Harris Picks Walz as VP Running Mate over Josh Shapiro

[uncle bernard]

9 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

tell me y'all think this is fine 

 

Well, it's not actually what happened to start. Pedophiles are not protected for their "sexual orientation" by the bill. 

I assume the trans lawmaker wanted to take it out because 

1) it's unnecessary. pedophilia is already illegal. and this language already exists elsewhere in minnesota law.

2) people unfairly accuse trans people of being pedophiles. they don't want the word anywhere near language that is ostensibly about them.

And I'm now reading that another amendment was added putting the language back in place, so this whole thing is about nothing. And Tim Walz had nothing to do with it anyway.

Edited August 7 by uncle bernard

[ThreePointTakedown]

On 8/6/2024 at 2:39 PM, Bigbrog said:

Way to deflect...and who said I was voting for Trump??

Answer the question...you made an accusation about the Vance...some serious accusations...provide the examples that support your claims.  Otherwise you are using those words for no other reason than to try and discredit someone for political reasons and at the same time diminishing those words of which should only be used for people that actually are those things.  Do better

Well, they were two different posts. So I figured you might be able to differentiate the two. I didn't assume anything, that's why I posed both questions. It wasn't an exhaustive list. Just two options. If you want to just offer your opinions that is also an option. 

To answer your question, his opinion on abortion is wildly misogynistic. Not being supportive of people who could become pregnant at all. Racist, because he supported 45's comments about VP KH as only recently wanting to be known as a black person as "totally inoffensive". This shows to me that JD is either ok with someone being racist(45 was) and not confronting it or JD agrees with the comment which makes them racist. Also that JD has no empathy for people that could see themselves in VP KH's shoes and that they are perfectly happy making a useless(and racist attack) for political gain. Xenophobic: "We do not consent to an invasion of this country from millions of people who shouldn't be here," Doesn't specifically say who. Just 'them' which is rhetoric used to create a common enemy within a group. I understand that is an opinion to have. But invasion would imply a coordinated plan rooted in violence and with a goal. None of those criteria can be proven at all to have been met in any meaningful way(a family working together to get to the southern border to seek asylum is not a coordinated plan to invade, btw). It might also work to inspire supporters who may be already inclined to take violent action against those they perceive as 'invaders' to do so. That has never been a problem before. Transphobic: https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/icymi-how-jd-vance-betrayed-his-transgender-friend-for-the-sake-of-his-political-ambition this article points out that JD was once an ally to a person going through their transition. Contrasted by all the things JD has said and done since those days in the hopes of gaining more power in a party that does not like, care, or love trans people, immigrants, people of color, or really anyone that doesn't already agree with them. 

I hope that answers your question. 

What could 45 do to win and lose your vote?

What could VP KH do to win and lose your vote? 

[ThreePointTakedown]

20 hours ago, mspart said:

Walz said, one person's socialist is another persons neighborliness.

Walz signed law that puts tampons in elementary school boy's bathrooms.  

Walz signed law that allows abortion to the point of birth.   Also does not save the life of the baby if the baby is born alive against all odds.  

Not a leftist?    That is the leftist playbook.  

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/tim-walz-signed-bill-making-minnesota-a-sanctuary-state-for-child-sex-changes/

Dubbed the Trans Refuge Bill by supporters, the law grants legal protection to children who travel to Minnesota for so-called gender affirming care, including puberty blockers, reconstructive genital surgery, and hormone therapy, as well as the medical practitioners who provide it. The law prohibits Minnesota courts or officials from complying with child removal requests, extraditions, arrests, or subpoenas related to a child’s sex-change procedures received in Minnesota, even if they’re a crime in another state.

The law makes seeking gender-transition procedures for minors a factor in some assessments for whether a Minnesota court has jurisdiction to make an initial determination in child-custody cases. It also gives courts temporary emergency jurisdiction if a child comes to Minnesota from a state that refused them the procedures.

Not a leftist?    That is the leftist playbook.  

mspart

Why are you clutching your pearls? You being against 'neighborliness' makes you out to be a greedy SOB that would rather see others suffer than to be, even, mildly inconvenienced for the sake of helping them. 

Back to this train wreck again. Sorry not sorry. You're wrong. Get over it. Its happening. There is no putting the genie back in the bottle. Whine about it as much as you want while the rest of us find more and less inconspicuous ways of ignoring you. Tampons in all the bathrooms. Your conservative/crocodile tears are the most delicious of all. 

You can't have an abortion and birth. Its a binary thing. A birth is a birth. An abortion is an abortion. 

The article. I love this article. If you want to talk about a playbook. Are you upset that Minnesota was allowing people to travel to there to get health care that was considered illegal in other states? Cuz that has no implication any other area of health care, WHAT SO FARKING EVER! 

Every red state that has all but outlawed abortion: 'No, we don't want to make it illegal to travel to another state to get an abortion.' (cue their(and your) outrage at people from state 'A' being allowed to go to state 'B' to receive health care that is illegal in state 'A') HYPOCRITE

Oh and the 'take away your kids if you don't allow them to transition' comment from before. Is this the source for it? Cuz if it is and you are referring to JUDGES ruling on custody cases and using the fact that one parent forbid their child from getting health care they needed. That's called BEING A BAD PARENT! And I would support any judge to make that call for those reasons. 

Yup, you are a steward of your child and that privilege can be taken away if you refuse them health care that they need. Unless you have a sincerely held religious belief. Then you can eff up your kids however you want. Maybe consider going that route next time. Not talking about you specifically just people in general that might consider not supporting their childrens' health care needs.  

[ThreePointTakedown]

16 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

 

Do you condone the xenophobia in this post or is it just coincidence?

[ThreePointTakedown]

8 hours ago, Scouts Honor said:

 

Do you condone the implied transphobia in this post or is it just coincidence? 

[uncle bernard]

16 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

Tim Walz checklist

• Supported George Floyd Riots (Wife says she kept windows open so she could enjoy the smell of burning)

• Said he'd assist illegals in crossing

• Replaced state flag w/ Somalian flag

• Started a hotline to report on neighbors who didn't wear masks (that don't work)

• Endorsed Socialism

• Lied about his military rank

• Left his military unit when deployed

 

i just want to make sure you're all aware of this.

i'm 100% sure this will not change any of your minds. that's how unrelentingly tribal you are. 

 

i'd have more respect if you all said 'listen, i just aint voting for the other side no matter what' 

than trying to defend this bs

1) He literally called in the national guard.

2) not what he said. basic reading comp failure on your part here.

3) bad idea, but not seeing anything showing any significant action tied to this. people weren't getting their neighbors arrested for not wearing masks. but yeah, bad idea.

4) When?

5) This one is iffy, but on him. He was promoted to the rank he claimed, but retired before he finished the necessary training, which resulted in him being demoted at retirement

6) He retired to run for office, specifically on an anti-war message. He didn't believe in Iraq and put his money where his mouth was and voted against the war when elected. And guess what? He was right!

[uncle bernard]

@Husker_Du "supported George Floyd riots" 

another great opportunity to change your opinion when confronted with new facts

 

 

[Husker_Du]

idgaf what trump said.

minneapolis was a war zone. his wife said she kept windows open b/c she enjoyed the smell of burning.

your precious kamala supported defund the police and bail out efforts for minneapolis rioters that burned down black businesses and homes. 

if your priorities  moved from virtue signaling to what's actually important for minorities you might open you're effin eyes

 

[ionel]

10 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

idgaf what trump said.

minneapolis was a war zone. his wife said she kept windows open b/c she enjoyed the smell of burning.

your precious kamala supported defund the police and bail out efforts for minneapolis rioters that burned down black businesses and homes. 

if your priorities  moved from virtue signaling to what's actually important for minorities you might open you're effin eyes

 

Are we sure this wasn't just Climate Change?  

[Husker_Du]

it was fiery but mostly peaceful - "MSM"

[Offthemat]

2 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

@Husker_Du "supported George Floyd riots" 

another great opportunity to change your opinion when confronted with new facts

 

 

The audio here has Trump praising the NG mostly.  He does tell the governor that once he finally called them out things looked much better.  The governor showed his support for the rioters saying they had a legitimate complaint.  So yeah, after three days and a precinct gone, damage in the millions of dollars, thanks for calling out the guard.  Doing your job. 

[Scouts Honor]

12 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

being on this forum has really crystallized that one of our country’s biggest problems is people can’t understand basic rhetorical language. 

“one person’s socialism is another persons neighborliness”

translation: you call free school lunch socialism, i call it being a good neighbor

not: i love socialism

”build a 25 foot wall and i’ll invest in the 30 foot ladder factory. that’s not how you stop this.” 

translation: if you build a wall, they’ll build ladders (or tunnels, etc…). it won’t solve the problem.

not: i want to build ladders so immigrants can climb the wall @mspart

leftists always love being good neighbors with other peoples money

my inlaws are staunch dems

a tree fell in their pool

i went and removed it for them

while they bitched about the city not doing anything about it or the other trees that have been down for days...

ironic

[Scouts Honor]

5 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Do you condone the implied transphobia in this post or is it just coincidence? 

yes

but it's not transphobia

im not afraid of them.

other than fearing for my dau with a man in her restroom

[Scouts Honor]

5 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

1) He literally called in the national guard.

2) not what he said. basic reading comp failure on your part here.

3) bad idea, but not seeing anything showing any significant action tied to this. people weren't getting their neighbors arrested for not wearing masks. but yeah, bad idea.

4) When?

5) This one is iffy, but on him. He was promoted to the rank he claimed, but retired before he finished the necessary training, which resulted in him being demoted at retirement

6) He retired to run for office, specifically on an anti-war message. He didn't believe in Iraq and put his money where his mouth was and voted against the war when elected. And guess what? He was right!

1 what did he allow them to do 

2. he said he would get them ladders...

4. i posted an audio of it\

 

[Scouts Honor]

 

[Scouts Honor]

 

[uncle bernard]

11 hours ago, Scouts Honor said:

1 what did he allow them to do 

2. he said he would get them ladders...

4. i posted an audio of it\

 

no he said he would *invest* in the ladder company. a normal functioning person understands that joke, but i’ll explain it to you guys. 

he invests in the ladder company to make money because they’ll be selling so many ladders to climb over the wall. 

this is so bad, man. you guys can barely speak english. 

[uncle bernard]

On 8/7/2024 at 4:41 AM, Husker_Du said:

 

this didn’t age well lol

[Bigbrog]

14 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

no he said he would *invest* in the ladder company. a normal functioning person understands that joke, but i’ll explain it to you guys. 

he invests in the ladder company to make money because they’ll be selling so many ladders to climb over the wall. 

this is so bad, man. you guys can barely speak english. 

So he supports people getting ladders to come over the wall and into the US illegally??  Yes, please learn english.

Can anyone ever just admit when someone says something stupid regardless if they support them politically or not instead of trying to use mental gymnastics and word play to deflect away from what they said...sheesh 

[ThreePointTakedown]

14 hours ago, Scouts Honor said:

yes

but it's not transphobia

im not afraid of them.

other than fearing for my dau with a man in her restroom

Did you read your response before posting? Because you are simultaneously afraid and not at the same time. If that was a typo, ok. But its impossible to be A and not-A at the same time(I understand afraid and A start with the same letter but it is simply a common way to express the sentiment). 

Since you are transphobic and post hateful things because of it and admit as much, I can longer believe that you have honest or good intentions with your comments. But to continually reconfirm the comforting lie that you keep telling yourself. That same trope that everyone in history has relied on when they have been overtaken by fear of something they CLEARLY don't understand. 

Best of luck. Hope you can wrest yourself from the grips of fear and come out the other side as a rational and competent adult.   

[Bigbrog]

So saying you would rather your daughter not be in the same bathroom with a biological male equals transphobe/hateful??  Who get's to determine who's opinion is warranted to have and who's isn't??  Who get's to determine what is transphobe and what isn't?

I am sorry, there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with someone saying they would not want their daughter to be in the same bathroom with a biological male.  I didn't want my son to be in a bathroom with another biological male alone without me until he was about 13.  Didn't mean I hate other men...didn't mean I was worried one of them may be a trans...it's because some people are sick and do things to kids and I would prefer that NEVER happen to my kid...call me hateful or transphobe all you want...if you do, that says more about you than it does about me.  

[uncle bernard]

4 hours ago, Bigbrog said:

So he supports people getting ladders to come over the wall and into the US illegally??  Yes, please learn english.

Can anyone ever just admit when someone says something stupid regardless if they support them politically or not instead of trying to use mental gymnastics and word play to deflect away from what they said...sheesh 

It's a joke you moron.

He's using a joke to point out that if you build a wall, they'll just find a way around it and there needs to be a better solution. Which is why he ends the sentence with "That won't stop this."

"Can anyone ever just admit when someone says something stupid regardless if they support them politically or not instead of trying to use mental gymnastics and word play to deflect away from what they said...sheesh "

CORRECT. Tim Walz clearly did not say he wanted to build ladders for illegal immigrants to climb a wall. Just admit it.

Edited August 8 by uncle bernard

[ThreePointTakedown]

2 hours ago, Bigbrog said:

So saying you would rather your daughter not be in the same bathroom with a biological male equals transphobe/hateful??  Who get's to determine who's opinion is warranted to have and who's isn't??  Who get's to determine what is transphobe and what isn't?

I am sorry, there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with someone saying they would not want their daughter to be in the same bathroom with a biological male.  I didn't want my son to be in a bathroom with another biological male alone without me until he was about 13.  Didn't mean I hate other men...didn't mean I was worried one of them may be a trans...it's because some people are sick and do things to kids and I would prefer that NEVER happen to my kid...call me hateful or transphobe all you want...if you do, that says more about you than it does about me.  

Your post, while filled with reasonable questions by them selves, are not honestly conveying the message of the post you are trying to represent. 

They don't say 'rather' they fear for their child. If they really did, which I don't doubt their fear, they would at least try to find out if their fear was warranted. If they don't or haven't, they are contributing to the continued misunderstanding of said group they fear. Being emotionally reactive and loud about it is dangerous and may lead to violence for not discernible reason. Considering, they hadn't offered any. Other than, 'that bio-man is in a room with girls/women and I don't like that'. At no point have the 'bathroom bills' worked or curbed any issues that they fear were 'obvious and common sense'. 

No one is policing an opinion. This is a 'cancel culture' argument. If you eff around and find out the consequences of your words and don't like them. Its not the fault of those holding you accountable. Its yours. On this thread there are few consequences other than being ignored. But if your ideas are not based in fact and the rhetoric that comes from those ideas lead to violence being brought upon a group that is being lied about, you should be held accountable. Again, being called an a$$h073 is about as far as we can go here, but there needs to be more people stepping up and saying so. When the crowd turns on the bully they lose their power. But if a single person stands alone the bully focuses on that person as a threat to their standing. So there is an element of fear involved that people typically don't feel compelled to address. I get it. But when you complain of things trending in the wrong direction. Its probably because we've collectively decided to not sweat the small things(that we could change) and instead whine about the big issues(we probably know little about and have little chance of making any meaningful change). We use that as a metric to determine that the system is broken. While not admitting that we've been derelict in our duties to get involved for the smaller issues. 

What is transphobic and what isn't: they decided. They admitted it. Its not a difficult determination at that point. They posted something that was derogatory to a trans-person. For no other reason than to have an opportunity to laugh or deride that person and their role. Then admitted that they were afraid. Not of that person, because they have no interaction. It was just an easy way to highlight their bias in a group and how that bias made them feel with regards to their child(ren). Again, have they done their homework and tried to model behaviors that are less bias and hateful then the ones they were probably exposed to? Maybe. Maybe that is a step up. If so, well done. But there's lots of work left to do before they are even in the ballpark of a healthy behavior.  And that is point. 

Ever play the game, "make it black/asian/any other trait or characteristic of people that are not of the people in this specific scenario"? If the first sentence of your second paragraph replaced 'biological man'  with (insert any other group based characteristic) how abhorrent  would that person be for even suggesting that anyone for any other reason should not be allowed in a room with people. And that's what it comes down to. People not being allowed in a room with people for an arbitrary reason that you've just decided was important. No where else should they care or would they even be aware(and I'll bet they've been in rooms with trans-people and even ones with their children and didn't even know it, with no ill effects) but this situation is special and needs to be policed. Do you see how crazy that sounds!? Now, can we as a society decide to change how locker rooms and bathrooms are thought about today? Sure. Will that take generations to implement and take hold? Again, sure. Will it solve this problem? Probably not. Because people will always find someone to fear and be anxious around. Because they will be convinced to be afraid by people who have an incentive for them to be afraid. Why do you think one party is about fear and otherizing and the opposite party is about acceptance? And why do you think there is such a gulf between the two? One is seen as strong for being scared of everything and the other is weak for begging you to stop being irrationally stupid and fearful of your shadow. 

Not transphobic, just irrationally fearful of statistically insignificant chance occurrences. I'll bet it stops there though. You aren't outwardly fearful of driving in a car or getting hit by a sharknado. These things are so mundane that you probably don't realize how dangerous they actually are. More so than a bathroom. But for some reason when it comes to people and locker rooms/bathrooms you've decided that only the worst of the worst would be there when I happened to be there. It must be quite stressful living like that. I'm sorry. Whoever or whatever convinced you that it was justifiable to feel that way, I'm sorry. But it isn't. As a parent, fear for your child can be crippling sometimes. Maybe you should talk to someone about it.  

[Bigbrog]

5 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Your post, while filled with reasonable questions by them selves, are not honestly conveying the message of the post you are trying to represent. 

They don't say 'rather' they fear for their child. If they really did, which I don't doubt their fear, they would at least try to find out if their fear was warranted. If they don't or haven't, they are contributing to the continued misunderstanding of said group they fear. Being emotionally reactive and loud about it is dangerous and may lead to violence for not discernible reason. Considering, they hadn't offered any. Other than, 'that bio-man is in a room with girls/women and I don't like that'. At no point have the 'bathroom bills' worked or curbed any issues that they fear were 'obvious and common sense'. 

No one is policing an opinion. This is a 'cancel culture' argument. If you eff around and find out the consequences of your words and don't like them. Its not the fault of those holding you accountable. Its yours. On this thread there are few consequences other than being ignored. But if your ideas are not based in fact and the rhetoric that comes from those ideas lead to violence being brought upon a group that is being lied about, you should be held accountable. Again, being called an a$$h073 is about as far as we can go here, but there needs to be more people stepping up and saying so. When the crowd turns on the bully they lose their power. But if a single person stands alone the bully focuses on that person as a threat to their standing. So there is an element of fear involved that people typically don't feel compelled to address. I get it. But when you complain of things trending in the wrong direction. Its probably because we've collectively decided to not sweat the small things(that we could change) and instead whine about the big issues(we probably know little about and have little chance of making any meaningful change). We use that as a metric to determine that the system is broken. While not admitting that we've been derelict in our duties to get involved for the smaller issues. 

What is transphobic and what isn't: they decided. They admitted it. Its not a difficult determination at that point. They posted something that was derogatory to a trans-person. For no other reason than to have an opportunity to laugh or deride that person and their role. Then admitted that they were afraid. Not of that person, because they have no interaction. It was just an easy way to highlight their bias in a group and how that bias made them feel with regards to their child(ren). Again, have they done their homework and tried to model behaviors that are less bias and hateful then the ones they were probably exposed to? Maybe. Maybe that is a step up. If so, well done. But there's lots of work left to do before they are even in the ballpark of a healthy behavior.  And that is point. 

Ever play the game, "make it black/asian/any other trait or characteristic of people that are not of the people in this specific scenario"? If the first sentence of your second paragraph replaced 'biological man'  with (insert any other group based characteristic) how abhorrent  would that person be for even suggesting that anyone for any other reason should not be allowed in a room with people. And that's what it comes down to. People not being allowed in a room with people for an arbitrary reason that you've just decided was important. No where else should they care or would they even be aware(and I'll bet they've been in rooms with trans-people and even ones with their children and didn't even know it, with no ill effects) but this situation is special and needs to be policed. Do you see how crazy that sounds!? Now, can we as a society decide to change how locker rooms and bathrooms are thought about today? Sure. Will that take generations to implement and take hold? Again, sure. Will it solve this problem? Probably not. Because people will always find someone to fear and be anxious around. Because they will be convinced to be afraid by people who have an incentive for them to be afraid. Why do you think one party is about fear and otherizing and the opposite party is about acceptance? And why do you think there is such a gulf between the two? One is seen as strong for being scared of everything and the other is weak for begging you to stop being irrationally stupid and fearful of your shadow. 

Not transphobic, just irrationally fearful of statistically insignificant chance occurrences. I'll bet it stops there though. You aren't outwardly fearful of driving in a car or getting hit by a sharknado. These things are so mundane that you probably don't realize how dangerous they actually are. More so than a bathroom. But for some reason when it comes to people and locker rooms/bathrooms you've decided that only the worst of the worst would be there when I happened to be there. It must be quite stressful living like that. I'm sorry. Whoever or whatever convinced you that it was justifiable to feel that way, I'm sorry. But it isn't. As a parent, fear for your child can be crippling sometimes. Maybe you should talk to someone about it.  

What in the crazy whackadoodle rambling over the top nonsense was this post?!?!?

FYI...it was a rhetorical question

Dude...get some help

[Bigbrog]

1 hour ago, uncle bernard said:

It's a joke you moron.

He's using a joke to point out that if you build a wall, they'll just find a way around it and there needs to be a better solution. Which is why he ends the sentence with "That won't stop this."

"Can anyone ever just admit when someone says something stupid regardless if they support them politically or not instead of trying to use mental gymnastics and word play to deflect away from what they said...sheesh "

CORRECT. Tim Walz clearly did not say he wanted to build ladders for illegal immigrants to climb a wall. Just admit it.

"It's a joke you moron"...nice UB...guess we are going there now

Hey dum dum...what he said was stupid...joke or no joke or otherwise...just like your take on this...is...well...stupid!

Dum dum you also don't get the point that you support and defend EVERYTHING a dem says but don't use the same filter/lens/nuance/leyway with the repubs.  It's fine...you are just another partisan hack like your twins RL/TPT/RV who has also resorted to name calling for no reason.