Gromnir

noteworthy the author is french and does not believe france should reciprocate with similar international participation in its national elections... at least not until france gains similar world prominence as the US. *insert eye roll* next time you go to france, strike up a conversation with a random french person 'bout their immigration issues or the clichy. give the french person your unsolicited advice and see how they react. when they do, point to clémence michallon and observe how as the US has such a prominent place on the world stage, it is your right and duty to shepherd the french. somebody should inform ms. michallon that if she wants input, she gotta concede actual authority. is doubtful she thought this through. would blame on french being french, but am suspecting michallon ain't as much o' an outlier as we would initial assume. HA! Good Fun!

misogyny? you explaining misogyny? now that is funny. btw, your straw man fails is as laughable as your defense o' dr. immanuel. given your read/write fails, tell us what we wrote or meant is a suspect proposition from start. claim a woman is loony is not misogyny unless the claim is made because she is a woman. as noted already, if fauci made same claims 'bout alien dna and demon sperm, you would be mocking fauci, and so too would Gromnir. fact you is shielding dr. immanuel and claiming you are defending viewpoint and gender integrity is transparent intellectual dishonest and just plain ridiculous. you cannot resurrect your fail by claiming you did so outta respect for women. skarp_one, o' all posters, is gonna look like a hypocrite making such a claim. ... if in 2016 we were told potus would serious be asked a question which referenced "alien dna" during a wh briefing, we woulda' laughed it off as a joke suggestion. HA! Good Fun!

we criticized the doctor's looniness and not her gender. you is the one fixated on gender. if it makes you feel better, we don't have a higher opinion o' skarp_one in spite o' fact we assume you are male. am not sure what point you believe you are making, but am confident you is once again failing, am a silver lining guy, is nice that in these uncertain times there is a few things we can still depend 'pon, eh? HA! Good Fun!

you are making a fool of yourself... again. either you didn't bother to search, or your grip on reality is so tenuous you cannot recognize just how loony you appear at this moment. has nothing to do with viewpoint and certain not gender. you brought up gender. if fauci or birx were promoting the same nonsense as dr. immanuel, we would be ridiculing them and am certain you would be. fact you is defending dr. immanuel is revealing a flaw in your character and not Gromnir's. honest, did you bother to search for stella immanuel info on other than what is available at breitbart? what is with the low energy folks needing be spoon fed these days? make it easier for you. search term: demon sperm. HA! Good Fun!

yup, would be totally different if it were a male taskforce doctor who were promoting cdc guidelines. nobody would bother mentioning stella immanuel if trump tweeted/defended her views if she were in favor o' masks or following fda guidance regarding hydroxy. *insert eye roll* for the nonce am gonna assume skarpy were just too low energy to bother doing a couple minutes o' internet searching and reading. dr. immanuel has a few interesting videos if such is more skarpy_one's speed. serious, we can't imagine how dramatic would be the alt-right explosion o' vitriol and derision (deserved so) if it were fauci who were expressing ms. immanuel's colorful and curious opinions. HA! Good Fun!

do self a favor and use your favorite search engine to discover stella immanuel. is better if you learn story for self if you ain't already aware o' the recent covid-19 kerfuffle she inspired. HA! Good Fun!

terrible part is how the marlins, as a team, decided to move forward w/o taking additional precautions after realizing one pitcher were infected... 'cause everyday is already a risk, or some similar bs. mattingly in particular deserves a very long and dirty swirly. baseball is a business and is not touching fundamental right issues. the mlb and nfl need to reconsider their approach, but am thinking given the length of the seasons for both, is no way the players agree to appropriate but draconian isolation protocols. all too often it is a mistake to treat intelligent adults like intelligent adults... and am not just talking 'bout players. owners and coaches is being idjits as well. mattingly. HA! Good Fun!

am thinking a few decisions from this term is gonna get a whole lotta debate in law schools and 'mongst law school professors. doesn't change nothing, but is gonna be one for the legal history books. ... “The Court’s opinion is like a pirate ship. It sails under a textualist flag, but what it actually represents is a theory of statutory interpretation that Justice Scalia excoriated––the theory that courts should ‘update’ old statutes so that they better reflect the current values of society.”-- J. Alito, bostock v. georgia (2020) alito weren't wrong. however, his dissent doesn't much help his position as he goes parade o' horribles route w/o mentioning how, for instance, his own textualist interpretations o' second amendment is equal suspect. if we are to do as alito suggests and consider the meaning of "a well regulated militia," and "arms" in the context o' what the text meant in 1787, regardless o' legislator intent, there is nevertheless gonna be a whole lotta gun control which sudden becomes appropriate. wanna make bets on whether alito goes hardline textualits on the next second amendment case? the article linked does offer insights which is both curious and enlightening. our thinking regarding the gorsuch opinion on bostock were that as kennedy were a mentor for gorsuch, J. gorsuch were doing legal gymnastics to validate kennedy's earlier obergefell opinion, a decision which had been near universal maligned by textualists. if kagan did indeed pull a svengali and convince gorsuch to take the textualist route to defend bostock, and by extension obergefell, we give her much credit for her powers o' persuasion, but am a bit worried that in the future textualism may be applied by more the activist elements o' the Court in creative ways... which also goes a long way in explaining alito's curious opinion. roberts is interesting. am thinking roberts is more concerned with the integrity o' the Court than he is with any single decision. trump threats 'bout Court has actual had the opposite impact o' what the President and his advisors intended as roberts has offered multiple compromise opinions. faith in the Court 'mongst populace is approaching all-time lows and roberts realizes the Court cannot function if The People don't believe in the integrity and independence o' the Court. is perhaps ironic, but roberts, to keep faith with the public in a time o' extreme and hardened polarization, is opting to indulge in the politics which is supposed (but not really) the basis o' public distrust. thomas is thomas, save that he asked a question or two. thomas is always gonna be out on an island and while his opinions is legal sound and well-crafted, they is nevertheless complete unpersuasive, which is why so few other Justices join thomas opinions. odd term. HA! Good Fun!

no, it isn't logical. you may believe it is reasonable, but it ain't logical. is why the hasty generalization fallacy exists. you got it complete bass ackwards. it is illogical to blame all or most in a class/group based on a few examples. do people make such broad judgements all the time? yes. ain't logical even if sometimes it is perfect reasonable and utter commonplace. however, keep in mind what set this all off were the admitted complete unjustified killing o' the unarmed george floyd by the police. ~90 times each year such happens. 'ccording to admitted questionable numbers the fbi collects from local and state police, there were 10 MILLION arrests in 2017 and over 500k o' those were for violent crimes. shouldn't be 90 corpses, but you are not being at all logical and we would suggest you ain't being reasonable neither. and actually, one o' the cops in the george floyd situation did question derek chauvin. two o' the cops who stood by while chauvin were killing floyd were n00bs being trained and chauvin were the guy training 'em. even so, one guy actually did say something and questioned chauvin's behaviour. the guy who questioned chauvin and suggested not kneeling on floyds neck were nevertheless charged with murder. you got facts wrong and logic backwards. you wanna see officer jackson as an exception, 'cause such fits your preconceptions. you see derek chauvin as a trend? you fail to see the conflict. and am realizing what your point o' posting the video were, which is why we responded. am knowing you didn't see how officer jackson were punching a big fat hole in your position as well as the blm protesters. HA! Good Fun!

am suspecting it ain't enough to convince others, or even gd, but video such as the one you share fits poorly with the hasty generalizations we keep seeing 'bout cops on these boards. we will keep saying: it is a mistake to blame cops en masse for the vast catalog o' wrongs current being blamed on law enforcement. people should be reassured that when they are in most need o' help, jakhary jackson will show up, or one o' the other hundreds o' thousands decent US cops, and he will be literal the only person you can depend 'pon for help. cop training makes all too many situations adversarial, and the attitude test is a problem. also, there is bad cops, and the police work environment does have a tendency to lead to ptsd and a disturbing number o' suicides. cops need help, but is little sympathy coming their way 'cause o' situations such as george floyd and the old guy with the cracked skull in buffalo. understandable. cops are armed and therefore dangerous, and you don't know if the cop you are dealing with is jakhary jackson or derek chauvin. people fighting to defund police aren't necessarily wrong. cop money is being spent in such a way that tensions 'tween our heavily armed populace and the cops is increased as 'posed to diminished. that said, the malc and vol view o' cops is part o' the problem and not part o' the solution. am thinking aoc is a bit naive as well. mistakes causation for correlation. is a gross oversimplification to suggest urban violence and crime will be reduced by spending less on cops and more on vagueness such as, "youth, health, housing, etc." there is serious socio economic issues at play which is the causes o' crime and redirected cop budgets alone is not gonna fix endemic poverty, hopelessness and the very real but less understood impact o' having millions o' people living in relative small geographic areas. in fact, redirect alone is gonna only lead to crime w/o a sufficient police presence to protect those who need help. defund police (a horrible misleading term) is not a solution in and of itself, and it sure as hell ain't a one-size-fits-all cure. am thinking defund police can't be the end of the discussion, but we need to start somewhere, and serious reform is only ever debated in earnest when there is riots and widespread protests, and then the debate is all too quickly forgotten. we will support defund police as long as we believe that its prominent presence in the national consciousness offers meaningful opportunity for police reform. HA! Good Fun!

baseball rejected serious social distancing guidelines. the only way this were/is gonna work was if teams and staff were functional isolated for the duration o' the season. football rosters is much larger and it is a contact sport. if you can't see potential nfl problems, is 'cause you are purposeful looking away from reality. the only thing football has going for it is baseball. nfl will able to see the reality o' baseball and tailor their protocols based on what worked and failed for mlb, but the nfl is running outta time 'cause such measures not only need time to be implemented league wide, but you are gonna need the nflpa, with its disturbing segment o' flat earthers and anti vaxxers, to agree to new protocols. hopeful a few o' these early hiccups result in baseball taking a moment to reflect 'pon and renew consideration o' more serious isolation protocols. am knowing players wanna be with their families (admitted, "families" for many players = strip clubs) and genuine isolation for months is a no-fun zone which will become tedious fast, but the alternative is no finish to the season. maybe 'cause Gromnir is old, a few months o' unpleasantness to be earning millions o' dollars doesn't sound like a particular difficult choice. crazy old man. HA! Good Fun! ps this is the year the nfl starts playing games in vegas?

kinda appropriate when you realize/admit the breonna taylor tragedy were in part the result o' a guy with a firearm protecting me and mine. attempting to protect himself and his girlfriend, a man with a legal firearm shoots a cop who is exercising a legal warrant. cops return fire, with one o' the sooper cops discharging ten rounds from outside the taylor home and through a window. arguable worst part is that it ain't the guy with the gun who shot the cops who ends up dead, but his girlfriend. accidents happen every day. accidents happen with staplers, and perhaps you end up with a bloodied thumb. accidents happen with eggs in your kitchen and then perhaps you gotta figure out how to clean (answer btw is to first sprinkle egg with salt or baking soda). accidents happen with lawn sprinklers and perhaps you end up flooding the neighbor's petunias. accidents happen with firearms, 'cause finagle's law says accidents will happen when humans is involved, and all too often a person perhaps ends up dead. firearms does not make you safer, if only 'cause accidents happen. we know from hundreds o' stories how cops with many hours o' training are subject to accidents; ain't just the bumbling and inexperienced who blunder. somebody accidentally gets shot at a breonna taylor protest? is unfortunate, but is also particular appropriate... not that the second amendment folks realize. maybe need read more shakespeare to realize all dramatic tragedy is inevitable. audience knows what is coming from the moment the players step on stage. question is how will events go to hell and not if. HA! Good Fun!

the issue raised in the article vol linked is legit, but as we noted, the headline is clickbait. is not that the biden campaign is turning folks into trump voters or is somehow preventing latinos from voting at all. if enough people don't vote, biden will lose. the number o' democrats in this country for decades and decades and decades has outnumbered republicans, and even the electoral college goofiness wouldn't prevent near universal wins for democrats in the Presidential election if democrats actual voted consistent. the percentage o' democrats who actual bother to vote trails republicans by a significant amount. such indolence is enough to level the playing field. democrats know they have a voter turnout problem, which is why it is so important for democrats to encourage as many democrats as possible to register and vote. problem ain't turning folks into trump voters. most fundamental issue is getting democrats (and independents) to vote. as we stated so recent, am likewise concerned the democrats, if they get control, is gonna continue the same shady shenanigans as trump utilized, but they will feel justified in doing so 'cause is payback for trump. idiots. one o' the reasons senate republicans backed trump in spite o' their concerns 'bout his character and competence is they believed they were mistreated by obama and the Congressional democrats. is not they like trump. nope. four years o' republicans running roughshod over democrats is gonna result in some ill will. coupled with the terrible polarization we are suffering from in this country, a return to government by compromise is improbable in the extreme. HA! Good Fun!

many decades past, we taught hemingway. am recalling we made a n00b teacher mistake o' assigning the sun also rises as the first book covered when we were doing a class in spain. many decades past, but even so we were were kinda surprised by how few considered hemingway antisemitism to be at all relevant, but those who did became complete fixated on such to exclusion o' all else. weren't intentional, but we managed to divide individual students and the class as a whole; had some difficulty producing constructive dialog from that point. after our firstest blunder, sun also rises always became the last book we covered. lucky for us, from a teaching pov, while hemingway's private writings ooze with antisemitism, such is not a common theme in his published works. were never our intention to teach Hemingway is a Bigot as a class, but we believed it were dishonest to not mention. am thinking the fact we were so visible obvious an ethnic minority made it difficult for a few students to discuss bigotry so early in a class. perhaps didn't wanna offend Gromnir and students didn't know just how honest they could be discussing such an emotional charged topic. the sun also rises is a fantastic piece o' literature. we got no guilt admitting we like the sun also rises, but we sure as hell never defend hemingway's antisemitism. am recognizing the ethical questions o' teaching such overt bigotry. full stop. HA! Good Fun!

am suspecting vol didn't get past the clickbait headline. however, is just a guess as "LOL" is hardly the rejoinder which offers substance for reply. HA! Good Fun!

hard to imagine that during a pandemic a political campaign might suffer organizational issues which hurts their efforts to reach key demographics. yeah, given how important is florida, and recognizing biden is current polling better in that state than trump, hopeful they don't bungle the advantage through incompetence. just so long as biden don't pull a clinton and largely ignore key battleground states during the remaining months, it will be an improvement. pandemic is gonna make even the best efforts appear flawed, so am willing to cut folks a break as long as it ain't willful or reckless mistakes. HA! Good Fun!

HA! Good Fun!

all the time. comforts us to consider the number (no doubt considerable) o' times such thoughts were directed at Gromnir. by same token, if a coworker pulls you aside and says that the guys in accounting are, "not your friends," you will no doubt assume he is talking 'bout something more than the capacity o' potential bad accountants to screw with your paycheck, or simple a generalized observation that the accounting guys is paid to make sure you get minimum possible money as demanded by terms o' your employment. *shrug* there is a-hole cops. some cops is born bad. cops are people. however, the cop job does involve daily tarumas and stressors which we eulogize in domestic violence victims and combat vets. is also unfortunate but much o' the bad behaviour malc and others appear to wanna warn you 'bout insofar as the oakley wearing and shaven headed cops is the result o' ubiquitous training as 'posed to ill will or foul demeanor. ... oh, and while we believe gd implicit in spite o' his reliable skew towards the hyperbolic, you got no idea how many times we has listened to one side o' a story and then seen videotape o' an encounter and were dismayed (not) by by reality v. narrative. can't count the times we has heard, "i went out of my way to be polite," or some variation. gd has a somewhat colorful view o' cops. is difficult to imagine such preconceptions not having an impact on how he viewed a cop encounter at the time, and even more so how he remembers years removed. regardless, is a bit like any other human endeavour: confidence in an outcome has a tendency to lead to such outcomes. sure, no matter how much confidence we got in our game, we ain't gonna take stephen curry in a one-on-one basketball competition. converse, if team facing stephen' curry and his mates is morale broken and certain they got no chance o' beating golden state, then chances o' victory for those facing mr. curry is even more slim than a statistical accounting might assume. however, and again, even if a person does become verbal abusive with a cop, is no excuse for the cop to resort to violence. none. never. the attitude test needs to die. HA! Good Fun!

you keep trying to rationalize your terrible stereotype. the vast number o' police encounters most o' us will possible face will be o' a kinda and quality unlikely to trigger the cop's flight or fight anxiety. no danger. no trigger. when you need a cop, you will want them to be friends as 'posed to enemies. that said, we have mentioned at least one police encounter we had which coulda' gone south very easily and the cop were definite not our friend. our behaviour, treating the cops as if they were dirtbags getting a contact high off their own inflated sense o' self importance were a contributing factor to us almost getting twisted up... which should never have been a concern for us and is not an excuse for cop behaviour. nevertheless, perception has a way o' becoming reality, particular if you got obvious biases. when you need a cop, you will want them to be friends as 'posed to enemies. treat 'em same way you treat the dog you do not know whether is dangerous. don't be stoopid, but also do not show fear and anger and hostility, or in case o' malc, bare contained contempt. HA! good Fun!

had an uncharacteristic beavis and butthead moment. am admitting, to our shame, we immediate thought o' olivia wilde. HA! Good Fun!

most o' the casting choices should be good enough if not perfect when converted from radio to netflix. death just got a bit more curvy than the graphic novel iteration, but is hardly a deal breaker. the corinthian? get the corinthian right for tv is gonna be difficult enough w/o a casting choice 'bout whom we are kinda ambivalent. we will need see... which brings us to our other concern that get to dollhouse means a whole lotta material is being covered in ten episodes. 'course is zero chance we don't watch at least the first few episodes regardless o' whatever is the consensus o' reviews and pre-release conjecture. HA! Good Fun!

US police is different than most countries. extreme decentralized. overwhelming majority o' the total US money spent on police is the budgets of municipalities and counties. lots o' municipalities and counties. rural areas will most often be covered by county sheriff's as 'posed to state police. municipalities, however, is where the people is and sadly is also where most law enforcement is needed. am also saddened to need disagree with hurl on a few things, though we agree 'bout training. honest, malc's silly oakley and shaved head stereotype aside, we keep banging the drum on how curiously misguided typical police training is in this country. many cops are your best friend when you are in need o' help, but at first sign o' perceived danger, they do as they is trained to do. blame on some kinda flaw in character o' police complete ignores the reality o' the training such folks is receiving. huge amounts o' money is spent on training and arming cops in a way that presumes every encounter with the public is a potential life and death scenario. have armed cops and suspects who is all believing a situation is gonna explode and is no surprise when such happens. yeah, our heavily armed populace makes policing inherent more dangerous, but police training is encouraging the casual brutality we spoke o' on previous pages o' the thread. as @Guard Dog correct predicts, we aren't gonna make major gun control changes anytime soon, so addressing the police angle is best bet for changing the current inevitability o' lethal blunders. however, total US dollars spent on education alone far exceeds police. education budgets collective (and am just talking public elementary and secondary) is more than 5x as much spent on police. often what happens is a school district, to make a point, will compare their spending to the local city or county police budget while ignoring fact the police o' a few o' the larger police and sheriffs will cover multiple school districts worth o' territory. the education folks doing comparisons will also wanna lump in courts and correction departments. as noted before with oro's misapprehension 'bout the location o' the strictest gun laws producing the least safety, is a few municipalities with overwhelming budgets compared to most o' US police departments, 'cause those high density urban areas is where police is needed most. everybody is channeling vol these days? point out that in places where cops have biggest budgets and most uniformed officers is also places with most crime is not proof police is unnecessary. sure, big cities have tanks and military surplus, but many citizens in this country have police service which amounts to a sheriff department with a handful o' employees covering vast areas o' territory. converse, education dollars is spread about a bit more egalitarian. is not as if kids in montana is relegated to little house on the prairie esque one room schools with nothing more than a school marm, her trusty blackboard, and a dozen or so desks to broaden young minds. that isn't to say police need $115 billion or that the billions spent on police is invested wisely. is any number o' large and urban police departments which defunded partial or complete and found considerable success by investing more heavily in community outreach and counseling. am not a fan o' biden as his single most outstanding quality is he ain't trump, which in any other year would be laughable underwhelming. however, his plan for addressing police has positives. he ain't claiming he will be encouraging or mandating defund, in part 'cause he don't have authority to do so. biden suggest that police departments which voluntarily redirect funds to more preventative aspects o' law enforcement or to the often overlooked mental health aspect o' law enforcement, should be awarded federal funds. HA! Good Fun!

funny, we don't recall addressing such a point. you "bet" what would be our position and then argued against comments you made for us. now you repeat the same error, like the fork. two decades of same shtick, but with rapists and blm instead o' bioware and game features. less funny. HA! Good Fun!

by definition, perversion is unacceptable behaviour. enjoyment o' shades of grey and harlequin romances is perhaps puerile, but is not considered unacceptable by a noteworthy portion o' the population. your blanket generalizations once again makes you appear less than fully coherent and the fact you cannot grasp the problem would be curious but for two decades o' observation o' vol reason. so go ahead and fork the socket... again. HA! Good Fun!

vol, the guy with the fork, is surprised by the result. what is more impressive is you know he will do it again and blame the fork or the electrical company or blm. HA! Good Fun!