Popular Comments

mrincredible
Discussion: Really?? A piece of fruit for how much??

Hopefully the piece will keep its appeal. Otherwise the price might slip.

Like  6 Likes
mrincredible
Discussion: Really?? A piece of fruit for how much??

Anyway it should keep the artist off the Dole for a year or tree.

Like  5 Likes
fiche
Discussion: WINTER STORM WARNING for Monday 12/2

As always, thank you to Max and WxNut2.0 - the weather gurus. 

Like  4 Likes
mrincredible
Discussion: 2020 - Candidates

nohero said:

The Disney Party would have won, if third-party Hanna Barbera's candidate Yogi Bear hadn't drawn away votes.

 Curse those extremist Hanna Barberians and their demands for free pick-a-nick baskets for everyone.

Like  4 Likes
PVW
Discussion: Impeachment 101: "This is precisely the kind of conduct the founders were most concerned about ... to seek foreign intervention in our affairs."

The factual questions around the Ukrainian conspiracy theories belong, as @nohero notes, in the "Ukrainian Job" thread. They're not relevant to the question of impeachment. In fact, for that, we can even grant that Trump believes them to be true, regardless of their complete lack of factual merit. Indeed, Trump goes even farther than Paul does, believing that Ukraine has the server the DNC emails were stored on (and in doing so reveals his complete ignorance of how modern information technology works). But again, despite the ridiculousness of it, let's grant that Trump sincerely believes this.

Does this mitigate his actions? No, not in the least. He stands accused of using the power of the presidency to pursue his own personal goals at the expense of the national interest. Whether or not he believes these absurd conspiracy theories is beside the point -- he pursued them for his own ends, hampering and undermining US government policy that, as head of the executive branch, he is charged to execute.

If Trump believed the national interest were served by pressuring Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden and by assisting Russia obfuscate its role in the 2016 elections, he could have acted to set US policy along those line. He could have directed the State Department to formally request Ukraine open an investigation. He could have informed Congress that he was withholding the funds they appropriated, and why, and made the requisite effort to defend this decision (as is normal in disputes between the branches). He could have lent support to efforts to secure our elections against future foreign interference.

He did none of those things. Instead, he actively undermined the State Department, making it more difficult both for his own administration and for future administrations to effectively execute foreign policy. He, of his own accord, defied the policy goals on Urkaine expressed by Congress and by his own administration, undermining US support for Ukraine in its fight against Russian aggression. He regularly pursued all his actions in such a way as to make the apparatus of the Executive branch operate, not as an executor of US policy, but as an instrument for his own personal interests.

In doing all this, it really makes little difference what he believes about Ukraine. He solicited things of value from President Zelenskyy - a bribe in plain English -- extorting that country in a time of great vulnerability, for his own personal interests. I doubt any signatory to the Constitution would fail to recognize this a high crime and misdemeanor.

Like  4 Likes
ml1
Discussion: Sure, why not? Let's discuss what makes something funny

mtierney said:

Not a humor issue, but symbolic  of the trend to increased government involvement in our lives. Wausau, Wisconsin has banned snow ball throwing — in public, even playgrounds, by anyone.

I guess you can do it in the privacy of your own home.
blank stare

 you know what is funny?  How people like yourself get duped over and over again by such stories.  That ordinance is not indicative of any trend, because it's been on the books for nearly 60 years (at least).  My BS meter went off immediately (as yours should have as well, assuming you have one).  And a few seconds with the google uncovered this:

Yes, throwing snowballs is illegal in Wausau. But it’s not a new rule.

“I searched the hard copy ordinance books I could find in our office and found it in its exact form today, at least as far back as 1962,” Jacobson told Wausau Pilot and Review. “But we could not definitely determine when it was first enacted.”

 so yes, it's funny that you and anyone else who fell for that story was punked :))

Like  3 Likes
cramer
Discussion: Really?? A piece of fruit for how much??

You're on a duct tape roll.

Like  3 Likes
marylago
Discussion: WINTER STORM WARNING for Monday 12/2

sac said:

fiche said:

As always, thank you to Max and WxNut2.0 - the weather gurus. 

 Yes!!!

 Absolutely! Thanks! Youse guys are the best!

Like  3 Likes