leh-nerd skin-erd

contrived /kən-trīvd′/ adjective Obviously planned or calculated; not spontaneous or natural; labored. "a novel with a contrived ending." Unnatural, forced. Showing effects of planning or manipulation. Most definitely not the one in your country, Monsieur, but thank you for inquiring.

Jesus, you fold like a cheap suit when a patient questions your advice? Are you a doctor of horsecockery?

Actually, that would be horrible advice given your diagnosis, devoid of reason and indicates quite a bit confusion on your part.

Ah, the old power of “his words” argument. No one else…Clinton referring to tens of millions as deplorable and beyond redemption…Biden suggesting Republicans were going to put people in chains….Bush fabricating evidence to trick the nation into going to war leading to a million+ deaths….Harris sh*t talking vaccine development during a national crisis…ah, why bother. You seem to live in an alternate universe where regardless of what others may say, the insults and divisive language…you seem to only pick up on one side o it. You’re a poli-speak Rip Van Winkle. And Christie is sorta porky, and it wasn’t all that long ago all the beautiful liberal voters had pictures of him on a lawn chair circulating and laughing like Donald Trump. Anyway—sure, you’re walking in the shadow in the Lord when you declare someone has called for murdering citizens and then adjust slightly to….them not calling for murder at all a few hours later. That’s not “overly excited”, that’s hysterical hand wringing.

In the span of a few hours, Andy, you went from “Trump wants to murder Americans” to a much less batsh8t crazy analysis because some random guy with the screen name of a 70s southern rock band asked you for clarity. That’s nuts. Of course he was following the war monger angle—-he actually said it— if you think that’s a problem I can appreciate and debate that all day. Yet, on the assassination, your analysis is much more measured in spite of a stunning, almost comical strong of events leading to a guy dying horrifically, another being injured and a Kennedy-style head explosion by sheer dumb luck. If Tom Clancy used what happened in book he would have been laughed out of existence. What an interesting perspective you have. With respect to pregnancy, the conventional wisdom shared by your people is that men can become pregnant and of course all that follows. I’m not sure why you’re hung up in the 1940s. Be that as it may, you’re a proponent of a woman’s right to choose until birth? The way I see it, a person’s right to vote is an important right of a citizen, and you wanting to eliminate the vote for certain people is also a thought out of the 1940s.

You seem to be a huge fan of hers, carrying her water when as a senator, she had a tremendous platform to speak truth to power about an issue that seems otherwise important to you. As for holding her accountable for her father’s actions, you’re off on a tangent like you’re a host of The View. Trump said she’s a war hawk, and wondered whether or not she would be if she had to face combat. You went weird with that, of course, but if that’s your thing, that’s your thing. All I can tell you is the thoughts that Trump shared—how might she look at things if she was on the front line—and that’s an eternal question that’s been asked and debated for as long as there has been war.

She was, and is, a strong proponent of her father. She has had many years to disavow her father's actions, to reveal her belief that the American public was duped. She had tremendous power to reach the masses as a US Senator, her word certainly would have mattered. How did that go? But seriously, still....'suto'?

Liz Cheney was a strong proponent and supporter of her father in invading Iraq. You probably forgot. The rest of your post is weird....and seriously....'suto'?

I think @L Ron Burgundy is 100% committed to telling you exactly how much he doesn’t care about what you have to say, regardless of how much time and energy it takes. You really have to applaud his commitment and dedication to the noble pursuit of apathy.

I heard somewhere that 22 former CIA spooks and a cashier from a 7/11 are saying that apostrophe was edited out by the Rooskies.

I would think when the owner of one of the publications blows up the "reliable media" is quite unreliable, perhaps one would reconsider that which they thought they knew. But, some people cling to their false idols. See: Bezos, Jeff

Ah, another Gumby argument to fit a narrative. I figured that might be the case--not because I think you're an intentionally dishonest poster like some others here--but because a declaration of the magnitude you made surely would garner a ton of press, and represent an easy find on the internet. What I can tell you with certainty is that while you're bending into a pretzel to reimagine comments in obviously unintended way, the people you support oversaw the security and safety of their political rival, that so failed so badly that a simpleton nearly assassinated him. From wandering around the grounds with a rifle, to ignoring concerns from citizens, to climbing on the roof of the building of one of the command centers--it's quite reasonable to question how much was incompetence and how much intentional from Team Harris. But carry on, Andrew.

I wasn’t talking about putting words in your mouth, that was you, silly. I’ll repeat. Andy1 made a statement. I asked for additional information after a google search didn’t return links consistent with what he claimed. You linked opinion pieces, which is wholly different than providing a link proving what Andy1 said to be true. You can do that in your next post. Now, you’re making declarations of your own. I listened to the Trump/Rogan convo and didn’t catch any part about murdering Americans. I’m halfway through the Vance interview, will likely finish up tonight and no comments about murdering anyone there yet, either. If you can muster the energy to send the link detailing what Andy1 said, that would be appreciated. In the meantime, you’re offering up garbage and garbage ain’t cool these days. Don’t you dare underestimate me. You must have the link, surely. Why are you holding back?

Andy made a pretty clear statement on what he believes to be true. I googled what he said and can’t find a link for Trump calling for “murders of Americans”. If you had a link calling for murders, I’d think you would provide it. Providing links on narratives and opinions of what people are telling you to think is akin to thinking Harris was unpopular until someone told you she was the One True Choice. You’re getting paranoid and taking up bandwidth, BillStarr. Provide the link or stop wasting time.

I’m not certain what you’ve heard about calls for “murders”. I googled what you wrote, and see a series of articles stating that Trump has called for the death penalty for people here illegally and who are guilty of murdering American citizens. If you’re seeing something else about “murder of Americans”, what is it?

Welcome back, Kay. It's always nice to be involved in a conversation, even if only by asteriskical addendum. I had forgotten about the discussion on perfumes and complicity on hot button issues, that was quite some time ago. I am pleased to see my comments landed, and that after all this time what I shared resonates enough to warrant a mention. I think many people find they gain wisdom with experience, and the ability to revisit that which they once knew to be true. I can appreciate your steadfast denial of hypocrisy, what I've offered is in contrast with that which you may well value most--your integrity. Still, the challenge and conflict between what you say and what you do is yours to carry, not mine. I can only point out the obvious and hope that with the fullness of time, we both can grow. Sounds like we're both on a journey here. On a positive note, I've gained wisdom as well. Before today, I was unaware of the "I got a gift!" exemption to the liberal list of "Issues Important to Our Collective Survival". I suppose when the seas rise to uncomfortable levels on the coast, those impacted can take solace in the fact that somewhere, there's a well-intentioned revolutionary who smells kinda nice, or drives a full-sized honkin' SUV she gifted herself for her 40th birthday. Now, on this costume. I mean, sure, "...not 100% cruelty-free..." sounds an awful lot like 100% cruelty to whatever animals they test on, but let's move past that. Halloween is a pretty darn important day in the grand scheme of things, so if you're going to bend some rules and a couple lab rats have to be blinded, this is the time to do it. I loved the story of Medusa as a child, and it sounds like you've put a lot of thought into it. I wonder though, if the story was written today...would Ovid apply a different spin? I'm thinking in 2024, the peril associated with Medusa was less about hair and snakes, more about sustained yammering about her hair and the products used to tame it? Perhaps this time, the poet offers the valiant warriors the option of turning to stone not as a tragic fate, but as a reward for their bravery? Admittedly this occurs to me because I woke up one night not long ago and my wife had the Housewives of Yammerville on the telly and they were round-tabling agitatedly over some slight or the other. Hope the party goes well! How presumptuous!

I wonder about a certain someone reading an EKG what with all the bouncy lines and whatnot.

I always thought the “Bush fabricated intelligence crowd that resulted in a million + deaths” crowd liked their rules kinda squishy.

Frenx is gonna flip his lid over this!

Oh, that's absolutely horrible news. I enjoyed chatting with him, and while we didn't agree on much, he seemed like a good and genuine guy. I lost a good friend earlier this year from the same cause, and it was devastating to his family and friends. Thanks for the heads up, @Wacka, and I have to say the note shared by SDS was absolutely top notch.

Oh, I’m special all right!

I get a nice stipend for the work I do with people like LaRon. It’s a win-win, and I’m grateful he’s appreciative. That’s enough for me.

I’m pleased—under my tutelage you’ve moved past denials and at least see firecrackers. That’s a step forward!

First, to clarify, I believe JB believes what he said--certain Americans are "garbage" because they don't agree with him. I think that's indicative of the hard left view of citizens in general, and of course all that pre-dates the comment by the comedian by a decade plus. It's consistent with the Clinton appeal to the darker instincts of the far left--borne of arrogance, hubris and a vast overestimation of one's own self-worth. In that regard, you're no different than the far right, you just throw stones at different targets. Second, one person was 'slinging the insult'. Attack the guy who did, attack the RNC or Trump for allowing it to happen on their watch, but like most things in life--some things aren't complicated. Some will find the humor offensive. Some will find it funny. Some will find it stupid. Most won't think of it again after hearing about it--including the whole bunch of outraged liberals who will not seize the opportunity to dig into their pocket and send a donation to help the needy in PR. JB of course misses the subtle aspects of life, maybe because he's a politician, maybe because he's dumb as stump, maybe because he knows he can rile people like you up. Third, I thought having the guy appear and deliver that monologue was pretty dumb. Not because edgy comedy doesn't have its place (and it does, even with you softies who pretend it doesn't), but because it's unnecessary and that wasn't the place. Finally, my only real suggestion here is don't be so obviously full of sh*t in a forum like this. You like your brand of insults, you like your brand of denigrating others, you like your brand of politics and it's not about unity or decency.

This thread has been an interesting read, and the responses have been entirely predictable. There are ugly people in the world, some are here. The people outraged by a candidate lying and telling half-truths were very pleased to vote for a candidate lying and telling half-truths for nearly 50 years. The people outraged by a candidate allegedly assaulting women were very pleased to vote for a candidate who acknowledged and admitting assaulting women. The people outraged by a president maintaining classified material were very pleased to support a candidate who took, maintained and shared classified documents as a senator...VP..and private citizen. The people outraged by a phony allegation of a candidate partnering with Russia walked in lockstep to support a president with business ties to China. The people outraged by phony allegations of foreign election interference were thrilled to line up and vote for a candidate who benefited greatly from documented domestic election interference. The people outraged by a candidate who they suggest has cognitive/psychological issues were dumbfounded to find their candidate was unable to string a cohesive sentence together during an internationally televised debate. And so on. The only question I have here is whether or not Biden's comments came about as a result of his continuing cataclysmic decline, or simply the loss of yet another filter as happens to the elderly. His comments are entirely consistent with democrat strategy, and certainly in line with past comments that saw him booted from the race for the president.