leh-nerd skin-erd

We had a nice moment earlier. You were empathetic about my limitations as you viewed them. I acknowledged your feelings and expressed appreciation that you cared enough to care enough. Most importantly we agree that Biden was convinced to discontinue his run in spite of repeated declarations of his intentions before a debate was scheduled, in the run up to and after the debate. His approach can best be described as “Anytime, Anywhere Pal!”. Now it seems you’re intent on reverse engineering what happened to fit the narrative of an heroic statesman facing a silent crisis of confidence walking away, and the courageous constituency who knew on some level that while he had lost a step, it was really his age that was of concern, not his penchant for using words that don’t exist and talking to dead associates that was a bigger issue than how many birthdays he has had. After consultations with doctors, staff, leadership, family (and a host of enablers on a massive scale), he decided to run. When he struggled, he continued to run. When he crashed like the Hindenburg in the Trump debate, he continued to run. In the week or so after his epic implosion, he continued to declared he was THE man. We don’t know this because I say so, we know this from the words he used and thoughts shared by his advisory team. All the rest is drivel. He was convinced to drop out, he dropped out and that’s about it. As to why, speculation abounds.

Obviously, board members here have a tendency to disagree on just about everything. JB decision to discontinue his run as some sort of noble gesture for party flies in direct contrast to his actions, his words, and his declaration of his intentions. He quite literally spent hours preparing for a nationally televised debate to showcase his grit and competence, shook apart at the seams and suggested he had a cold...bad prep...he was traveling too much..and he was just tired. He declared after the debate that he was staying in the race and would beat DJT, I guess having recovered from the flu-that he picked up in on an international flight-and impacted debate prep and which subsequently left him exhausted and caused him to confuse medicare with the Japanese in 45.

I appreciate your expression of sympathy, compassion is sadly lacking in the world today. We agree that in spite of his repeated declarations that he was running, he was convinced to stand down.

Ah, the Secretly Hoping Society. They were pretty certain that Trump was the only president holding classified documents as I recall, then suddenly became experts on slippage which later morphed into special consideration for electeds. Nice people, a bit naive. It’s entirely possible JB was reading the Secretly Hoping newsletter, where all the Secret Hopers were urging him to rethink his decision. Not probable but possible. But if you prefer the Biden was saying he was running but what he was really saying was he wasn’t running angle, cool. At the end of day, it seems quite clear he was forced to tap out, and there typically is a reason for that sort of thing. Sometimes a velvet glove is used, other times the hammer comes down.

That is a funny interpretation to be sure. As to mature ladies and facial considerations, I believe you’re looking for a different website.

That’s silly. Biden’s family is a mess, his daughter-in-law getting a pass on her misdeeds, his daughter reminisced about some of her odd memories with her dad from childhood, and it’s quite likely Hunter is guilty of much more than we’re hearing about. It seems increasingly likely Biden used his office for financial gain, it is a reasonable assumption that his brother could be targeted for misdeeds in the family business, and Biden is a shell of whatever man he was a decade or two ago. He also left classified document strewn all over the place, which implies he’s a pretty sloppy guy. All it would really take is a threat to his legacy and family. He was rock solid he was running until suddenly, he wasn’t.

I'm not a teetotaler, but find myself drinking less and less as I get older. The world involving anything called anything like "Grand Cru" is completely lost on me. I have a friend who owns a nice liquor store and when we get together, he's always bringing something for the rest of the group to enjoy. Sadly, it's all wasted on me.

Oh, gotcha. My biggest issue is the erections of fences and physical barriers to ordinary, average citizens as they go about their lives. It's truly weird that in sanctuary cities and states, for people consistently fine with open borders, that any barrier might be installed beyond a lock on the front door and in extreme situations, some common sense extra security. It does have a tendency to lead to conspiracy theories though.

You have the money, share it!

It wasn't just the kid walking around, though. It was the losing track of him, allowing him on the roof of the building where law enforcement was perched to look for potential shooters, allowing him to set up, fire multiple rounds, kill a man protecting his family, injure two others and nearly kill a candidate for President.

Wait until she starts price controlling all that grape juice so the masses can get a swig. Next thing you know we'll find you nippling up to the wine in a box game.

You insist of reviewing medical records as some sort of purity test for teetotalers? What's with you, Johnny Law?

No, Starr, I don't want any of that. Sensible regulation and sensible consumer protections are good for everyone. You're preaching to the choir on all that, but it doesn't strike you as odd at all that these things continue to happen given the size and scope of our federal and state government? Here's what happens imo: Rules implemented Rules ignored Big dogs skip the penalty phase Regulators who missed it continue to regulate Someone screams "bailing out huge corps and stock broker bonuses!" and the regulators who didn't do a great job regulating implement sweeping changes that impact honest players (and there are many) and consumers adversely 5, 6, 8, 10 years down the road the same thing happens Btw, government chooses winners/losers all the time, year in year out in ways a private corporation could only hope to do. I'll point out here that I suggested balance was the key, and you immediately responded with some silliness about 5 year olds living rent free. I started saving for my future in 1984...slow, steady, consistent...paid my rent every time it was due, paid my mortgages when the time was right, paid my bills upon receipt, and solved the problems I occasionally created by figuring out a solution. I have been lucky, worked hard, paid attention, learned, grown, and completely accept the fact that balance between private industry and regulation is absolutely necessary. Kudos to you though on your Che Guevera rant for not using the term "FAT CATS!". Sure, but along the way, decisions are made and people benefit in ways the private sector would kill for. My life got a lot simpler when I started thinking of government in same terms as that of corporate America. There are winners and losers there, too. Social Security is a fiscal mess. Medicare is a fiscal mess. These facts are not in dispute. Goodness. I can only imagine the gaskets blown if you had an idea of whatever it is you are referring to meant. On the other hand, it does seem you kind of understood what I meant because you said this "....private business does need the government..."---of course it does! Let's agree on that.

Sure, we can talk about that. Though, shouldn’t we also discuss the political class that established rules/regulations that came up with the safeguards to prevent the incidents from 29, the 80s, 2008, SV bank in 23, and crypto? How did that go? Let’s remember, too that the big government crowd gives us an estimated $5 trillion in revenue and it’s not enough, not nearly ever enough. How is it going with Medicare? Social Security? The budget? Government needs private industry and private industry needs governance, but let’s not pretend these things happen in a vacuum.

That’s fair.

Inflation is right sized now, I think. Plus it wasn’t the admins fault, though she’ll address it straight up like a boss, but if she doesn’t, it’s the economy stupid. (I don’t really think you’re stupid).

Ah, thanks for the explanation. I was wondering about the middle class thing, but wasn’t quite certain how someone might qualify for a new home buyer credit if they weren’t first time home buyers regardless of income. I think either way, “need” is often relative to who benefits. Much ado is made about “fair share” and income tax, where someone who makes X is somehow beating the system when the tax paid is 30+ % of income. Yeah that was some serious cash. I was paying $450/ per month for my family of 5 and was aggravated every time I paid the bill. Again though, we complain about the cost of services but accept a whopping 13% going to the government, never seeing an opportunity to reduce the tax.

What do you mean by “the middle class…who don’t need it as much.”? As for cell phones, this article from 2023 suggests $74 per month v $60 in the States. Is that after the gouging was addressed? Also, I always wonder what the impact of taxation is on your monthly bill (before or after). Back before we used VoI for our office phones, my bill was around $400 per month, but nearly $90 of that was tax/surcharge/fee.

Liberals seem to like their leadership tied to the Chinese government, I think that’s a net plus on his resume.

I’m not even sure why the article is necessary, or the agent for the Buffalo field office was even quoted. Lots of people pose a “significant threat” to lots of other people, and even if NYS becomes a safe harbor for dangerous criminals, its like “Yeah, ok, there have been like tons of people who’ve killed way more than 23 people”. What a worry wart! Do we really need all this drama being reported? Imagine how hard it is on the Los Killers de Ventanilla y Callao members trying to improve the community, you know, Habitat for Humanity and whatnot.

One of our relatives is from China. Her dad still lives there, mom passed away a year or two ago. She travelled there recently in an attempt to gain access to money she has in her accounts, and had tremendous difficulty even gaining basic access to funds. Her husband was sharing some stories from her life—people simply disappearing after speaking out about issues mundane and complicated.

One slight modification. I can accept that the science involved with the virus was evolving, and at times they advocated the equivalent of hiding under the desk in the event a nuclear bomb detonated overhead. I alos understand that politicians were flying without a net (which is a whole 'nother issue engtirely), and that nobody wanted to be the big dog if this thing turned really, really sideways. I tried to view Andrew Cuomo's position with significant latitude, though looking back he botched several elements very badly. Our leadership, however, did not simply 'cry wolf'. They cried wolf and then in many cases, completely and irrefutably ignored the rules and guidelines they established as THE ground rules to prevent millions from dying. I'm in my office setting up plexiglass sneeze guards (the gold standard in avoiding the zombie apocalypse) under threat of criminal/civil penalty, and politicians were encouraging/participating in mass gatherings where people walked arm in arm for hours at a clip. Governors and Senators were seen dining in vacant restaurants, or bypassing restrictions on flights to see family members, or claiming 'mischief' afoot when seen maskless at baseball games with their friends immediately to their right or left. I can forgive crying wolf, but I have always been quite certain that high ranking officials behave hypocritically not because they ignore the rule, but because they have better access to inside information not readily available for the public. We it time and again while politicians raise alarms over climate change and pollute on a massive scale. I don't believe any of the offenders wanted to come down with a case of COIVD--or infect their family members, but I do believe they knew the fallout if they did was likely going to mild, temporary and short-lived. As for mpox, not a concern of mine at this point. I'll stay tuned though.

I never did the math but I’m figuring the Fleetwood Mac was on the way up, or maybe she was with a lesser band. The whole thing sounded wildly preposterous, but, then… Legendary claim amongst our friend group, and sometimes that’s enough.

A buddy of mine (may he rest in peace) went to Niagara back in the early 70s, and a group of us were hanging out just after work. He was telling us about working concerts, with bands etc when he was there. At one point he stops and declares: I ****ED STEVIE NICKS! We weren’t quite sure what we heard, whether he had relations with a guy name Steve Nicks, or THE Stevie Nicks. To his credit, he insisted THE, and in spite of the fact that he was a bit homely, held his mud. He was a bit of an embellisher but would always laugh when we reminded him of his claim. To this day, I’m 90% sure he was making it up but there’s a part of me that wonders hey, it was the 70s and drugs and alcohol were flowing. And, if a Joe Ferg4Evah can bang a future former US Senator from the great state of Maine, is a young road-weary Stevie Nicks too high a mountain to climb?

I was at a party in Westchester when he was present 25-30 years ago. There was a lot of hubbub, someone mentioned Clinton was in the place and some chit chat followed. A person I respect and love simply stated "He's not my president". We had disagreed on the Lewinsky matter, and I was of the impression that he had a personal issue and it wasn't my concern. I've evolved from that position because the reality seems to be much darker, and much deeper than that. The question of the power imbalance comes into play, the predatory nature of a person of power and an impressionable young person. Add to that his settlement with Paula Jones for harassment, the accusations of a number of other women and his perjury issue. He's a classic predator, but sure, he had charisma.