TrueBlue4ever

So the article about Trump and Christ is a really perfect example of why distrust exists and how each side can spin it to fit their preferred narrative, and dovetails nicely with Wideleft’s comments here. The headline of the article is patently false at its most basic level. Trump never said that. He tells the tale that “someone” (I hate to use absolutes as exaggeration, but it really does feel like he always drops that anonymous “people say” or “someone has told me” as his go-to source for speculative and often questionable information) said he was the most famous, he denies it and when asked to name one person who is, he says Jesus. So he is not at all saying “only Jesus is” more famous, but that Jesus is one example of a person who is more famous. And since he was only asked to name one person, it leaves open the question as to whether there are more than one or not, so the headline “spins” it in the way they want to frame the story - that Trump is an egomaniac. Which sadly they can do just as easily without the misleading or patently false headline. But it’s click bait, so their real underlying mission is accomplished. Trump backers thus get fuel for their “fake news” mantra, which does real harm to the system when an important story does come up. Trump bashers revel in another example of his hubris as a sign of his unfitness. And since it is Trump himself relaying the story, it would have been easy to point out that he is again talking about himself through the shadowy spectre of a third person to point out how famous he is perceived to be, and throws in a humble-brag when true self-deprivation would have been to follow up with “and that one person is not an exhaustive list by any means”. So read critically, folks. And even more importantly, think critically. Maybe the discussion should be “You know, Trump legitimately does have a case for being the most famous person in the world right now. So what? When did fame become the measure of a person’s worth?” The answer to that would say a lot about him, but even more about us.

Nice attempt at deflection. However, the point that was being made isn’t that other news agencies aren’t mistake-prone (of course they all are to varying degrees), the point is that your source is. And your (IMO defensive) response acknowledges that your source is questionable. So be it. My question for you though is, since you have avoided the mainstream media as you yourself put it “I don’t want to continue to be misinformed” then why do you castigate them and yet give your guy a pass for his misinformed takes? Is it more-so that he fits your worldview and validates your opinions, so you see him as more credible?

Here is a Wikipedia bio of Mr. Dore. Like Donald Trump, I just put it out there and let others decide. Unlike Donald Trump, if asked, I will take a position and not pretend I don’t know anything while spreading information or potential mis-information (IMO this guy is not credible). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Dore And here is some context to the NY Post story itself and the Twitter and Facebook blocking by snopes.com, take it for what it is worth: https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/10/15/hunter-biden-laptop-giuliani/ The article was explicit about rumblings that the e-mails were forged, but did not explore it in too much depth. Still, even the sequence of events as reported by the Post in obtaining the laptop would raise many eyebrows. If this was courtroom evidence, I know a boatload of lawyers who would line up to cross examine the witness on it, lots of holes to attack in that story.

And in some cases people have waited 9 hours to vote (curiously enough, reports are that the longest waits seem to always pop up in districts that are predominantly black). This is 3 weeks out from Election Day. Imagine how slow voting will be on the day of.

“Cocaine” *snicker*

So the Florida-LSU football game got postponed because of a COVID outbreak amongst some Gator players, a few days after the coach called on students to “pack the swamp” (90,000 seat stadium). And now Alabama coach Nick Saban says he has contracted the virus.

Made the same statement (threat? promise?) in Minnesota. Only 48 states, one district, and 2 territories to go! “Mexico will pay for the wall” 2.0

That is laughable. Don’t know if you are trying to fool yourself, but that argument doesn’t fool me. Trump mentioned the question of Cruz’s birthplace twice that I can find. Once in March of 2015 when they both announced their candidacy and he noted what everyone knew - that Cruz was born in Canada and so legally it could raise questions in court that could take time (BTW legal scholars seem to have consensus that “natural born” extends beyond “born in the USA” and Cruz would have qualified). He mentioned it once again in January 2016 when they were both front runners. His motivation then seemed clear enough in that he was looking for an advantage over a political rival. His attacks on Obama lasted 5 years and were based on no more speculation than his patented “some very credible people say” assertion with no source and no proof. And he was never running against Obama, it was a pure baseless claim motivated by......what exactly? Here is a timeline: https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-birther-timeline-20160916-snap-htmlstory.html I understand that you don’t like the corporate controlled mainstream media and their biases, but your internet based “news” sources are no less biased and are often just random opinion blogs from wannabe celebs in the dark corners of the net with little to no fact-checking undertaken. Slanted bias of a fact-checked story is one thing, unsubstantiated rumour mongering, which was the Obama birtherism in a nutshell, is quite another.

Why is it that Trump’s xenophobia is limited to countries where people have darker skin then? And we all know Trump was wrong on the birtherism stuff. The question for you is how is that not a racist attack?

Just where do you get your information from then?

You are. 1) It was the senate, which was Democrat held, and not the Obama administration, that used the nuclear option. Different branches of Government 2) Harry Reid changed the rules for filibustering to simple majority, but deliberately not the Supreme Court appointment. The filibuster was being abused by Republicans to block all of Obama’s appointments for lower court judges and cabinet positions. The Dems specifically left the Supreme Court pick at a 60 vote threshold. It was Mitch McConnell in 2017 who used the nuclear option to change the SCOTUS threshold to simple majority, expanding what the Dems had done but clearly changing the game himself in this aspect. 3) Maybe they don’t voice their opinions at the confirmation hearing itself (although Kavanagh cited a radical liberal Clinton conspiracy at his hearing and vowed payback - nice impartiality there Judge) because it would be suicide, but many Judges are pretty overt in their political leanings well before they are appointed. And the high court decided an election in 2000, so to say the court doesn’t weigh in on politics is patently false.

I’m not going to even try and debate your point about him refusing to do so because it’s insulting , you are beyond convincing otherwise on this issue and in my opinion that reasoning is ludicrous. But please, justify his “shithole countries” comment without using the words xenophobia or locker room talk, and then justify his Obama birther nonsense. I would be fascinated by the spin doctoring there, much like being enthralled driving past a car crash. Really, you are honestly saying you had never heard of Trump disbanding Obama’s pandemic response team? Either you are dodging the issue knowing you can’t defend your position in the face of this counter-argument, or you are massively uninformed given how often it has been brought up in pretty much Every mainstream media outlet. And if it genuinely the latter, then you have just lost your footing on every other argument you have made, since you would have to admit to being equally uninformed on tons of other Trump issues.

Coney Barrett, like Anton Scalia before her, believes in an “originalist” interpretation of the Constitution, meaning she’ll apply the laws as the original framers intended, and not adapt her reasoning for any change in policy, adaptation to modern day thinking, and such. Forget for a moment that the Constitution itself allows for (and intended to have) Amendments as a way of self-correcting over time to recognize changes in society, and focus on just this one issue: the original framers lived in a society that did not recognize either black people or women as equals (or even people based on the legal definition of such) the former allowed to be subjected to ownership by others, and the latter not given rights such as voting or working to name but 2. So if she believes in that doctrine, then she must admit that per the original framers’ intent she cannot be allowed to sit on the very court that would not have allowed women to practice law or be a candidate for a judgeship. But hey, if you want to start with that “originalist” mindset, let’s not apply 2nd Amendment logic to anything beyond muskets. Oh I forgot, Republicans and Trump defenders alike don’t worry themselves with inconsistency and hypocrisy, they just demand strict adherence to the rules when it suits their interests and conveniently shrug it off with What-about-isms when it boxes them in to a morally inescapable losing argument any time they want to break those same rules because it no longer helps them.

Patrick S. Tomlinson @stealthygeek I don't give a **** that she lives her faith. I give a **** that she'll force the rest of us to live her faith.

Had the pizza burger once. Absolutely gross. Now, bring back the steak bites, and I will listen.

Judges can get removed if they have perjured themselves. The “nothing” answer is the safe way to avoid that. And to be fair, expecting her to know every statute off the top of her head is a stretch. Now logically, common sense would dictate that the answer is likely a “yes”. Now, if one ants to question her credentials, point out that she was a law clerk for 2 years, only practiced law for 3, has been an academic for 15, and was appointed to an appeals court for 3 years before this nomination. So 6 years practical legal experience and gets appointed to the highest court on the land.

There won’t be any dental plan with that contract, so I’d walk away.

I could never hear that name and not think of this. RIP.

These are the kind of contracts that throw the whole NHL salary structure out of whack. Ridiculous overpay.

I feel like they did not get enough here. Vegas very desperate to shed cap dollars, we should have gotten a draft pick back from them, forced them to retain salary, or offered no better than a 5th or not given a player as well. They were in more need to make this deal than we were. And I don’t know how much 2 years older and the injuries will offset the prior chemistry with Laine and Ehlers in a short sample size. If we had the 2018 Stastny and not the 2021 Stastny I’d be more pleased with the deal. We shall see.

I agree with the wish that the Knights retain some of that salary. I guess we’ll see what the Jets are giving up, because it should be essentially nothing if we’re paying all of his salary. Funny though that people shrug off the knee injury and age here (he’ll be 35 before the season starts) and yet sound alarm bells over Blake Wheeler’s declining skill set due to age (he is 8.5 months younger, BTW).

So he’s quitting? This seems so off- brand for a guy who has declared bankruptcy 6 times, had 2 failed marriages, has settled over 100 personal lawsuits against him, and dodged the draft 5 times. Biden should wait until just before the debate (or at the debate) to use the “quitter” tag for his campaign. Don’t want to goad Trump too early and guilt him into attending, better that you have an uninterrupted voice to answer the questions of the American people solo and continually point out that you are the one candidate willing to stand up and be accountable to them.

11 broadcasts. 6 different games in total, 5 of them repeated. Not sure who gets it worse - Montreal fans who get to see 4 different losses played 7 times over, or B.C. and Ottawa fans who apparently don’t have CFL teams.

Perfetti still available. Also Winnipegger Seth Jarvis. Would fill the need at Centre going forward.

Jets are now in line to draft Cole Perfetti (#5 in Central scouting rankings) or Marco Rossi (#6) who are both Centres. This after 8 picks in.