Gromnir

we read the article. didn't prevent us from watching the video. our observations is hardly irrelevant 'cause as you keep ignoring, those observations illustrate just how different were the situations you inexplicable are trying to compare. non analogous and yet you somehow keep using as some kinda proof o'... what exact? in the video o' tarrant, the cops could see the suspect who were plain visible to the cops on the scene as windshields is purposeful transparent, unlike the walls o' a uvalde classroom. was a lengthy delay 'tween ramming o' car and the suspect being removed from the vehicle and at no time did tarrant fire on the cops. the uvalde shooter had fired 'pon police and had not just been on the receiving end o' a high speed auto collision. oh, and even the nz cops were surprised tarrant were alone in the car. we know that bit o' info 'cause we read the article. is unlike uvalde where the shooter had a room full o' kids with him. with one hand a cop pulls tarrant outta the crashed car? serious? try that with an uncooperative male adult. ever seen videos where it takes a bunch o' cops to wrestle even a smallish subject to the ground and restrain him? those ain't exceptional. the nz cop got tarrant outta the car and to the ground using only one hand before the suspect were struck with the rifle. have personal been one o' those guys trying to restrain somebody who is uncooperative. is not easy to wrestle a large primate even if you got a significant size advantage. sure the cops hit the bad guy with a rifle butt and nobody is gonna second guess, but tarrant clear weren't putting up the kinda resistance any reasonable person would expect if he were well and trying to do harm to the cops. "Carmody called for Manning to enter the vehicle from behind and handcuff the driver with his hands up. Manning went around and opened the hatchback and saw what appeared to be four improvised incendiary devices - petrol cans with objects taped to them." note the wapo included video begins with hatch on the subaru up and manning nowhere near the back o' the car. so how much time had elapsed after impact wherein the terrorist were sitting in the driver seat, not firing at the cops? so much different. stun grenades? did the first guys on the scene at uvalde have stun grenades? have said 'bout a dozen times the delay by law enforcement taking action has not been explained satisfactory. am seeing no excuse offered for the delay. stun grenades. ballistic shields. whatever. how could it take so long to come up with a workable plan, but once the shooter were behind a door in a classroom with kid hostages, expecting individual line cops to ignore leadership and rush through the door is not reasonable and hardly deserves a blanket condemnation o' cowardice. even if the first guys on the scene had stun grenades, the effectiveness o' such devices is hardly 100% particular if somebody is expecting, has ear protection and/or has sheltered or is protected from blast, as with tables or furniture acting as obstacles. do you know what the situation were in the classroom with the uvalde shooter? where were he positioned relative to the door? did he line up hostages between himself and the doorway so he would have a clear line o' sight to fire at anybody coming through the door while the kids became human shields for his defense? seem like the kinda stuff you would want to know, yes? and strawman much? we never claimed uvalde cops were brave, 'cause we don't know the situation o' individual cops and what orders they were following and what steps were being taken. am unable to label individual line cops as cowards for not rushing into oncoming weapon fire, but is not an either/or proposition. just 'cause am uncertain o' cowardice it most certain does not require our admiration and praise for bravery, but logic continues to be a problem for zor. so not same situations as with tarrant and am so not applauding uvalde police bravery. the delay to come up with a viable plan at the uvalde school, particular as the shooter were murdering kids in the classroom, is in our mind unacceptable. if is an explanation for such a lengthy delay we would consider such, but so far nobody in authority has explained the delay. unforgivable. nevertheless, the fact a few months previous some uncertain amount o' uvalde cops got unspecific active shooter training, or that they were armed with military gear is hardly convincing us the individual cops on site were cowards. HA! Good Fun!

blt season is almost 'pon us in our location. shelf stable tomatoes is a bit tasteless compared to the good stuff, so if you can find a decent farmer's market am gonna highly recommend trying such a source. am not offering for the recipe but rather the process. mentioned a few pages back how simple is mayo, but am nevertheless confident many people has never made mayo. our personal recipe is not gonna match anything you see on the internet, which is a good thing as am making to match our taste, however, we got a couple recommendations using the video ingredients and quantities as a baseline. 1) you do not need a full cup of oil is nothing wrong with a full cup, but we typical go with 3⁄4 C or even a smidge less. am preferring our mayo to be on the lighter side. if you want something which tastes closer to most store bought brands, use vegetable oil. grapeseed is an ideal choice but our most frequent choices is avocado or vegetable oil. even so, you willget full and stable emulsion even with 3⁄4 C o' oil. 2) do not use extra virgin olive oil an immersion blender is the wrong tool if you want to use extra virgin olive oil 'cause it is gonna make the mayo bitter. if you serious wanna do immersion and use olive oil, make sure is extra light olive oil. 3) consider adding a full teaspoon of salt salt makes most food taste better right up until you hit point where is too salty. 4) one full egg as 'posed to 2 egg yolks works perfectly fine 5) garlic addition gets you closer to aioli and may be overpowering would recommend not trying to make with garlic your first few attempts especial if you are hoping to get something close-but-better than best foods/hellmans or duke's. 6) sugar is not our jam, but... particular if you prefer miracle whip, add a half teaspoon or more o' sugar. if you want like dukes, then skip sugar but use vegetable oil, and go 50/50 white distilled vinegar/cider vinegar and add a bit o' paprika. 7) room temp ingredients you don't wanna try and emulsify with cold egg, water, mustard, whatever to room temp oil. take your egg and whatnot outta the fridge +20 minutes before prep. ... for reference, when having a blt, we make mayo with the following ingredients: 1 large egg 2 teaspoons lime juice 1 tablespoon white distilled vinegar + typical 1-2 teaspoons of cider vinegar, but am admitted fluid as to how tangy we want the mayo 3⁄4 teaspoon salt 3⁄4 cup vegetable oil we then let cool in the fridge after you got your emulsion as it will firm up a smidge. downside is you got a fair amount o' mayo with this and if you make a single sandwich, your remaining homemade mayo is gonna last no more than a week. HA! Good Fun! ps we mentioned tomatoes at the start o' the post. the one variety o' tomatoes which ain't been bred for shelf stability is cherry tomatoes. cherry tomatoes is not a great option for blt, though not terrible. regardless, if you don't mind a bit o' extra sweetness in your recipes and you want more tomato flavour, consider replacing whatever tomato you ordinarily use with a similar volume o' cherry tomatoes. grow your own or find good farm tomatoes is also viable options.

After arrest in rape of 10-year-old girl, Fox News hosts shift focus Some of Fox’s most high-profile hosts — Tucker Carlson, Jesse Watters, Laura Ingraham — suggested this week that the account of the 10-year-old rape victim was a “hoax” and “politically timed disinformation,” and claimed that the Biden administration was “lying” about the case after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. ... Later on Wednesday, Carlson and Ingraham shifted their attention to Fuentes and his uncertain citizenship status. The hosts featured chyrons on their shows saying that the 10-year-old girl “in Biden’s abortion story” was raped by an “illegal immigrant.” Assistant Franklin County prosecutor Dan Meyer said during Wednesday’s hearing that he believes Fuentes, 27, is undocumented, according to video of the arraignment. ... the thing is, as we mentioned earlier in the thread, the hypothetical thirteen-year-old rape victim were specific addressed by ohio legislators previous to their new rape ban being made law. deflection and evasion is such a common tactic these days. Ohio bill would ban abortion without rape exemption Democrats were ready to ask questions, with most of them coming from Reps. Richard Brown (D-Canal Winchester), Dr. Beth Liston (D-Dublin) and Tavia Galonski (D-Akron). However, Majority Floor Leader Rep. Bill Seitz (R-Cincinnati) jumped in. The intense back and forth between Brown and Schmidt revolved around the lack of exemptions for rape and incest. “So under this bill, if a 13-year-old girl, let’s say, was raped by a serial rapist, broke into her house, or maybe more likely raped by a family member, which occurs frequently — unfortunately, this bill would require this 13-year-old to carry this felons fetus to term, regardless of any emotional or psychological damage or trauma that may be inflicted upon this 13-year-old girl to deliver this, felons a fetus. Is that right?” he asked. Schmidt responded and said that rape is a difficult issue. “It’s a shame that it happens, but there’s an opportunity for that woman, no matter how young or old she is,” she said. The opportunity — which would be the only option — is to deliver that baby. “She can choose to raise the child, she can choose to give that child to a loving family member or to give it to someone else — and that child can grow up and be something magnificent, a wonderful family person, cure cancer,” she said. “Just because you have emotional scars doesn’t give you the right, right to take the life.” Brown followed up. “You earlier said every life is important — the life of a 13-year-old girl in my hypothetical is important,” he added. He then brings up the pregnant juvenile going to middle school, saying that kids are “mean, they’re evil and they’re going to say all kinds of bad things to their classmate about her condition.” “I think this girl has rights every bit as much as the zygote that has rights under your bill,” he said. “This girl has rights, and I don’t believe we can lose sight of the rights of the person who was raped.” Supporters of the bill, like Ohio Right to Life, say just because someone commits a crime, doesn’t mean we should have the right to “purposely” end a life. “They can live a dignified life that shows them that they can overcome certain circumstances,” Elizabeth Whitmarsh, a spokesperson for the organization, said. “That might seem impossible in the moment, but they’re able to get through it.” ... not shocking. not unforeseen. however, am gonna suggest that caitlin bernard should not have mentioned the incident and most definite were mistaken in speaking to a newspaper 'bout a ten-year-old rape victim from ohio. the doctor, in spite o' having good intentions and recognizing that she did not release specific patient info, knew or shoulda' known that the girl's identity would be discovered once bernard made her story public. innuendo has the capacity to make statements tortious or illegal even if the speaker does not explicit reveal the identity o' an individual. bernard quite possible has added to the victim's nightmare by making the child's rape a matter o' public interest. but again, the ohio gop were okie dokie with thirteen-year-old victims o' incestous rape being unable to obtain an abortion in ohio, so their indignation and deflection today is hardly convincing. "Just because you have emotional scars doesn’t give you the right, right to take the life." at least the gop authors o' the rape ban were being honest 'bout the absolutist position.

https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1184370/view/3400797688635109882 august 11 is new dlc release. september 29 is console and enhanced edition release date. HA! Good Fun!

so wait, the cops didn't plow into tarrant's car after he had already shot dozens? we just assumed that from video? would seem to be a significant difference, no? edit: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/03/16/this-cellphone-videos-shows-alleged-new-zealand-mosque-attackers-dramatic-arrest/ tarrant is pulled outta car, flops onto the ground and then is struck with rifle butt. 18 second mark. how much time elapsed previous to start o' video is unknown but were time enough for cops to get out of their car and reach tarrant. tarrant had plenty o' time to set off vest before being struck if that were the plan and if he were in condition to do so. just as you assume he were dazed from rifle strike, tarrant's behaviour previous to being struck suggests he were dazed from the car crash. keyboard heroes not seeing difference 'tween subduing a guy with no hostages following a car crash and suspect visible the entire time v. "charging in" to a closed room through a single doorway not knowing where is the shooter, children and other obstacles in the room. no doubt is cowardice to not wanna be the first cop through that doorway, eh? not analogous and should be unnecessary to point out differences. HA! Good Fun!

@Guard Dog shared this story Conservatives Called an Ohio Rape Case Fake News. Now an Arrest Has Been Made the whole situation is revolting with people attempting to score political points and gaslighting w/o any sense o' shame.

the active shooter training for uvalde cops happened in late march, so were relative recent, but am having no idea just who were part o' the training. is unlikely such were the entire department. all texas police departments is 'posed to get some kinda active shooter training, but how each department handles such training is typically american with every sheriff and police chief deciding what is sufficient. training were a monday and happened once, on a single day? were a leadership thing or did line cops get training and if so how many? participants were informed to embrace "immediate, decisive action." have few details 'bout training. regardless, immediate and decisive didn't happen. then what? typical such training involves role-playing to address the what if situations. got a shooter with an ar-15 in a room with a bunch o' kids and cops is outside. immediate and decisive sounds swell and all, but with a doorway 'tween hero cops and the shooter, decisive looks a bit more hazardous than ramming a suspects' car. immediate, decisive action mighta' prevented such, but once the shooter were in a classroom with kids and a doorway between him and any rescuers... regardless, raise your hand if you thinks some number o' small town cops receiving a single day o' unspecified active shooter training made 'em experienced and qualified to handle for reals active shooter incidents. in our specific area o' ca, regular scheduled drills is being done by cops with cooperation o' schools. such happens in more than a few municipalities, but is hardly universal. for uvalde all we ever saw mentioned is the one training day w/o much enlightenment regarding what were the training involved save for media repeating the less than helpful, "immediate, decisive action" mantra. oh, and why do we mention car ramming? our recollection is the christchurch mosque shooter were arrested after he fled shooting scenes via car... had already killed dozens when the cops rammed his vehicle at high speed. cops pulled the shooter out o' the vehicle, and the killer were hardly moving and looked bloodied... although admitted the crude mosaic stuff made difficult to discern details from rando pedestrian video we saw on interweb capturing the arrest. maybe not exact the same as uvalde, eh? in any event, is much more difficult to be brave in real life than to accuse others o' cowardice via the internet. is avoiding the draft during war cowardly? perhaps is times when avoiding the draft may be brave? depends on whether you respect the "draft dodger" as to whether you brand him a coward? perhaps passage o' time and opinions 'bout the war in question changes hearts and minds on the issue? muhammad ali. donald trump. if it were 1966 or thereabouts, most americans woulda' criticized ali, including jackie robinson btw. am thinking the situations o' trump and ali is diferent, but we also have more details 'regarding trump and ali as 'posed to broad stroke criticisms o' cops in tactical gear. HA! Good Fun! ps as part o' our mcle, we took a single day course in mediation and arbitration. got a certificate and everything in addition to receiving our needed hours. bona fide. were held at the la playa in carmel, and our law firm paid so we said, "why not?" if you think for an instant the course made us competent to handle arbitration and mediation you are nuts. furthermore, we ain't never yet been part o' a mediation in which we were being fired 'pon with an ar-15. am suspecting whatever training we received via the one day course mighta' slipped our mind if our heart rate were exceeding 100 and the prospect o' our imminent death were something other than a philosophical quandary.

as long as cops is provided lightsabres there is no genuine problem. blast doors is a terrible idea but admitted no worse than ted cruz's call for a single entrance for schools. more than 750 texas schools have 1300+ students. can't imagine how things could go wrong in an emergency with a single exit. HA! Good Fun!

not allowing armed and angry parents into the school is hardly unreasonable. duh. add a chaotic and uncontrollable element to an active shooter scenario? am not needing be an expert on such to recognize terribad. and there has been no meaningful corroboration o' the claim cops rescued their own kids save as part o' a general rescue effort o' kids in other classrooms. weren't as if cops were rescuing their own kids and leaving others behind, or at least is no meaningful proof o' such and is noteworthy there is no new stories making such claims. so again, what were the failures you "previously" observed which led you to an explanation o' cowardice? am not gonna help you with this. be specific. as have said before, am placing at least a portion o' blame on cop leadership 'cause am unsure how to explain the time delay before entering the classroom. sure, is hardly unforeseeable that there might be an effort by those in charge to minimize loss o' life o' cops and innocent civilians. rush in w/o a plan or intelligence might be unwise even if folks such as sarex would see as brave... right up until a bunch o' kids and cops got shot and killed. but again, with each passing minute, the failure to do anything makes for a bad look for those in charge. still not seeing any explanation for cowardice finding... other than your imagination. you admit you don't know the cop job and you clear don't know the details o' what individual cops were being told to do or what training they might have previous received. nevertheless, based on vague "previously" observed somethings, you feel confident in labeling the uvalde cops who did not "charge in" to be cowards? precise 'cause Gromnir don't know details, and am not making assumptions, and 'cause am having never needed to rush headlong into oncoming weapon fire to prove our bravery to faceless keyboard jockeys, we do not feel comfortable labeling individual uvalde cops as cowards. HA! Good Fun!

agreed, which is why the following is so weird: having seen other unspecified police fails, not involving same cops, he makes an educated assumption that the uvalde guys is cowards? dude. might as well finish the response to @Sarex so first you complain 'bout Gromnir assumptions and then immediate make an assumption based on past bad acts of cops not the uvalde cowards. *chuckle* then you make a strawman argument. *eye roll* advice: never start with, "what you are saying," 'cause looks like you cannot be trusted to then describe what were said. we has explained many times how US police literal cannot be standardized (training, hiring standards, etc.) save through organic homogenization. state police power is literal off limits to the fed. unconstitutional. nevertheless, we didn't blame uvalde on systemic problems and keep in mind we never even conceded your point 'bout cowardice so... fail again? am not certain where the fail at uvalde were other than our belief, based on the admitted lack o' an explanation, that the delay o' law enforcement to enter the classroom where the shooter had retreated were excessive. seems like a fail further up the food chain than individual cops on the scene, but again, am admitting working on a lack o' info 'cause law enforcement still hasn't provided an explanation. btw, we purpose stopped quoting you where you admitted you don't know what cop job is 'cause we specific addressed what cop duty most certainly is not in the post you got nothing from save a spelling correction. "protect the public order" is a decent enough identification o' the duty in question, but as already stated, that don't carry with it any duty owed to any specific individual. the cop has a duty to the community, but like it or not, she don't have a duty to save or protect any individual even if the need is obvious and the cop is capable o' rendering the necessary aid. is no duty to "charge in" just 'cause people is in danger. so, add basic reading fail too. nevertheless we got you to at least concede you were in fact asking cops to hurl themselves into the breach and that failure to do so amounted to cowardice. baby steps. HA! Good Fun!

ps keep in mind how since the day o' the uvalde incident we has repeated the same observation regarding time: we have yet to hear a valid explanation as to why it took so long for there to be any meaningful law enforcement response. just 'cause sarex and others expect cops to be willing to sacrifice their lives for the sake o' their fellow citizens don't make it so, however it took near an hour to come up with a plan enter the classroom? we were waiting for a valid explanation as to the delay, but given how much tie has elapsed, am thinking is fair to assume there is no good excuse. HA! Good Fun!

and 'round we go. at least you ain't pretending no more. we have shown previous how there is no duty in fact for cops to rush in and save people. your expectations do not match reality or legal duty. "When the alternative is to just let the bodies hit the floor? I would say yes, they are supposed to charge in." these guys is trained to hand out parking tickets and break up domestic disputes, both o' which is unfortunate and unnecessarily dangerous in this country. some police departments train for active shooters at schools. some. you know how many different police departments there is in the US? they all got potential different training and standards. how much training does ordinary local cops get for dealing with an uvalde situation? very much depends on the department and department leadership. you know those details? nevertheless, sarex believes not only should those cops in uvalde charge into a situation where they know an individual with murderous intent and an ar-15 lies in wait, but sarex holds such a belief w/o knowing what cop supervisors were telling those individual coward cops at the time. as for military gear, we has more than once complained 'bout local departments spending money on such extravagances, but again, even if your local cop has military gear it don't mean they is soldiers. not same training. not same duties and obligations. is an irrelevant observation. massive disconnect. am suspecting most folks recognize how the secret service folks is called 'pon to do the extraordinary. nevertheless, whenever an ordinary cop making ~$45k a year fails to meet the same expectations as secret service, we see their bravery questioned. if "charging in" is what we demand o' the guy who has slight more demanding hiring standards than walmart greeter, then the appreciation o' the sacrifice and bravery o' secret service loses its meaning and value. nevertheless uvalde happens and people pretend to be shocked average cop didn't hurl himself into the breech to save all those kids. unreasonable. HA! Good Fun!

rats is a menace for homeowners. any opening they may get their pointy little heads through is a point o' access and from there they may cause many thousands o' dollars o' damage. why do rats like to chew copper wire? dunno. don't care 'bout "why" unless knowing helps us prevent it from happening. squirrels, in our opinion, is no better than rats. we had a neighbor who filled a decent sized bird bath in her backyard with what amounted to squirrel chow. our neighbor liked to watch the squirrels. the f'ing squirrels swarmed the endless buffet neighbor lady provided and then they retreated to our roof to stash their booty. when we pointed out that in our attic we had squirrels, squirrel poop and a substantial quantity o' the same medley o' seeds and nuts she filled her bird bath, our neighbor found the situation amusing but made no effort to change behaviors. were a constant battle squirrel proofing our home. tenacious buggers and unlike rats you need dispose o' squirrels humanely in CA 'cause is the law. stoopid hippies. HA! Good Fun!

we know the emphasis on safety first for firemen 'cause we has specific addressed the firemen hero myth with a couple captains and a chief in local fire departments. also you may read stats from link we provided and may check elsewhere. relative few on-the-job firemen deaths (during non-covid years) is not a coincidence and has been trending towards fewer in recent years. point o' military equipment is relevant how? ask our boardie marines if the gear makes one invulnerable or safe from oncoming weapon fire. and you did indeed imply those cops pictured were lacking bravery, no? we read your post as a response to veruca, a fact you might already have forgotten. "police are totally supposed to charge into oncoming fire and just let the bodies hit the floor." is not as if your post 'bout cowards happened in a vacuum. images o' cops standing around not saving children is hardly evidence o' cowardice particular as you lack other information or at least has failed to provide any. you may make proclamations 'bout shortcomings in bravery from thousands o' miles away sitting safely ensconced behind a computer screen while armed with a keyboard and an opinion. rings a tad hollow. HA! Good Fun! ps "on-the-job" somehow became one-the job. fail.

maybe ain't legal to do so, but we do in fact agree with this observation. HA! Good Fun!

well yes, in point o' fact such is the training firemen receive and movies and tv gives you the same misguided notions regarding firemen as you appear to have regarding policemen. y'know, ordinary lunch pail police and not give-up-your-life-for _________ secret service detail. the number o' firefighters who died line of duty deaths in 2020 were killed by covid more than anything else. exposure to covid which later resulted in death while responding to medical calls were accounting for 78 o' the total 140 fireman fatalities. only 10 2020 deaths o' firemen occurred "on the ground in incidents" not including wildfires. why is numbers so low? 'cause is a safety first occupation. btw, fifteen firefighters died in vehicle accidents on the way or returning from an emergency call. fireman safety has been made paramount for many decades here in the US. we don't ordinarily send firemen to die in the vainglorious hope they maybe could save persons in danger. we train firemen so they avoid death o' self and fellow firefighters in spite o' being engaged in an inherent dangerous occupation where any mistake could lead to fatalities. where do you people get the notion there is an expectation o' a 1:1 trade where firemen has an unwritten duty to sacrifice selves to save people. statistically, @Keyrock has a much more dangerous job than does the ordinary US firemen precise 'cause we collective are far more concerned with the safety o' firemen than truck drivers. can't speak to sweden safety numbers so perhaps is different for @Azdeus. however, am gonna make clear, regardless o' safety precautions, going into a burning building requires bravery. the human animal ordinarily has an instinctual fear o' fire. add noise, smoke, water and general chaos o' any emergency fire scenario and am thinking it should be obvious that doing the job o' a firemen, regardless o' pay, involves courage, which is precise why so many fire fighters gave up their lives on 9/11 in spite o' impossible odds. ~60 cops died on 9/11 btw. in any event, as we has said many times, the delay in doing anything for so long were the inexplicable part o' uvalde, but individual cops not rushing into oncoming weapon fire hardly is an example o' cowardice. how many o' our message board heroes would for ~$45k a year have been willing to rush through a closed door to confront a guy armed with an ar-15? the folks in charge during the uvalde situation were indeed negligent in not coming up with a workable plan for the better part o' an hour, but somehow see cops not making a suicide charge as evidence o' cowardice is ridiculous and we suspect is highly dishonest. keep bringing up firemen as a comparison. keep being a mistake. HA! Good Fun!

could say the same 'bout the sincerity o' moderate democrats asking for unity seeing as their own party is fractured and they cannot get anything done w/o at least some republican support. to suggest politicians is transactional actors first and foremost should come as little surprise, yes? am also gonna suggest you is attempting to rewrite history a bit. trump were not popular in 2016, not even with republicans. clinton and trump were two o' the least popular candidates in recent history. exit polls made it clear that the majority o' republicans who voted for trump did so grudging and as a lesser of evils choice. is just one reason why trump, in spite o' having majorities in both houses were unable to achieve anything in two years save for his tax cut, a tax cut which helped mostly the rich but did indeed benefit small business owners in a big way. few Presidents has achieved so little with so much during the course o' their first two years, and first half o' first term is when most presidents get their signature programs passed. "and what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches towards bethlehem to be born?" it did indeed take decades for folks such as rush limbaugh and steve bannon to create what would become the trump base, but what our liberal friends like to forget is just how many o' those future trumpers voted for obama. the dougs is in the same economic foxhole as inner city and rural minorities. is no shock so many voted obama particularly in 2008. sure, the trump base is easily exploited in large part 'cause o' their unjustified prejudices. is hardly as if bigotry disappeared for generations o' americans and then sudden reappeared with the coming o' the trump Presidency. us v. them were so easily magnified by fox news and trump precise 'cause o' long standing grudges and willful ignorance. even so, the republican party had for decades been dedicated to the "big tent" metaphor. tell us the support for big tent weren't sincere? your revisionism ignores the fact big tent were the republican goal for decades. serious, do self a favour and add big tent + republican into your favorite search engine. not new and even if you convince self the goal were mere transactional, it were a guiding principle o' the party since before reagan. that said, the popularity o' trump in spite o' all the controversies and his largely ineffectual Presidency is a baffling outlier in recent (post ww2) American politics. explain how an unpopular President not much liked by the majority o' his party and who set fire to near everything he touched became more popular with republicans since 2016 is improbable. europeans is not the least bit surprised by trump, but nothing like him existed in post ww2 american politics save at the local level, and for good reason. republicans and democrats has for a long time been functional two shades o' the same neoliberal ideology. bill clinton's championing o' bank deregulation and his friendliness with wall street is convenient ignored by today's democrats. turn back the clock to as recent as the eighties and it were republicans who were supporting the relaxation o' immigration policies while democrats lamented the jobs threatened by undocumented aliens. conservative and liberal means something much different to euros. a demagogue who would rise to power selling nothing but grievance and fear and who routine failed but stayed popular 'cause he could sell us v. them to a fearful electorate? european and not american neoliberal republicans. that said, am not gonna argue against the proposition that the current republican leadership has gone all-in on trumpism. am suspecting republicans believe they need the trump base. how many times has we shown the video o' lindsey graham being chased outta an airport by trump supporters calling him a "traitor" 'cause after january 6 the south carolina senator said, "count me out" and that he were done with trump? the increasing radicalized trump base represents at least 1/3 o' the republican party and is likely closer to 1/2. moderate republicans know they cannot win elections w/o the support o' the trump base, so they is functional making themselves willing hostages to those formerly fringe elements they spent decades attempting to marginalize. ARIZONA REP. WHO DETAILED TRUMP‘S ILLEGAL PLOT TO STEAL THE ELECTION SAYS HE’D VOTE FOR TRUMP IN 2024 bowers had tears in his eyes as he recounted trump's efforts to undermine American representative democracy. even so, as 'tween democrats and trump, bowers would still vote for and support trump? us v. them. and this kinda thing is only shocking to republicans post 2018. HA! Good Fun!

have mentioned more than once, previous to 2019/2020, we thought clarence thomas were an admirable judge if not a noteworthy Justice. bit more explanation via the way-back machine. the vox article repeats more than a few o' our recent criticisms o' the current majority: their willingness to ignore the rule o' law to arrive at transparent partisan conclusions; the terrible history and tradition analysis o' thomas and Alito; the shadow docket being used to alter fundamental rights, etc. am finding our self making the same or similar arguments as vox authors and Sotomayor, which even five years ago woulda' been blue moon exceptions. ... unrelated, but am gonna repeat our disappointment in Ginsburg. the Court is in this mess in no small part due to J. Ginsburg arrogance. a septuagenarian three-time cancer survivor is cheating death every additional day they keep breathing, and ordinarily there would be people 'round her whom she trusted and respected capable o' telling her such truth. unfortunate, a Justice always believes they know best-- is practical a prerequisite for the job. obama asked J. Ginsburg to consider retirement and she refused with a snarky comment requesting the President name any candidate superior to herself. am not a fan o' what ifs, but this current partisan Court, while admitted a virtual worst case scenario if you had asked us pre death o' Scalia, were not complete unforeseeable... and it coulda' been avoided. one person had the power to stop all o' this. chose not to. HA! Good Fun!

executive orders do not give a President the power to create or redistribute monies already allocated by Congress. obama and trump pulled some shiesty bs with executive orders, but even trump when trying to get his wall boondoggle funded needed to pilfer discretionary funds. fema, dod and other fed bodies has considerable money not specific allocated 'cause o' the need to be flexible in case o' emergencies and unexpected situations, but is not trillions o' dollars in discretionary money even if a President declared a state of emergency and scrapped together ever spare penny daring Congress to impeach him/her. ubi amounting to $12k per year would require more than three trillion dollars o' additional money, which is near doubling what the US collected in tax and other sources in 2020. manchin and sinema alone should make clear makes the nuclear option is pointless for something such as ubi as there would be additional moderate democrats opposing a paradigm altering scheme with a dubious chance o' success given all the previous fails.. as the US and the world grudging moves incremental and sloth-like towards full automation while ai replaces the need for many highly educated professionals, ubi will become a need as 'posed to a pipe dream. not today. not tomorrow. regardless, you don't experiment on a national scale and even if you chose to do so, you can't abracadabra/hocus pocus ubi into existence. rinse and repeat... again. nevertheless, veruca wants what she wants, eh? HA! Good Fun! ps @alanschu am gonna suggest you are indulging in a bit o' hyperbole. one need not look far to find libs who see republicans as an existential crisis much the same way trumpers does when describing democrats. converse, during the 2016 Presidential run, every major gop candidate pushed back on the bannon and trump narrative. paul ryan, while clear an enabler not deserving o' any medals for courage, were most certain not describing democrats in language otherwise reserved for fantasy novel villains. john mccain died in 2018 and at the time he were not alone in his calls for sanity and a return to pre-obama civility ff to ~7:00 and listen 'til at least 10:00... and keep in mind, since the nuclear option were mentioned already in this thread/post, harry reid and obama were the folks who flipped that switch. their validation were the obstinacy o' the opposition party and the impossibility o' working cooperative. you ain't gonna bring back better days just as long as you see conservatives as irredeemable enemies while simultaneous refusing to acknowledge lib complicity in the mess we got in 2022.

HA! Good Fun!

am working on a 1031 exchange for our soon-to-be-vacated rental property... properties? is getting confusing and truth is the point o' selling is to make our retirement as ez as possible, so the exchange option is having drawbacks. regardless, is a headache but simultaneous what we plan represents what is wrong with capital gains in the US. as mentioned many times already, capital gains tax rate is already lower than the income tax rate for just about anybody save those genuine impoverished. is why it makes sense for rich people to take so little income and instead have a bulk o' their wealth in income-generating property. 'course eventual the tax man gets his due, yes? buy an asset which is worth 100k and sell it for 1 million and you need pay gains on 900k. makes sense. 1031 exchange allows us to trade our real estate property but also starts the gains tabulation anew. if we exchange the aforementioned 1 million in property and then hold onto the exchanged property for a year, am gonna be paying extreme low capital gains rate and the tax is gonna be on only those gains which happened over the course o' a year. if property takes a bit o' a hit as it looks like it will the next couple years, then chances are we turn the gain into a loss which we then may hold onto for multiple tax years until it is exhausted by any subsequent irs or franchise tax board bills. the system in its current form is decided not fair, but that won't keep us from taking advantage o' the current scheme. HA! Good Fun!

best thing for liberals would be a trump 2024. democrats is terrible at voting, but they voted for not-trump in 2020. would millennials, who bare managed 50% voting in 2020 in spite o' their universal outrage the previous four years, vote not-desantis not-nikki haley? wouldn't count on it. insofar as a future President is concerned, the best thing for dems is a trump 2024 run... second best is gop choosing not-trump and then trump destroying the base in retaliation for the disloyalty done unto him. trump is arguable the only good thing going for the dems in 2024. HA! Good Fun! ps trumpism is already part o' the the new gop faith and fury based politics. imagine trump gets abducted by aliens tomorrow or pulls an ambrose bierce and disappears in mexico, never to be seen again. such won't change the problems for fractured democrats needing deal with an opposition party unified by outrage and grievance... unless trump manages to set the gop on fire before he disappears.

J. Rhenquist, back in the 1992, penned a dissent to a case which upheld the right o' the hare krishnas to handout flyers at airports. one aspect o' the former chief Justice's argument were relating to the public forum doctrine-- Rhenquist curious suggested that analogizing airports to 18th century shipping ports were a mistake. airports did not exist in 1789, so the founders could not possible have recognized 'em as public fora. serious. now obvious most o' the originalist Justices, 'cept maybe clarence thomas, ain't so obtuse as Rhenquist were pretending to be. after all, take such ridiculous logic to its obvious conclusion and semi-automatic rifles and handguns would be excluded from Second Amendment protections, and those originalists didn't wanna extend the syllogism that far, yes? minieball weapons woulda' been beyond the scope o' founder's imagination. regardless, the not-activist members o' the Court have situational been doing the silliness represented in your cartoon since at least the 1980s... which would actual be ok if they were 100% consistent. sure, the comical if it didn't exist in 1789 bit is extreme, but we got no problem with limiting fundamental rights to what is described in the Constitution and its Amendments, 'cause otherwise you got the most undemocratic collection in the federal government deciding which rights is gonna be bootstrapped to Constitutionality based on little more than a public policy analysis... which is exact what Congress exists to do. the Court is not fit for such value judgements. the problem we got is the current history and tradition analysis advanced by Alito and thomas is selective insofar as questioning whether a right were recognized in 1789... or 1868. is complicated 'cause 1868 is when you got fourteenth amendment adoption. (an admitted not helpful link to incorporation provided.) regardless, Alito and thomas is playing fast and loose with law and history to the advantage o' those who were the majority o' the electorate in 1789 and 1868-- white, male, christian, etc. worse, the new Court majority is being transparent with its intellectual dishonesty, applying originalism in absolutist terms when doing so favours current gop values, but ignoring when such an analysis would achieve less than favourable conclusions. 'tween the shadow docket excesses we has lamented previous and the new brand o' weaponized originalism adopted by the majority, am hardly recognizing the s'posed not- activist members o' the Court. HA! Good Fun!

there is a curious alchemy necessary to pull off such lies so routine. first you need create an us v. them culture, which is easier to achieve when people is suffering or afraid, but you would think it would be more difficult to create such divisions during peacetime and w/o major economic/social upheaval. additional and almost paradoxically you need convince people that everything they hear from previous trusted media sources is suspect, while at the same time you need foster an almost slavish devotion to a few select media outlets and voices which will deliver your alternative facts messaging. boris needed more polarization and he didn't have the necessary propaganda apparatus to reinvent his falsehoods as misunderstood integrity. "it's not lying if you don't admit that you lied!" with an us v. them electorate plus fox news and radio voices such as rush limbaugh and steve bannon telling the faithful (us) that the real liars is the libs and their media lackeys, never admitting you lied is a viable tactic and a powerful one. almost any lie will be embraced just so long as is contextualized as us v. them. that said, am admitted petty enough to admit a kinda schadenfreude for brit political woes. sure, US politics o' the last few years has been the equivalent o' the hell toilet from trainspotting, but brexit and boris proves there ain't anything unique stoopid or improbable 'bout our current troubles. HA! Good Fun!

our daily battle with the deer continues. the deer are winning. is a picture after we managed to chase the deer from our yard this am. the redwoods and fir is Gromnir property. is our neighbor's propane tank-- neighbor is on what is referred to as a circle lot and we had already landscaped the majority o' common area before he built, so our large lot is effective even larger than it appears to be on paper. these deer get into the fenced portion o' our yard and destroy, destroy, destroy. worst o' all, am much concerned 'bout our dogs who have free access to our backyard via a doggie door. the delicate looking deer hooves are capable o' caving in the skull o' even a large and ferocious canine in the blink o' an eye and our little yappers instinctive will bark and run at the deer. the possibility for a tragic ending is high. more first world problems, but am genuine concerned for our ankle biters as the deer literal come up onto our patio to eat potted plants. HA! Good Fun!