Search the Community

gifted asked same not long ago, and gd smacked him with the rolled newspaper. thought the lesson were driven home. silly o' us. regardless, you are gonna need be specific. who is "everyone" and what specific issue are you speaking 'bout? regardless o' legality o' presence in the USA, all human beings is afforded a few basic rights by the US Constitution. one reason why a number o' administrations, democrat and republican, kept guantanamo viable as a detention facility is 'cause it were arguable not in the US. non-citizens who were held outside o' the US were having less/no rights, or so the argument were presented. but step foot in US and those Constitutional protections would immediate kick in and take effect, protecting due process rights and other such defenses. so an immigrant who manages to make it to the US, legal or otherwise, gots basic rights. am not certain why folks convenient forget that fact. also, as hurl points out, the immigrants is being held for civil offenses. is on par with minor traffic violations. hit and run and reckless driving is criminal, but minor traffic infractions is civil... and so too is illegal border crossing. so akin to parking or speeding ticket... but no more than 10 mph over the speed limit as that often is the point when excess o' speed triggers reckless. 'course even the most hardcore natavits who has at least a couple firing neurons would balk at making border violations criminal. why? 'cause then you gotta give accused illegal immigrants criminal trial protection such a speedy trial and lawyer and jury. at the moment, you got thousand and thousands o' backlogged cases-- years o' backlog. toddlers is being ushered into immigration courts where judges s'posed explain to the child their rights and responsibilities. this ain't a joke, and it happens daily... many times a day. am thinking far too many people have no idea what "illegal immigrant" means insofar as legal rights is concerned, or they is convenient forgetting. maybe you don't like the Constitution? you are welcome to try and change it. HA! Good Fun!

a derisive retort that a statement or observation were too obvious to be worth mentioning? could apply with some regularity, but not enough to warrant a signature change. thanks for the input though. am curious to see who wins race to the bottom: trump complaining 'bout wind turbines again or gifted shoehorning concentration camps into another post. which happens first? more relevant to the thread: a minnesota farm family fights to save its land trump keeps saying the chinese and canadians and others is paying for his trade wars, but sure don't appear that way. not much o' a surprise, eh? duh. HA! Good Fun!

we thought the el paso perpetrator were sent to jail. kinda need segregation And denial o' due process to get an accurate concentration camp label. post ww2 cyprus were a concentration camp. so too were japanese internment camps here in the USA. that said, post ww2, use o' concentration camp language has folks immediate think o' nazi death camps, which probable ain't constructive if goal is meaningful debate. regardless, gifted's sarcasm-by-ignorance efforts appear off-target. nothing like repeating a failed effort to drive home a point, eh? but back on topic, trump is calling for tougher background checks on gun purchases. one wonders if the President is aware the House sent such legislation to the Senate where it languishes in part 'cause trump has threatened to veto it. perhaps the President is so busy ending aids and saving the nation from wind turbines to know what he has said previous 'bout background checks? HA! Good Fun!

... am genuine not certain which would be the more laughable alternative. as to previous administrations and tanks, am not one o' the guys who suggested such were unprecedented. such is gauche and indeed tacky, but as you say, not unprecedented. delivering a campaign speech on the fourth? maybe need go back to nixon, though other Presidents have had brief 4th o' july photo ops which typical also drew criticism. oh, and as you is likely aware, take an opportunity to throw a few jabs at jfk is not gonna bother us none. am always baffled by jfk revisionist history. insofar as the umbrellas, am thinking they were taken up as a defense 'gainst pepper spray rather than acid rain. honest, am not recalling exact why umbrellas were the adopted symbol. regardless, is so difficult to guess if acid rain or pepper spray explanation would be more amusing to gifted. neither is exact on par with "crushed" by tank, but am genuine not sure where the humor in such imagery is, so is tough to predict future laughs. HA! Good Fun! ps am honest not recalling eisenhower or jfk doing 4th o' july military parades. you got a link, or were such inaugurations or other events? am s'posing we could google, but am lazy.

... and now Gromnir learned something. am vague recalling an international nato tank competition from 80s, but tank biathlon were new to us. as for weird russian competitions, am still gonna vote for chess boxing as our favorite. another image for gifted. funny stuff. err. HA! Good Fun!

coming from guy we needed spend multiple pages explaining the difference 'tween temp change and rate of temp change, is an odd observation. err on side o' gifted ignorance is the conservative play. nevertheless, considering how by now the only way a person wouldn't know trumps tanks would be stationary is if they were willfully avoiding reading articles which referenced those tanks, we cannot wonder if you might wanna look in the mirror for a person needing a neurological consult. and see, you really did learn something. HA! good Fun!

no doubt images o' warsaw ghetto fighters throwing rocks at armed germans in 43' is also a h00t for gifted.

is not really a "case file" in this situation. case file for whom? didn't ever have a grand jury specific review trump for charges. mueller made clear he could not consider charges. investigation only. there is a difference and such minutiae can be important. specific nomenclature aside, this started 'cause we asked for clarification. "It would be funny to watch how quickly would they back off if someone would give them the case papers and say "- ok, bring this before the judge" so we asked sharp what he meant by case papers? we were not hair-splitting when we asked for a little illumination. "am not sure what "case papers" you is talking 'bout. am pretty sure you don't know what you is talking 'bout. volume 2 o' the mueller report is 182 pages and volume 2 is largely unredacted. fraking dream scenario for any prosecutor to have a bob mueller team o' all-stars do all the grunt work so they can slap together a formal charging document?" sharp clarified. "Case papers as the name suggests are papers for the case. You know the pieces of cellulose with ink on them in the shape of letters. Seems pretty simple to me. Oh well ." sharp, as is typical, is trying to bluff his way through this. doesn't know enough to carry the bluff. @Guard Dog we got at least a little compassion for the folks in oregon. whether the clowns is dressed red or blue, the senators should be able to forge a compromise. yeah, the funding bills being held up ain't like trump's unilateral shutdown which cost the fed government billions o' dollars and saw fed workers go w/o pay-- oregon state workers aren't in danger o' seeing an end to paychecks anytime soon. even so, there will be delays on projects and independent contractors at some indefinite point in the future might suffer... maybe? gonna need delay hiring a few additional state troopers, and budget money were gonna expand caseworker numbers to aid foster-care system. etc. nothing immediate and dire, but is important stuff. *shrug* playing hooky as a last resort don't bother us, particular as is not even the first time the oregon senators have resorted to such. converse, a state senator advocating militia violence? another threatening violence 'gainst state troopers performing their duties? y'know, one thing those old movies get wrong 'bout the boston tea party is how civilized it all were. sure, the rebels dressed as indians to kinda/sorta hide their identities, but the Americans were extreme careful to not hurt anybody and to actual avoid any property damage save for the tea and the lock on the hold where the tea were kept. were no other damage to ships, persons or cargo. to be clear, am not suggesting the oregon senators should next engage in property damage as a form o' protest 'gainst 2019 version o' taxation w/o representation. am only bringing up to show that one o' the more dramatic and memorable examples o' unruly Americans carrying out protest were entire bloodless and carried out with almost urbane flair. even so, we agree oregon ain't gonna fall to pieces, or even suffer great, if a handful o' republicans hide out in "idaho" for days or weeks. however, we personal do draw a hard line at violence, but again, the threats o' violence started after gifted's hand wringing. HA! Good Fun!

you specific distinguished case papers. distinguished as celulose with ink on it. nobody refers to case papers. had no idea what you thought were case papers... but your bullet point evasion once again fails to make sense-- you suggested if the lawyers got 'em, whatever they are, they would balk at going before a judge. the lawyers in our link, all +1000, got the stuff barr and rosenstein got. they got the same papers. duh. you were dismissive o' the +1000. again-- "They sound like every retired militaryman who "would win every war" and retired policemen who "would solve every crime" etc. if only they were younger." the actual abilities and experience o' the +1000 is thus quite relevant. were core. nevertheless, even though it were an evasion by sharp, am still not knowing who these retired military folks is you speak o' as you can't produce any (irony.) "We are former federal prosecutors. We served under both Republican and Democratic administrations at different levels of the federal system: as line attorneys, supervisors, special prosecutors, United States Attorneys, and senior officials at the Department of Justice. The offices in which we served were small, medium, and large; urban, suburban, and rural; and located in all parts of our country. "Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice." there is a list o' 1025 names attached. knock yourself out. fact that they cannot bring the case with barr as ag don't in anyway diminish the expertise o' the +1000. just as there is no doubt more than one expert on bumblebee aerodynamics in the world (HA!) there can be multiple people with expertise on legal questions. the best neurosurgeon in the world suffers tennis elbow and cannot perform a surgery. doesn't mean his opinion is invalidated, eh? the +1000 have the bona fides to qualify a experts; a few o' them is daunting qualified. fact that only one person has power to make a decision or perform an action hardly precludes others from being capable o' contributing valuable and even superior insights. evasion. as to gifted, is good to know you don't need sympathy, 'cause with all the whining and hand wringing 'bout senators and free press and not enough chinese style do the last few pages, you sure seemed like you needed a hug. ... aw, what the heck. can't be stingy with the hugs. now dontcha feel better? HA! Good Fun! ps this shouldn't be necessary, but given how blunt sharp has been since returning, am thinking it just might be necessary to clarify how graham's observation regarding nobody on earth who could were an observation o' ability rather than capacity. wouldn't be a point if the senator's total pool o' earthlings were limited to barr.

there is a reason we referenced senator packwood being hauled in to chambers to establish a quorum. @gifted and we know how much both you and gd like to indulge in hyperbole. is not as if this is the only bit o' legislation oregon has dealt with in the past couple years, eh? and nobody suggests doing nothing on even this issue. is important issue, but if you gotta strongarm a minority into accepting, then perhaps more debate and negotiation is needed, eh? is so much bad legislation and executive decisions which has been executed over the years. not doing is often the course o' wisdom. choose not to pass bad legislation is hardly same as accomplishing absolutely nothing. HA! Good Fun!

good news, bad news. while we weren't a fan o' dos2 combat neither, and as such a larian bg3 is not a slam dunk for us, the interviewer in our link were a larian fan. the thing is, the larian guy kinda pushed back on the notion o' bg3 incorporating dos2 gameplay. made clear that, first and foremost, bg3 were gonna be a d&d game. whatever liberties the developers is taking with the rulez, they is making efforts to replicate a tabletop d&d experience... to some unspecific degree. the thing is, d&d 5e might not be gifted's cup o' tea neither, so... regardless, interviewer did a poor job o' revealing much 'bout bg3 save for accident. when larian guy were correcting preconceptions and expectations o' the journalist, then we learned a bit. HA! good Fun!

am gonna do the seeming impossible and combine a recognition o' gifted's complete random moment and bring the thread back on-topic with a surprising timely use o' the way-back machine. not sure what happened with our first attempt at this... let's see what happens with a second cut at the same wood. HA! Good fun!

Just because it sucked for some of us doesn't mean it will suck for everyone. Besides, Gifted, Shady, Hurlshot, TN, all seem to have done well. So there is hope. Not for me though. Two attempts and two failures. Either I'm a terrible judge of character or I'M the problem. Either way, not getting on THAT horse again. am not good with gardening. have killed many plants over the years, and at some point we gave up trying to become a good gardner. is no rule which says you need to be good at everything and 'course the stakes is much lower when dealing with roses and tomatoes than spouses. stubborn trying to prove you is good at marriage would be only reason to criticize. ... we were actual engaged during our 3rd year at boalt. found out 'bout a medical condition and decided marriage weren't a responsible life path. on the positive side, from our pov, most married folks we know is making us think o' polar bear clubs. got a goodly number o' people enduring a shared agony while trying to laugh and smile through the unpleasantness. HA! Good Fun! ps edit to get back to politics candace owen we actual watched the entire "two hour" clip and she is kinda mischaracterizing her response, though she didn't deserve the admonishment she received. the nationalism question were asked at 38:30 ms. owens' response begins at 40:54. ends 41:55. listen to the entire 1 hour and 16 minutes at your own peril.

the shibboleth yet again? https://www.statista.com/statistics/271897/leading-countries-by-acreage-of-genetically-modified-crops/ just one example. the US is, far and away, the world leader in gmo research and exploitation. more than 60% o' the food gifted and others in the states consume is gmo. the eu, japan and china has historic been big critics o' gmo research and production, but the main reasons for such has been transparent economic protectionism. japan doesn't wanna need deal with us rice and china placed all kinda restrictions on us beef which consume gmo. 'course china has been doing much more research in recent years, but they is actual having difficulty implementing advances, which is reason for numbers in the graph linked. 'tween government ineptitude and public backlash, few gmo have actual been implemented in a nation with massive food supply needs. 'course the gmo problems is significant and often poor understood until decades have elapsed. gene flow were considered a rare and negligible phenomenon in the 80s, but is now understood to be common. am doubtful we need worry 'bout a planet o' the ape scenario anytime soon, but is sometimes amusing to realize the disconnect 'tween action and behavior. come into california with an exotic fruit or little susie's pet gerbil, and you got all kinda bells and whistles go off-- is dozens o' laws protecting states from the potential harm from invasive species. converse, we got gmo being tested and produced on large scales w/o actual understanding the long term hazards. HA! Good Fun!

you managed to outdo self by resurrecting a month old topic. since you went there, we would happily have this public seeing as how qifted has once again regressed to abandoning any pretense o' topic discussion. https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/106336-weird-random-interesting/?p=2146532 tn asked us both to stop, but only Gromnir did so. rather than continuing a board tangent which had already received a mod warning, we asked tn via pm if we also got a chance at a parting shot. am not gonna speak for tn, but we told him as far as we were concerned, the matter were ended. is kinda funny that apparent the mod, and not Gromnir, is the one who seeming needs be moderated. qq squee am happy to continue whatever thread relevant discussion you wish, but you invariably take us 'round the bend. will you be shocked when mods need once again step in? and that is the thing which gifted don't appear to understand. is not negative reviews which is troublesome, but rather the subversion o' a feature for childish and arguable illegitimate reasons. were more than a few bad steam reviews o' poe1 and poe2 which were generated before the tow kerfuffle, and those negative reviews did not have boeroer and others complaining 'bout subversion o' the system or infantile behavior. heck, more than one developer has pointed out how negative reviews is often useful for future design... just as long as the reviews provide actionable critique and detail. Gromnir has spent far more posts criticizing obsidian design choices than praising, and am not thinking the folks angry at the tow steam response had our kinda negativity in mind when chastising the slew o' new terribad poe and poe2 reviews. bad reviews clear ain't at the issue. is silly straw man nonsense to suggest such. HA! Good Fun!

we see gifted is channeling his inner roberto aguayo... again. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xF455bGsGU8 HA! Good Fun!

relevance? as a matter o' fact, the very existence o' arlington is a refutation o' gifted pov. where is arlington national cemetery... and don't say arlington. robert e' lee's home. arlington were established on the grounds o' robert e. lee's home in part to guarantee it would never be turned into a memorial for the aggrandizement o' the confederacy. in recent years, some o' the original harsh legislation regarding lee has been amended and the former home o' lee were furnished and renamed as a memorial site. even so, the arlington site specific recognizes the need to prevent glorification o' the confederacy and lee. honor the dead who has fought in wars without tour guides telling you fibs 'bout the honorable soldiers who successful fought to prevent the spread o' communism in southeast asia. no claims the men who fought in iraq saved the western world from a wmd attack by the madman, saddam hussein. we do highly recommend a visit to arlington. is a somber experience. is 'bout humility and respect. is a reason Gromnir has pointed out on these boards how we is supporting any number o' civil war battlefield site memorials (north and south) as they is powerful reminders o' the tragic loss o' life american exercised 'pon fellow americans... and anybody who cannot see difference 'tween such and 40' tall monuments to nathan bedford forrest, the first grand wizard o' the kkk, monuments built during the civil rights era many years after the civil war, is not being honest. HA! Good Fun! ps thanks for bringing up arlington. we shoulda' mentioned arlington earlier as a contrast example, but didn't think to do so until you raised the spectre, so-to-speak.

kinda missing the point though. this isn't 'bout the sins o' the forefathers. is a sin o' your tour guide/groundskeeper, and many others. teaching kids fake history? as we said, interesting pov. HA! Good Fun! ps if gifted genuine don't care 'bout sins o' the forefathers, then he should be doubly angry 'bout the $40 million in taxpayer money. one o' the only arguments for maintaining the monuments is so folks do not forget sins o' the past. if such is a non-factor, then what is the other justification for spending so much taxpayer monies?

purposeful misreading or just missed the important stuff? first of the two recent linked articles by gifted, right in the title, says students "could" face expulsion. is nothing in the article which suggests all the students caught up in the scandal will or should be expelled, though there is an admitted argument for such. is no entitlement to a four year degree when you are granted admissions to a university. you pay per quarter or per semester. that's it. most scholarships (including all d-1 athletic scholarships) are valid only for 1 year at a time, requiring student to meet various eligibility requirements to continue. if it turns out a student didn't actual meet admissions standards in the first place, why not have student re-apply? if they has already paid for the semester, expelling seems unjust unless the university is certain the student were complicit in the scheme. regardless, the actual articles don't go near as far as Gromnir... do no more than state obvious: students could lose their seat. there is gonna be a review. omg, no! students part o' a multi-million dollar bribery and fraud scheme are having their admissions reviewed. reviewed? "squee" indeed. "Others might be treated more harshly, she said. "If the kid is 18 at the time he sits to take the tests and the proctor is feeding him answers, I don’t see why he shouldn’t be liable. And I think it’s an interesting prosecutorial choice. I think it says something about how they view the nature of the wrong," she said." seems fair. again, fraud is bad; that observation should be axiomatic. if a student were knowing part o' the scheme to gain admission to school under false pretenses, why should school be forced to keep the student? ain't forced to keep other students who lie or cheat or bribe, but these kids get some kinda free pass? why? HA! Good Fun!

you already gave up on discussing any issue relevant topic save for personal silliness, so any response from Gromnir is gonna necessarily add to devolution, but please keep posting... for posterity. gfted's guide to board moderation, now with examples. what a hoot. let's see just how far you will go... am knowing a "fin" from gifted is meaningless, so am admitted curious to see just how far he will take what is obvious already doomed. yet another attempt to keep thread relevant. DNA Shows Ethnically Diverse Crew Sailed Henry VIII’s Flagship HA! Good Fun! ps as to gd millenial post, am not sure who to blame more: parents or schools. parents is necessarily doing less parenting than ever before. more work and less time to parent. two working parents is now common. is not school's job to parent kids, but reality is kids likely get as much parenting at school as they get at home. many schools, for the last couple generations, has been in participation trophy mode. is never the kid's fault when they get bad grades; teachers need find a more appropriate modality to reach the student. bullies at school were victims o' bad parents or over harsh potty training, so give 'em hugs instead o' discipline. etc. am being hyperbolic, but not completely. is not the job o' schools to parent, but reality is many (not all) parents don't parent the way they once did.

sure. sure. 'cause million dollar bribery schemes is nothing but an excuse for first worlder's "squeals." what an utter waste o' law enforcement efforts to uncover and stop fraud. corruption? only reason anybody cares is 'cause o' fake news doing fake news, right? *insert eye-roll* yeah, have learned from gifted the real problems is the press getting same free speech protections as ordinary citizens, american federal democracy successful preventing good old fashioned dictatorships from getting stuff done, and basic math. why won't somebody do something 'bout the real problems? HA! Good Fun!

QQs and excessive punctuation and "very sad" appears to be needed for gifted, so is 'bout him being discombobulated as 'posed to Gromnir. if is unnecessary, we can stop, but don't want you to lose track as is so frequent the case. our father was cremated, so is inapplicable. on the other hand, if this were some kinda silly attempt to bait us, then we will make only the following observation: QQ hower, as a serious response to a childish query heavy with snark (can't expect too serious a response if you describe with "pappy's bones," eh?) am gonna observe how hinder construction based on presence o' remains o' relatives temporal proximate or remote is personal irrelevant as am having little emotional attachment to the remains o' the deceased. nevertheless, am self aware enough to recognize we would unapologetic use such an excuse on behalf o' clients or causes we believed in as a means delaying or stopping ill-considered constructions. would be irresponsible and unethical not to use every means. also, while we do not have the emotional makeup to be individual concerned 'bout the moldering evidence o' humans long dead save as data for physical anthropologists and the like, would be needing channel a level o' sociopath thankful alien to us to fail to recognize how different such stuff affects our fellow living humans. to discount impact o' a perceived violation o' earthly remains 'cause it don't bother Gromnir personal would be displaying a level o' callousness we hesitate to consider. as such, our concerns insofar as "pappy's bones" is a recognition such is not necessarily insular from our concerns 'bout the wellbeing o' the living. likely needed at least a couple exclamation points to generate comprehension, but C'est La Vie! HA! Good Fun!

sure there is accountability for press, just as there is accountability for individual citizens who publish libelous content... is why we have libel tort. standard o' proof is tough, and again, is thankful tough. founding fathers did not want to chill open and frank discussions o' noteworthy persons and events. need scrupulous fact checking for every schnook passing out pamphlets or writing letter to editor is not only resulting in less speech but is unAmerican... or at least it woulda' been almost universal viewed as unAmerican to hamstring political speech even a few years past. 2019 is different. as to wh access, is getting pretty far afield from initial issue, but will answer more fully than is deserved, w/o resorting to case names 'n such. custom and tradition, as much as written law, may have weight o' law. no doubt any involved in regular course o' business understands the wisdom o' such generalities. in the hypothetical widget business, a "truckload," as a matter o' custom and tradition, actual represents a specific number of units: 500. got a contract tween manufacturer and vendor which specifies delivery o' one truckload per month. evuhl manufacturer thinks he is sneaky and uses a remote controlled toy truck 'bout the size o' a bread toaster and delivers a single widget to the vendor in june. goes to court and points out to judge how the vendor were the one to write the contract, so any ambiguity in the C is gonna work against the author. truckload, in ordinary english, is unspecific. manufacturer complete loaded his truck and made delivery as promised. most o' us would be justifiable outraged by manufacturers actions. thankful, if vendor is able to show "truckload" is indeed custom in the widget business, then vendor is likely gonna win case. is a similar principle with government actions, particular when actions is utter transparent. if wh has been allowing reporters, including reporter D in particular, access to wh press room frequent enough so as to make clear such is ordinary course o' business, then sudden stop such access is gonna trigger due process, regardless o' lack o' any specific rule or law granting access to reporters. during the civil rights era, government institutions in the south found ways to seeming legal deny access to blacks from vote and important services. literacy requirements for voting is no doubt familiar. less well covered in high school history texts were apparent innocuous stuff such as business hour restrictions at government offices which government knew disproportionate affected minority access. when government changes rules and behaviours to disadvantage folks it doesn't like, the Court should hopeful steps in and delivers a smackdown on the government. and keep in mind, the President don't in anyway own the wh. gifted and Gromnir ain't been vetted and cleared for access to press room. is obvious and reasonable security concerns related to random persons gaining access to wh. converse, prevent a person who has gone through all the security protocols from government space they has been previous been afforded access to 'cause they is rude or antagonistic to President is not gonna be an argument which gains much traction. am honest surprised the wh press room access thing were gaining the President any sympathy... and to be fair, even the majority o' fox commentators chastised the chief executive on this point. HA! Good Fun!

Well, the "press" is hardly monolithic. But even so both things can be true at once. more significant is the obvious mischaracterization o' the press getting a free pass. ny times v. sullivan (9-0) is a free speech case as 'posed to a press-specific case. all Americans, when discussing public figures and events, has a low threshold for fact checking... and thank goodness for folks such as gifted and gd and Gromnir 'cause "publish" applies equal to tens o' thousands o' printings daily by a city newspaper as it does posting on a game message board or pamphlets handed out on a street corner or similar. can't knowing or intentional print falsehoods, but mistake is forgiven and aggressive advocating a particular pov is historical more common than is attempts at impartial reporting. 'course the the myth o' the unbiased press were created to vilify the press and hold it to a standard which has never existed in this country. free pass? *chuckle* https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/104780-political-thread-xx/?p=2087953 there is this notion o' the press being coconspirators with and getting a free pass from obama during his administration. have personal pointed out the error o' such a notion more than once. Congress and many elements o' the press rolled over for obama during the first two years o' his administration, but after that, no President since lincoln had been as aggressive in attacking journalists as were obama. https://www.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/tv/z-on-tv-blog/bs-ae-zontv-trumpvpress-20170304-story.html the thing is, not obama and not even lincoln attacked legitimacy o' the institution o' the press. both lincoln and obama understood the essential role o' the press in US politics and they similar recognized the deference the founders afforded the rabid and biased journalists o' the late 1700s. core American values and all that. appreciation o' place in history and whatnot. there is no free pass for the press, so is no point refuting, but even so, the thankful enlightened men who has typical held office o' the President has, for the most part, recognized the worth o' the traditions and laws which protect the press (as well as individual Americans) when discussing newsworthy persons and events. also, we never subscribed to the doomsayer pov offered up by some elements in the media. we specific noted how 2019 and 1919 were hardly interchangeable. heck, one o' our favorite spencer tracy monologues doesn't work quite same today as it did 1967. even so, the past decade has been disappointing for us. is not the rough beast slouching towards bethlehem, but have personal been surprised by degree o' political polarization and the magnitude o' individual intolerance we has seen from fellow Americans in recent years. worse, as we noted earlier in the thread, we has become numb to what we previous woulda' considered unthinkable. catholic schoolboys in a confrontation with native americans and black israelites? compared to antifa and white supremacists in numbers literal stabbing and clubbing each other on steps o' state capitol, the covington boys brouhaha is minor. our standard for normal (not same as acceptable) has shifted in the last few years and the move has been more than a little. yeah, the media indulges in hyperbole, but the carus effect o' the last few years o' increasing improbable news may be a contributing factor. check out the ethics in america series, particular episode 3: public trust, private interest. https://www.learner.org/resources/series81.html# is 1989, which is not so long ago for an old dog such as Gromnir. at 4:50-- why don't you lie? of all the videos in the series, the only one which feels complete outta touch, but enlightening for that very reason, is the discussion o' media. good thing? HA! Good Fun!

Forget that example, thats not the point What about pedophile rings that get busted? Don't you automatically assume they scum and guilty ? no, we don't assume they are guilty or scum. however, depending on the evidence made public available, we might protest or boycott. we might even use our First Amendment rights to criticize the State if it appears to us that there were a failure on the part o' lawyers or police or whomever that made it possible for seeming guilty folks to go free. we need be convinced that a person is scum... need more than mere accusation. however, what convinces Gromnir is likely gonna be different than what is required to convince gifted or bruce. good. am not seeing a problem if evidence made public is unconvincing to gifted but satisfies Gromnir that _________ is scum and we will henceforth never voluntarily do business with the d-bag. stuff such as "innocent until proven guilty" is not a standard for the court o' public opinion. if __________ is an accused pedophile, then how much evidence do we require to convince us that ___________ is not somebody we wanna leave alone with our pre-teen cousin, regardless o' whether or not we is certain that they is legal guilty? chances are that we need little such evidence in that situation, eh? for us, legal guilt is a complete different query. there can be any number o' reasons why the State fails to prosecute a scumbag. is even more reasons why the State may fail to gain a conviction o' a scumbag. am understanding that such a pov can seem self-contradictory. HA! Good Fun!