mspart

As of August 7, 2023, President Joe Biden just took his 367th day of vacation in just 2.5 years, which sets a record compared to any other president in recent history. Biden has been on vacation for roughly 40% of his time in office. He is outpacing every single one of his modern predecessors. So he is unique. He's the oldest ever and takes the most vacations ever. I don't get that much. He's figured out the system. Perhaps we only need a 60% President. Pay him/her 60% of what he is currently getting. Obviously we don't need a full time President, he's proving that everyday. mspart

I can't edit now but for 0-17, death rate was 0.0098%. It is in error above by a factor of 10. mspart

Yes Trump did that and what would you be saying if he didn't? But in the beginning, the vaccine was for those that needed it. Old people, people with bad immune systems, obese, with diabetes, or other comorbidities. Young people were not in danger of it and this was known. Even middle aged people were not in great danger of it. All of that action to have everyone vaccinated was a liberal cause. All of the lengthy shutdowns was a liberal cause. Interminable mask mandates was a liberal cause. Saying you risk everyone else if you don't wear a mask was a liberal cause. See reaction of MSNBC's Rachel Maddow when DCD lifted their mask mandate. She had to consciously think that that unmasked person was not a threat. I'm sure you can find the youtube of that one. And she ain't no conservative. This is all well known and documented. So what you are trying to say is that Trump got the vaccine going and he's not liberal so it was not a liberal issue. My perspective is that not knowing exactly how things with covid were, it was prudent of any President to get a remedy as quickly as possible. But all the hysteria after that was liberal politics. For the US, here is the up to date covid death chart: As you can see, most of the deaths were for folks above 50 years old. Younger folks didn't have much concern. This is who contracted covid. Few older folks got it but it killed more of them. Lots of younger folks got it but were mostly unaffected. Compare age of contracting covid vs that age group death and you get a rate. I'll do a few. For those 85+, death rate was 15.8% For those 50-64 death rate was 1.1%. For 40-49, death rate was 0.33%. For 0-17, death rate was 0.098%. Vaccinating school age kids is almost worthless. But that too is a liberal cause. Why? Because for liberals, covid is death, which as you can see is not the case. The upshot is no matter what age you are, you have a slim chance of dying from covid. But the older group certainly has a greater chance. mspart

Ban - using the word tedious? Isn't that a bit high brow? Are you trying to increase our vocabulary? I say hmmph hmmph!! (must be done in an English accent to get the full effect) mspart

Here Here! mspart

So will UW and UO bring back wrestling? I would applaud that. mspart

If I remember history and I'm not sure I am remembering it well, it was the Big 8 champ vs Pac 8 champ at the Rose Bowl. That was the deal for a lot of the history of the Rose Bowl. That has been lost for the last number of years, but the Pac 8 was a serious conference. Now it is relegated to history. I'm a nostalgic type and just think this is sad. Blame money and airplanes. Can you imagine Big 8 winner traveling all the way to Pasadena back in the day. Miserable. That was the key to Pac 8 success at the Rose Bowl ha ha. mspart

Will Big 10 change names? Big 12? Pac 12. My suggestion for Pac 12 name change is Pac 0. There will be no PAC anymore. It's done. That history is gone. mspart

Great TM!! Instead of twitter.com it will be xmarksthespot.com. The conversion will be complete. mspart

Ban, Yes, we are aware of that. In fact the article goes on to say that the "policy" comes just days after the group representing the country's school boards wrote to President Joe Biden to plead for federal assistance in responding to mounting threats and violence that they likened to domestic terrorism against school board members related to their decisions on COVID-19 school safety policies, critical race theory and more. Interestingly, the group retracted that letter but DOJ did not stop. There was lots of discussion of this at the time. Just because a group says there are threats and violence does not mean it is so. In today's world, words are violence and looking or saying the wrong thing can be considered a microaggression or threat. So definitions matter. DOJ looked into this for exactly a few days before issuing the new policy. Based on what? Apparently based on the retracted letter from the teacher's group. mspart

I think a definition of extremism is useful in this discussion. 1. Is a person who bashes in a police car an extremist? 2. Is a person that sets a police precinct on fire an extremist? 3. Is a person that sets buildings in a city an extremist? 4. is a person that speaks up at a school board mtg or city council and is a bit animated an extremist? 5. Is a protester outside an abortion clinic an extremist? 6. Is a protester outside a police station an extremist? Loads of other examples of could be extremists. DOJ put parents on notice for being extremist at school board meetings because of what's going on in schools that is crazy. Voicing concerns or opinions at a school board mtg is not extremist in my opinion. Telling them you are going to injure or kill them is another matter. mspart

I typed in x.com in the URL (not google or other search engine, the actual URL area) and it sent me to twitter.com. So the name hasn't changed which is why everyone calls it Twitter. Only the changed to X. Nothing else changed. mspart

But haven't we said taking those actions is wrong, no matter the race? Now it is ok? mspart

Hi Ban, it never used to take this long to get election results that I remember. At least in the 60's - 1990's, results were fairly immediate. Then we got into early voting and mail in voting and the times have been extended. The idea of voting at the precinct has been shown to be vastly superior in terms of accuracy and speediness of results. When we tried to centralize it as is necessary in mail in voting, the speediness at least has suffered greatly. mspart

Yep following and advising about a state that needs help. We need help. mspart

I think in WA, they gather the ballots and count on the day, because it takes 2-3 weeks to get results. mspart

Flo should know better than to do that. That's just wrong. But it's probably in the small print when you sign up. But if they were sued and have to pay maybe not. Digital is not privacy friendly. Says I while on a chat board. mspart

Snyder wouldn't have any of it. Snyder is the absolute #2 at 97 kg. If Sad is out, Snyder wins, he has been very consistent. mspart

WKN, you are missing the point of what Turley said. Turley said it was legal to lie. If Trump is convicted and it stands, then it is no longer legal to lie. It changes everything. That's Turley's point and what I am saying here. I am not for lying, I am for equal protection under the law. Wonderful. Again, how does this make any difference to what is being said. I don't have time to read legal documents in my spare time. I will go to trusted sources, whether you trust them or not, and try to make sense of the headlines. But what you are here saying is that because I haven't actually read the indictment but am depending on Turley, a noted Constitutional authority, helping me understand the legalese, that somehow my reporting of that is of no worth. So it changes my perspective when listening to you. I have not said Trump was right in what he did. I have not said Trump was wrong in what he did. All I have done is shown what is obvious to everyone, even you, that there is a legal standard for Trump and there is a legal standard for others. Heck, Trump was impeached for a phone call that nobody heard. If that is not a standard that does not apply to others, I don't know what is. FYI - I am no legal scholar, I have no background in law, I have never been to court except as a juror. So obviously that means I cannot lean on someone who does and look at their argument and agree or disagree with it. That is out of bounds. So yes, it changes my perspective when listening to you. mspart

I have not read the whole indictment. Does that change anything I reported Turley to have said?? mspart

Then look at what Turley said and explain why he is wrong. mspart

If you read the quotes I posted, Turley says he was one of those that told Trump not to try to discount authorized electoral votes. But Trump did anyway. Turley still finds problems with the indictment such as what I provided, based on what he provided. JONATHAN TURLEY: The burden is on the prosecution. And the question is, how do you actually prove this? What the indictment says is lots of people told Trump that the election wasn't stolen and that the challenge, the certification was invalid. Well, fine. I was one of those people saying that. But he had other people saying the opposite. He had attorneys, not a small number saying, ‘No, you can make these challenges. So the election was stolen. There is this evidence.’ Millions of Americans believe that. And so it's a weird indictment. The indictment says at the outset, as it must, that you are constitutionally protected in saying false things, including in an election. The Supreme Court has said that. It said in a case called Alvarez involving a politician who knew he was lying, and the court said this is still protected. But then basically, (Jack) Smith does a 180 and says, ‘But not here because Trump was told it was a lie.’ Well, that doesn't make any sense. Alvarez knew it was a lie in that case. As I said and as Turley asserts, this is chilling for Free Speech as you can be thrown in the pokey for saying something not acceptable to someone in the federal government. Constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley warned the latest indictment of former President Donald Trump has "chilling" implications for free speech in America Is Biden going to be held to the same standard. It is all but fully admitted that he lied about not having anything to do with Hunter's businesses. Now the line is he was not in business with Hunter. That is very different. Will Jack Smith hold him accountable? No. Should he? No, as Turley points out. mspart

Maybe - The point was to show that there is a two tier justice system. Hillary did all kinds of crooked stuff that is documented. But no reasonable prosecutor would take the case said the guy with the responsibility to gather evidence, not prosecute. Trump has 3 indictments already so questioning details is silly in my mind. They indicted him for speaking his mind. That is unconstitutional. Period. Who cares what else he was indicted for? As I showed with posts from Jonathan Turley, this is huge. Your words can send you to jail if this carries the day. But if you are of the right persuasion you can bleach bit evidence and smash evidence and no reasonable prosecutor would take your case. mspart

BB - I see you here. Cool. mspart

That is the height of self restraint. Good on you BigBrog. mspart