Just for Fun

[Vrede too]

The idea behind zero-tolerance policies can be traced back to the Safe and Clean Neighborhoods Act, approved in New Jersey in 1973, which has the same underlying assumptions. The ideas behind the 1973 New Jersey policy were later popularized in 1982, when a US cultural magazine, The Atlantic Monthly, published an article by James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling about the broken windows theory of crime....

Governor of New Jersey in 1973 - William T. Cahill (R)
James Q. Wilson - "He was the chairman of the Council of Academic Advisors of the (rightwing) American Enterprise Institute, member of the President's (Reagan, Bush I) Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (1985–1990) ... leading conservative scholar ..."
George L. Kelling - "... a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research ..."
Manhattan Institute for Policy Research - "... a conservative 501(c)(3) non-profit American think tank ..."

Has there ever been a case of republicans accepting responsibility for their actions?

No, they have zero-tolerance for that.

[Leo Lyons]

Not intending to further damage the irony-o-meter, it should be noted that although these are republican talking/funny points, the conditions that led to suspensions for aspirin and gun drawings came directly from republican zero tolerance.
And the other 6 came from liberal slobberings and whining. I get it now, billydot. Oh, and btw, there is not one political party any better than the other. Democrats and republicans are the bottom-feeding scum of the earth.

Scenario 9: 1958 Maria and children....
Aw gee, bilwee dot, dush it hoit and have a tempatooah?
Good grief, that's terrible! What school ground did this take place? (the subject was dealing with school, after all)

I get it now leo. Real funny stuff.

No, they have zero-tolerance for that.

Political pissing back and forth is a real bitch, ain't it?

[Leo Lyons]

Well you can carry your nose wherever you like, but I don't find much to laugh about when kids get assaulted with weapons as a "learning experience".
Nor do I, but no one got assaulted in those scenarios. What I find ludicrous is a first grader being sent home for bringing a toy soldier to school, pointing his finger and pow-powing, etc. I don't give a rat's ass which political faction is responsible (both are as far as I'm concerned.) Political bullshit is the #1 cause of hate and dissent among the American people.

You may not have been around when I was ranting about excessive helicopter parenting and defending "free range" parenting. I would certainly agree that some current practices are - on the surface - unreasonable. But I don't find the ridiculous practice of considering a picture of a gun the same as a gun to be humorous - it's too serious stupidity to be funny.
"But I don't find the ridiculous practice of considering a picture of a gun the same as a gun to be humorous -"

Huh? What did I miss here?

[GoCubsGo]

Leave it to Leo to completely suck the 'fun' out of the 'Just for Fun' thread.

[billy.pilgrim]

Not intending to further damage the irony-o-meter, it should be noted that although these are republican talking/funny points, the conditions that led to suspensions for aspirin and gun drawings came directly from republican zero tolerance.
And the other 6 came from liberal slobberings and whining. I get it now, billydot. Oh, and btw, there is not one political party any better than the other. Democrats and republicans are the bottom-feeding scum of the earth.

Scenario 9: 1958 Maria and children....
Aw gee, bilwee dot, dush it hoit and have a tempatooah?
Good grief, that's terrible! What school ground did this take place? (the subject was dealing with school, after all)

I get it now leo. Real funny stuff.

No, they have zero-tolerance for that.

Political pissing back and forth is a real bitch, ain't it?

No, pretty much all of this came from zero tolerance. Sure, gutless libs helped it along; after all, it's hard to stand up against excessive law enforcement in our political climate.

[Vrede too]

Ouch, that would really hurt . . . if I was a Dianne Feinstein fan, if she had really said "leeches", if jack a had a track record of more than 2 rightwing videos, if I thought that potentially out of context 31 second YT videos were credible sources for anything, and if it wasn't a wussy deflection from the topic at hand.

If I was still in CA, I would be supporting certain loser Kevin de Leon vs. Feinstein.

Try again.

[O Really]

Oh, and btw, there is not one political party any better than the other. Democrats and republicans are the bottom-feeding scum of the earth.[/color]

[/color]

Psychologists define several types of conflicts arising from forced choice. Each choice either attracts or repels the chooser. So a person who has to choose between a thick steak or a lobster might be conflicted because s/he wants both. Most people having to choose between the steak and haggis would have no conflict. But the hardest conflict is the repel/repel situation where the chooser doesn't like either choice. It seems, Leo, that you have that situation regarding politics and the conflict is clouding your ability to see clear differences.

Certainly you can find examples of bottom-feeding scum in both parties, as well as in most other occupations. But that doesn't mean everyone is scum or that they're all the same scum. There are certainly differences in Republicans and Democrats, and those differences can affect your life personally whether you vote for/support them or not. Pick most any issue you like, and you can find differences. Ask yourself if you would be affected personally if one or the other party were in charge and followed their positions. Then consider that even if - IF - all politicians were scum bag crooks, that some of them are better for you personally than others.

Saying "they're no different" or "they're all scum" is at least in part what got us into the current mess where perception created its own reality.

[Leo Lyons]

Ouch, that would really hurt . . . if I was a Dianne Feinstein fan, if she had really said "leeches", if jack a had a track record of more than 2 rightwing videos, if I thought that potentially out of context 31 second YT videos were credible sources for anything, and if it wasn't a wussy deflection from the topic at hand.
If I was still in CA, I would be supporting certain loser Kevin de Leon vs. Feinstein.
Try again.

Leave it to Vrede to completely suck the 'fun' out of the 'Just for Fun' thread.
Cheer up GoCubsGo. It's not the end of the world. Tomorrow will be here before you know it.

[Leo Lyons]

Psychologists define several types of conflicts arising from forced choice. Each choice either attracts or repels the chooser. So a person who has to choose between a thick steak or a lobster might be conflicted because s/he wants both. Most people having to choose between the steak and haggis would have no conflict. But the hardest conflict is the repel/repel situation where the chooser doesn't like either choice. It seems, Leo, that you have that situation regarding politics and the conflict is clouding your ability to see clear differences.

Certainly you can find examples of bottom-feeding scum in both parties, as well as in most other occupations. But that doesn't mean everyone is scum or that they're all the same scum. There are certainly differences in Republicans and Democrats, and those differences can affect your life personally whether you vote for/support them or not. Pick most any issue you like, and you can find differences. Ask yourself if you would be affected personally if one or the other party were in charge and followed their positions. Then consider that even if - IF - all politicians were scum bag crooks, that some of them are better for you personally than others.

Saying "they're no different" or "they're all scum" is at least in part what got us into the current mess where perception created its own reality.

Good reply; thanks for the comeback. All I can say is you've obviously never worked for the government. I have. That's why I retired early while I could take advantage of extremely good retirement benefits. Federal law enforcement is nothing but a plaything for politicians.

[Leo Lyons]

No, pretty much all of this came from zero tolerance. Sure, gutless libs helped it along; after all, it's hard to stand up against excessive law enforcement in our political climate.

"excessive law enforcement" ... you know nothing, my friend.

[Leo Lyons]

Leave it to Leo to completely suck the 'fun' out of the 'Just for Fun' thread.

So, what fun have you had taken from you?
Lead, follow, or get the (heck) out of the way.
There's room for plenty more fun here; try it.

[billy.pilgrim]

No, pretty much all of this came from zero tolerance. Sure, gutless libs helped it along; after all, it's hard to stand up against excessive law enforcement in our political climate.

"excessive law enforcement" ... you know nothing, my friend.

It's evident that I understand more than you about punks who become LEOs

[Leo Lyons]

It's evident that I understand more than you about punks who become LEOs

It's evident that I understand more than you about clueless punks who are still clueless punks.

[billy.pilgrim]

It's evident that I understand more than you about punks who become LEOs

It's evident that I understand more than you about clueless punks who are still clueless punks.

I really doubt that.

Even people who want to be cops for the right reasons, turn to shit when they realise that they can push certain groups of people (they don't like or don't approve of) around.

Yeah, I do think that our cops are pigs. And will continue to be unless something drastic is done.

[O Really]

All I can say is you've obviously never worked for the government.

Well, you're right. Other than my time with Air Force Intelligence that included time as NSA, I've never worked "for" the government. But over the years, I've worked "with" a lot of government employees - largely in the various agencies, divisions, and commissions within the Labor Department. I've run into a few jerks, and the occasional give-a-shit, but the vast majority have been competent, hard-working people interested in doing the best they can. I've had friends and relatives who were career people, and with the exception of one worthless cousin, they were/are all people you wouldn't mind working with.

Maybe you just had bad luck with your assignments and co-workers?

[Vrede too]

Blowing In With Hurricane Florence: The Rugged Anchor In A Polo Shirt
Hurricane season offers the shirt style the chance to do damage control on its otherwise dismal public image.

The only thing in the Carolinas having a good week is the polo shirt. As Tropical Storm Florence bore down on the region, the polo became a symbol of a sort of chesty watchfulness.

CNN’s Anderson Cooper wore one. Don Lemon wore one. Chris Cuomo wore one, too.

It was as if a memo had gone out:

we've reached the critical stage in the hurricane where all the cnn anchors have broken out their short sleeve muscle polo shirts

This was something of a brand reversal for the beleaguered polo. The loosely knit, piqué cotton garment has long had a bit of an image problem. Popularized by Ivy League douchebags, 1980s rom-com villains and, most recently, members of the alt-right, it is the rare shirt style to offer sophistication, comfort and a breathable sense of white supremacy. The collar can be peacocked skyward to protect the neck of the shirt’s wearer from the Nantucket sun, a useful bit of signaling that informs passersby that the man beneath the shirt is quite possibly a prick.

But Florence arrived, and all the old associations went on hiatus. Now the polo shirt was the unofficial uniform of the rugged men who’d come to the Outer Banks to cover Mother Nature’s wrath. It was the ensemble of the good guy....

There’s a certain seasoned nonchalance polo shirts evoke in this particular environment. It feels as if the bold anchors, rushing to report on a breaking story, didn’t have time to button up a whole button-down. The shirt’s usual air of stuffiness is replaced with a manly gusto.

In August 2017, polos’ already lackluster reputation took a turn for the worse when hoards of white nationalists descended upon Charlottesville, Virginia, clad in piqué cotton, chanting epithets including “Jews will not replace us.” One protester removed his white polo shirt to shirk his alt-right persona and hide from the proliferating counterprotesters.



Things are a bit different now. CNN anchor Chris Cuomo was the first to receive rave reviews for his choice in top. One enthusiastic news viewer tweeted: “If @ChrisCuomo is going to be reporting on the Hurricane today in that Polo shirt and shorts on the beach? I’m gonna be watching CNN ALL DAY!!!”

When Cuomo later opted for a looser-fitting top, the people noticed. “Aw, bigger polo shirt today,” a polo fan tweeted. “I respect that he didn’t want to distract from the hurricane. Doesn’t mean I’m not disappointed.”

At long last, polo shirts weren’t just the preferred garments of rich guys who think the best way to carry a sweater is by draping it around their necks like little capes. The polo was the choice of dogged reporters, servants of the people, dressing down a bit while still keeping it classy. The mind reeled at the thought of all the great moments in broadcast journalism that might’ve been enlivened by the presence of a reporter’s bare arms. Dan Rather getting his two-button placket ripped up at the Democratic National Convention. Ed Murrow covering the blitz in an H&M slim-fit. This is ... my bicep.

I give the last word to one polo-obsessed Twitter user: “Regarding future hurricane coverage videos. I can only take you seriously if you’re wearing a tight-fitting polo shirt and a baseball cap which I expect you to try and hold on to regardless of wind speed. Please and thank you.”

Let's see you talk your way out of that one, Cooper.

[billy.pilgrim]

Weren't polos the uniforms of the cons who were bussed in to disrupt the Florida recount in 2000?

[Leo Lyons]

It's evident that I understand more than you about punks who become LEOs

It's evident that I understand more than you about clueless punks who are still clueless punks.

I really doubt that.
Of course you do. That's why I pointed out you were clueless.

Even people who want to be cops for the right reasons, turn to shit when they realise that they can push certain groups of people (they don't like or don't approve of) around. Yeah, I do think that our cops are pigs. And will continue to be unless something drastic is done.
Hmmm. Cops are not programmed robots; like you and me, they're humans with human emotion, human faults and human temperaments. By this conversation with you, it tells me you would have fit into the category you described above had you decided on a career in law enforcement; when challenged, even verbally, you go all ape-shit. Also, it's people with your mind-set and temperament that causes the need for law enforcement.

[Leo Lyons]

All I can say is you've obviously never worked for the government.

Well, you're right. Other than my time with Air Force Intelligence that included time as NSA, I've never worked "for" the government. But over the years, I've worked "with" a lot of government employees - largely in the various agencies, divisions, and commissions within the Labor Department. I've run into a few jerks, and the occasional give-a-shit, but the vast majority have been competent, hard-working people interested in doing the best they can. I've had friends and relatives who were career people, and with the exception of one worthless cousin, they were/are all people you wouldn't mind working with.

Maybe you just had bad luck with your assignments and co-workers?

You missed the sticking point; I said politicians. I had no issues with whom I worked with; peers or supervisors. My issues were with the ones who, because of their elected positions, made it adamantly clear who was going to be "the boss" in decision-making instances and policies.

Example: I gave "soft orders" to my charges that simple pot busts were unimportant, and not to be overly zealous with making arrests. A locally-elected pol got wind of this, and in an effort to shine, raised hell in the local media that DEA wasn't enforcing the law. I got a tongue lashing and a transfer. Fortunately, no reprimand in my folio.

I'd say this is a prime example of "cops are pigs", wouldn't you?

[billy.pilgrim]

It's evident that I understand more than you about punks who become LEOs

It's evident that I understand more than you about clueless punks who are still clueless punks.

I really doubt that.
Of course you do. That's why I pointed out you were clueless.

Even people who want to be cops for the right reasons, turn to shit when they realise that they can push certain groups of people (they don't like or don't approve of) around. Yeah, I do think that our cops are pigs. And will continue to be unless something drastic is done.
Hmmm. Cops are not programmed robots; like you and me, they're humans with human emotion, human faults and human temperaments. By this conversation with you, it tells me you would have fit into the category you described above had you decided on a career in law enforcement; when challenged, even verbally, you go all ape-shit. Also, it's people with your mind-set and temperament that causes the need for law enforcement.

got it, they have the type of emotions that cause them to escalate situations they could have defused, it they don’t like the person

as I said - Pigs