It is heartbreaking. These are needless deaths. We should be similar to most countries on this planet, and yet, we are an embarrassment, a tragic embarrassment. That is where we stand.” huh. in the past we only ever liked the eagles when they played the cowboys, or more rare, the patriots... and perhaps green bay. not much o' a fan o' the phillies or the flyers neither, and has been a long time since dr. j played for the sixers. for a minute or two we had positive feelings 'bout a philadelphia sports team? who woulda' thunk it? HA! Good Fun!

the terrible part 'bout our elephantine memory is that we need remember even vol psts. the rest is just nonsense which pretty much complete ignores yours previous fail 'bout blm and its organization and leadership as well as trying to convince us o' the fox news narrative regarding vigilantes who bring firearms to a protest. HA! Good Fun!

Jim Gaffigan just a comedian and no more relevant than anybody else. nevertheless, has been all too easy to pretend as if the common sense o' salt of the earth midwesterners had disappeared long before their 401ks. am relieved, even if we know the feeling is fleeting and ephemeral. HA! Good Fun! ps @Guard Dog is making the same mistake as vol and is being led down the rabbit hole by trump. there is crazy protesters and violent protesters and stoopid protesters. look, am the guy who keeps saying is wrong to generalize cops and law enforcement departments even if we do see a problem with training in general. not fair to blame all cops or even all police departments. is similar not fair to blame all protesters or most. however, it is becoming far easier to blame many protesters even if they is being confronted by unsavory d-bags like the seventeen year old with the ar-15 and by too many cops who is looking to use tear gas and rubber bullets on somebody. for the folks who listen to conservative radio and watch fox news, the streets are running red with blood and only trump can save 'em from anarchy... regardless o' the fact the anarchy is happening now, with trump as President. oh, and for gd in particular, am thinking the protest related fatalities dwindle substantial if people recognize just how asinine it is to be carrying 'round firearms at protests. there will be tempers flaring, in the darkness and accidents will happen. what could possibly go wrong if you have people carrying firearms in such a situation? isn't a matter o' second amendment rights. is 'bout good sense. just 'cause law says you can have your loaded ar-15 as you protests or protest the protesters, doesn't mean you should.

blm, as o' a couple months ago, were not trademarked. as o' the beginning o' this year, back when we still cared 'bout such stuff and stayed educated, there had been more than a dozen attempts to trademark blm. were even a european attempt. is some slogans which got trademarked, but not "blm," or "black lives matter." am suspecting the trademark efforts has increased since we looked. the biggest problem facing a blm trademark is all the different groups who use blm as their name and slogan. given how widespread is the usage, is difficult to procure trademark rights, and such should only become more difficult. honest don't know 'bout antifa as it were founded in europe like 80 years past and am not sure o' the history o' the euro trademark efforts. regardless, what would be a paradoxical question for a more reflective person is water off a duck's back for vol. such willful indifference must be blissful, no? argument: any group or organization had a founder or founders and those founders constitute a kind of leadership. all groups, no matter how decentralized has a functional leadership history and cannot be described as leaderless. blm had founders and is a recognizable entity. therefore, blm has leaders. now is obvious such logic is strained, but vol cannot see the problem. if any o' the premises fail, so too does the argument, and belief founder=leadership, particular years and even decades removed is a curious conclusion, particular for a group purposefully designed to avoid the need for leadership. is literal dozens, if not hundreds o' groups claiming to be part o' blm with no direct involvement with the founders o' blm or any group whose origin might be attributed to those founders. again, is part o' the difficulty with blm gaining trademark protections 'cause is not particular convincing when any one blm group claims to be the blm. this is another case where vol read something somewhere and got confused... probable 'cause gatewaypundit or breitbart intentional tried to mislead him. blm, as o' june 2020, did not have a trademark, but, for example, a sportswear manufacturer did get a slogan trademarked which included "black lives matter." am honest not recalling the exact slogan, but were ~ a dozen words in length. had to be a bit wordy to be sufficient distinct and unique from blm. 'course this all undercuts vol's conclusion 'bout the blm organization. nobody has a blm trademark in part 'cause in spite o' multiple efforts to do so, there ain't been anybody who sufficient identified as the blm. if vol has a question 'bout trademark, he shouldn't rely on the internet, and particular not the corners where he tends to lurk. HA! Good Fun!

so... ignoring the +185k dead for a moment, a considerable large number o' people had to be hospitalized and a noteworthy number o' those folks will indeed face respiratory problems perhaps for the rest o' their lives. nevertheless, 'cause o' some random report you don't link, you are wondering if the concerns 'bout the virus is overblown. ... okie dokie. ignoring the asymptomatic stuff complete, though the asymptomatic spread makes the disease more dangerous 'cause is no obvious way to detect who may be spreading (particular as US testing, tracing and quarantine is so bad) +185k deaths and any a significant number o' people with long term diminished health should be enough to convince any sane person that the virus is a serious threat. now show us a report from a dr. which claims covid-19 will make you susceptible to the demon sex trump's dr. warned us 'bout. we would dismiss outta hand and covid-19 would not be any less a serious threat 'cause we ignored the possibility o' losing our soul 'cause a previous covid-19 infection. the stuff you already know 'bout covid-19, stuff which ain't actual debateable, should be more than enough to convince you covid-19 is an unparallelled health threat the likes o' which we has not seen for a long time. HA! Good Fun!

63% support Black Lives Matter as recognition of discrimination jumps: POLL those numbers have changed since june. is now close to 50-50 in most national polls, and in a few battlegrounds, blm is underwater, so to speak. fair isn't part o' trump's vocabulary. you think trump planned a trip to kenosha to unify the country? he wants fires and mayhem, and if he doesn't get as much pyrotechnics as he wants, he will show images from protests in spain. trump's supporters don't care 'bout reasons. they want an excuse to continue supporting trump and the excuse need not be unassailable or even believable. HA! Good Fun!

we were engaged... once. were long time past. were somebody we met while we were at boalt, though assume she were a fellow student would be a mistake. met her while surfing, and weren't at all like tank girl from point break, and we sure as hell weren't no johnny utah, though our fiance's father were fbi. we got a job back in the midwest and that pretty much killed the engagement. were some little things which became problems and we knew the little things would only grow. end of engagement. were the closest we ever got. HA! Good Fun! ps is no longer boalt as a few years ago the school decided it were kinda shameful to name the school after a blatant racist. so-called cancel culture? good.

broad generalizations about the protesters isn't fair. however, by now it should be apparent trump and his followers don't care about fair. the lack of leadership amongst the protest movements is an excellent way to thwart authoritarian efforts to shut down a movement. if there is no metaphorical head to be severed, then the government loses one of its more effective and time honoured tactics. with the availability of smartphones, social media and the internet to connect it all, you don't need any kinda leader to organize a movement. trump, and people like vol, will continue to generalize protests and protesters to an unreasonable degree, and there is no nationally recognizable individual or leadership council to push back on such unfairness. when a protester does engage in violence, there isn't a leader who will go on tv and publicly repudiate the violence, making it clear that the protesters in general reject violence. when elements of the protesters begin arming themselves because of the presence of armed militia groups and cops are using increasingly violent means, there is no leadership council pointing to john lewis' example as a way to convince protesters that violence and carrying firearms will not help the cause. lack of leadership is an extremely effective way to combat authoritarian government efforts at suppression, and if portland or kenosha was in china, we would advocate such a model. unfortunate, it's an election year in a country struggling to hold onto its democracy in the face of an administration increasingly dismissive of the rule of law and of personal freedoms. trump's appeals to fear and ignorance will reach more than a few wavering voters. democrats should be worried regardless of the manifest unfairness of the accusations directed at the protests. however, once again, am admitting we don't have a solution. who is in a position to step forward and become the face and voice of the protests? unlikely any politician would do so as such would put their own career in jeopardy. keep in mind mlk were never particular popular with the population at large during his lifetime. we got nothing. HA! Good Fun!

cop training and cop culture. cops is trained to act reflexive and the cops who try and de escalate instead o' taking immediate and decisive action run the risk o' running afoul o' cop code. am not able to stress just how much our current law enforcement problems is the result o' decades o' seeming homogenized cop training poor suited for 2020 demands. but am not wanting to derail too much. FDA fires brand new spokesperson after Trump exaggerates plasma as coronavirus 'breakthrough' at RNC HA! Good Fun!

the reason you are less likely to see in the US is 'cause with the way covid-19 has been politicized in this country and given how the blue line tends to vote trump, too many o' our police and sheriffs is lockstep legionnaires in the bat sh!te crazy tinfoil hat brigade, posting on qanon sites, refusing to enforce mask mandates, indulging in 5g conspiracies and likely still hoarding eggs and toilet paper as they prepare for the possible biden/harris apocalypse. we has always (well, at least since we matured a bit and lost our reflex pugnacity) been cautious when dealing with cops not 'cause we thought they were all racist but 'cause they have guns, are authorized to use such weapons with little provocation, and 'cause a few cops is indeed racist. if you don't know, then is better to err on the side o' caution. no harm in being a little extra polite. the thing is, nowadays, too many cops is also hyper politicized and indulging in the bat crap craziness mainstreamed by our President. we got no idea what might set off such folks? is there a coded phrase qanon folks share to let each other identify themselves? "i am concerned about friday's weather forecast." something inane they slip into any conversation so they might recognize a fellow adherent? could be worth looking into just to be on the safe side. kidding 'bout the code phrase, but the rest... HA! Good Fun!

am hoping you are happy as playing the video made one o' our dogs go nuts. side note, seeing the length o' the dog's nails, we couldn't help but think the poor dog were complete misunderstood. so cute to see him/her playing and yodeling, but were actual a desperate cry for a walk. also, unless is a rescue situation, cannot imagine us ever owning a beagle. HA! Good Fun!

the reason there were no witnesses at the senate trial is 'cause o' senate majority. just one example. with functional democrat control o' the flow o' information and a parade o' witnesses and documents orchestrated by democrats w/o the kneecapping by mcconnell, will be very difficult to suppress evidence as happened the first go 'round. mcghan and bolton and pompeo will be forced to testify and all o' the suppressed documents will be on display. 'could get very ugly when it becomes clear to the public just how much were known to the senators who just went along. sure, some republicans will hold out no matter what. senators tend to have a better grasp o' history than our President, and they know that republican Congressman who did not loyal follow nixon were punished by their constituencies, regardless o' right or wrong. nevertheless, the first trial were a sham in spite o' considerable evidence already available. a second go 'round will be devastating... for everybody. the recent rubio report release alone should have republicans scared for january, but is an election year and how many people has read the near exhaustive report? HA! Good Fun!

so, because barr didn't admit wrongdoing, it didn't happen? ... ‘Just plain wrong’: Fox News analyst attacks Trump’s ‘unconstitutional’ use of federal troops in Portland the troops were there bruce and is only a complicit senate which made barr's lies possible. doesn't change that the troops were sent w/o a request by state actos necessary for them to be there. Trump Fires SDNY Prosecutor Who Refused to Resign barr claimed berman resigned. he did not. this were the one instance o' overt incompetence by barr we may point to and it surprised us... right up until the bannon charges. Judge slams Barr, orders review of Mueller report deletions “The Court cannot reconcile certain public representations made by Attorney General Barr with the findings in the Mueller Report,” wrote Walton, an appointee of President George W. Bush. “The inconsistencies between Attorney General Barr’s statements, made at a time when the public did not have access to the redacted version of the Mueller Report to assess the veracity of his statements, and portions of the redacted version of the Mueller Report that conflict with those statements cause the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump despite certain findings in the redacted version of the Mueller Report to the contrary,” the judge added. barr lied. is no other way to describe. oh, and 'cause... have said barr is the most dangerous man in washington, 'cause unlike other trump enablers, barr is competent. with the sole exception o' the firing o' the sdny us attorney, barr hasn't made clear mistakes and there is unlikely to ever be criminal charges directed at him, but he faces impeachment in january as well as trump if three seats flip, and there is already more than enough evidence to support impeachment. the complicity o' the current senate makes barr and trump's malfeasance possible and barr is aware o' such, but his political life depends on such Congressional cowardice. edit: to make clear, am not actual in favor o' the january impeachments which could occur even if trump loses and would be set to leave office january 20. am indeed worried democrats, who will justifiable have reason to wanna payback complicit republicans for their efforts to undermine Constitutional democracy, will take swift and unwise action. am hopeful 'cause is biden, who would be President in such a scenario, cooler and more moderate personalities will prevail. do not be surprised if a democrat or even split senate complete changes the situation. HA! Good Fun!

am now 51, so might be more appropriate to identify as menopausal. HA! Good Fun!

“Indeed we can think of no better example of the police power, which the Founders denied the national government and reposed in the states, than the suppression of violent crime and vindication of its victims.”-- J. Rehnquist, us v morrison (2000) we almost invariably claim Justices are misidentified as republican or democrat. Justices follow legal philosophies which kinda/sorta mesh in some places with party philosophy, but that is frequent not the case. J. Scalia, for example, considered by many to be a pro-republican Justice, were the Court's most ardent defender o' 4th amendment protections, making it more difficult for cops to investigate and for da to criminalize. however, rehnquist... "as an aside, J. Rehnquist were always our prime example o' a dangerous Justice. no Justice active during our lifetime has received as much Gromnir vitriol as did Rehnquist. Scalia and Rehnquist were both "conservative" Justices and frequent they voted the same. even so, they occupied diametric opposed positions on our personal scale o' Justice approval." gromnir, feb 2016. rehnquist were a transparent political creature and even he had no stomach for the kinda nonsense you saw in portland. send in military is a state decision. period. worse, while oro and bruce may be forgiven for being unaware o' the law, every single US senator knew. even if they convinced self that somehow sending militarized fed police to portland to exacerbate the violence there were a good thing, they knew what were being done were unconstitutional. without a specific request from governor or state legislature (and not just a single pro-fed legislator) sending fed police to suppress violence is unconstitutional. end of story. period. this is not a gray area kinda issue. not even close. HA! Good Fun! ps what william barr did to legitimize the fed police/troop presence were to claim the protesters were insurrectionists, trying to overthrow the government o' the United States of America. don't even get us started if you are gonna try and sell that bit o' mularkey.

@BruceVC please reference our above links regarding the muslim ban promise. furthermore, the earliest iterations o' the President's attempt to implement the muslim ban were transparent and laughable unconstitutional. if you ban immigrants from the nations where +95% o' muslim immigrants to the US arrive, and you make exceptions for immigrants o' non muslim faith and then try an pretend as if you aren't attempting to ban muslim ingress, the Court will chastise. thank goodness. is nothing 'bout being a judge which means you need be willful obtuse. justice is blind, but she ain't deaf and stoopid. HA! Good Fun!

you should read elmer gantry. that were our point. HA! Good Fun!

we would note the predictable whataboutism from the trumpers... oh wait, we just did. the thing to keep in mind about the non-response to our muslim ban challenge is that trump's success isn't 'cause 30% o' the country believes his horseh!t and gaslighting. what trump is really selling is salvation and freedom from guilt. 30% o' the country is angry they has been made to feel guilty about agreeing with muslim bans. you got a family struggling to survive from paycheck-to-paycheck, and they see on tv how they is s'posed to feel guilty 'bout their white privilege? . uneducated doesn't mean you are worthless, but such folks has been made to feel that way for a long time. is more than a few smarty arse yankees who try and make southerners and midwesterners feel guilty about overt displays o' their faith. etc. god help us all, but trump secured the republican nomination with his muslim ban promise. every other republican candidate condemned trump's muslim ban. with the muslim ban, trump legitimized the 30%. trump was the first major Presidential candidate since nixon (*snort*) who genuine spoke to the 30%. trumpers will put up with anything from him, 'cause just like elmer gantry, what he is selling is salvation. jesus forgives your sins, and so too does trump. trumpers will follow him to hell and back because he is the one who is making it possible to breathe again in america, to blame immigrants for disappearing jobs and crime, to repudiate islam and homosexuality and blm. trump is making it possible for the silent majority (maybe 30% o' the country) to stand tall and proud and brandish their guns and cast away their masks. can we get an amen? HA! Good Fun!

posted a few months past, but the rnc made relevant by stealing. we didn't realize at first as we immediate turned off our tv when the fireworks display started, but the rnc used this song as accompaniment. the cohen estate is suing. ... am suspecting the rnc only considered that the word "hallelujah" would appeal to evangelicals. HA! Good Fun!

oh, and ad hominems are swell and peachy and fine from a logic stand point unless you use in place of argument. suggesting your fail o' an argument makes you meme worthy is not a logic fail. if you don't wanna be meme worthy, don't post meme worthy. most folks really don't understand logic fallacies. again, the president Promised a muslim ban. he attempted to implement a muslim ban. the Courts struck down the first two iterations o' the muslim ban. you and @MedicineDan do not get to pretend like the muslim ban were never promised and made part o' multiple executive orders 'cause the Court had more sense and wisdom than trump and his supporters. "The dissent's reference to Korematsu, however, affords this Court the opportunity to make express what is already obvious: Korematsu was gravely wrong the day it was decided, has been overruled in the court of history, and—to be clear—'has no place in law under the Constitution. '"--J. Roberts sotomayor used a hammer, but roberts got in a not so subtle swipe at trump as the lawyers for the prez had actual used korematsu as support for their earlier muslim ban attempts. oh, and NEVER use "most americans" as the basis for legitimizing an Unconstitutional action. the whole point o' the Constitution is it is a bar on the tyranny o' the masses. the aforementioned internment of Japanese during ww2 was overwhelming approved by americans. not all trump voters are florida man meme, buth you are not helping. edit: ok, this part is kinda funny and am sure most forget. one o' the attempted muslim bans tried to ban all immigrants from select islamic nations, with the exception o' christians. *chuckle* HA! Good Fun! ps so far we are getting typical trumpster gaslighting, telling us not to look behind the curtain. still haven't seen a defense o' the promised muslim ban. somehow try to convince us we didn't see what we saw is cute and all, but am looking to see the defense o' the promised muslim ban, and why anybody o' conscience would support a candidate who made such a promise.

gonna ignore the total anarchy hyperbole and note how the incompetent local governments requested that the troops Not be sent in the first place. the troops became a focal point for the rioting and were not making trump look good 'mongst independents. no wonder. and blame the media? freaking stop. *sigh* last point is to correct what we hope is ignorance rather than malfeasance. is best to assume ignorance. with such in mind, we we will once again note trump promised a muslim ban. trump was elected after he made the promise o' the muslim ban. were a muslim ban for purposes o' the election. even after elected, trump tried to implement a muslim ban. it were the THIRD iteration o' the ban which were directed at nations and not faiths. you voted for the muslim ban guy who did genuine try and implement a muslim ban. no defense. is another florida man meme? HA! Good Fun!