Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "ABC News" channel.

@josephyoung5157 Colbert: Republicans: Life beginns at conception and ends at the Rio Grande.
1
I think Mr. Woodward dealt a blow to the presidency. Bad news - Mike Pence is in waiting. He should not be given a chance to raise his profil and president.
1
binaryruffian Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned ? I recommend the statistics of partners being seriously harmed or killed by spouse / partner. Or ex-partners being killed to punish them for leaving. And then look which gender does more of the killing and the serious assaults (by far). - Now Women are revengeful as well, but not when it comes to the most serious harm. Lying about the former partner and trying to create problems is done by BOTH genders.
1
maybe it was a case of not getting up your hopes to not be disappointed again ....
1
The police clearly has nothing better to do ....
1
Mk.Jordi Official life begins when the egg is fertilized - the life of the zygote ! That is not a child and does not have personhood. Nor does the embryo or the fetus. - A lot of organisms are alive - a bacteria, plants, animals the unhatchtech eggs could be destroyed without legal consequences. I can imagine a situation where it would be done (pest control). That said: of course a decent person would normally not do it.
1
In Sweden they have a higher death toll than other countries. So it is possible that their vulnerable members pay the price.
1
Dr. Fauci is SO pleased with that result. (one could say almost beaming - and Trump will not fire him after all. although that may be secondary).
1
It is wrong to shame other people for their cheap clothes. so let's lure ! other kids into shaming the shamer (for clothes that likely stand out much more than what the first bullied girl wore). Kids usually are thoughtless (not inherently mean) when they bully, they react to a kid being "different" and the very vintage clothes that the stepmother tricked the little fashionista into choosing, of course triggered that much more than "normal" second hand clothes. I guess she was ridiculed by kids that left the first kid alone. Those kids being triggered into misbehaving like she had misbehaved was needed for the "creative punishment". Isn't bullyying supposed to be wrong. Period ? It was one way to teach her empathy resp. make her rethink what she did, but I think she was not hard to correct to begin with.. By letting her chose not some vintage closthes but making her pick what she thought were the most ugliest clothes the step mom tricked her. So what if a child comes to that school that HAS to wear that kind of clothes (evangelical family, one of the dresses looked cute btw). Because a few kids that had no strong opinion on vintage clothes so far, had been triggered into making that into something negative - so the fashionista / bully would get her creative punishment. The lesson was that it was also shameful for HER to wear old fashioned / vintage clothes. In that way the creative parents enticed ! other immature kids to show bullying behavior. (If everyone had been super accepting - after all she even rocked that style, it would not have been a punishment at all. The lesson to be learned depended on other kids being lured into shaming her. If the girl had showed up and told her peers that she was on a "I can rock the vintage look" challenge she might have started a trend. The punishment would not have worked either.
1
The girl is a little young to self-identify as "fashionista" WHO supported that whim, also with buying her a LOT of clothes ?? She did not sew and design her clothes and did not earn the money to buy them. I assume she even needs to be driven to the mall to pick them and cannot have her own Amazon account. She clearly was thoughtless about the privilege of her wardrobe budget and her good looks. THAT would have been an issue that needed addressing, too (plus the lack of empathy) - and it does not reflect well on her parents that obviously spoiled her with spending a lot on her clothes. Her joy to dress up (she is a little young to call herself a "fashionista"), lead to her having false pride in things that are not achievements (she may have good taste and a knack for combining her outfits, but for the most part she did nothing for being fashionable and looking good, she is just lucky. Enjoying shopping is not an achievement, for most pope it is a hobby). Plus she gave her ego a boost by shaming others that RECEIVE not as much as she does. Another possible reaction (If only her sense of fashion would have been offended) would have been to make friends and go shopping in thrift stores to see if she can find cute outfits for a girl with a much smaller allowance for clothes). The girl likely was looking O.K. anyway (these days people buy and quickly discard so many garments, that even thrifts store bought looks nice and new). But you are not going to find the expensive brands. No status wins with second hand, only "normal" So the parents have not done their job either.
1
I would have let her invite her closest friends and the bullied girl, and make her apologize / make amends in front of them. THAT would be uncomfortable but would address the real issue. The hurt inflicted. The setting would cure thoughlessness (also with those who observed the apology and may have been equallthoughtless on other occasions or could be tempted in the future. Unlike the creative punishment where other kids also misbehaving was needed for the lesson). Then some together activity moderated by mother to overcome awkwardness. Could be a sewing session, or cooking / baking together for a good purpose. A makeover of ugly thriftstore finds could be fun. Or a wellness / make-up afternoon (they help each other do their hair, are allowed to go into mums special lotions, essential oils, and bath scents and what not. And they are allowed to play around with decorative cosmetics. Not going out with it mind you, but playing around. Or carneval style face make-up.
1
Just about 55 years ago the Democrats of the SOUTH were incensed that the other Democrats spoiled the segregation and voter suppression in the former slavery states. The Republican party devloped the Southern Strategy and welcomed those racist Dixiecrats with open arms. - until then both parties had their equal share of racists - but then the Republican party started to specialize in racism and attracted more of them. They were always the party of the haves and biz. Hard to get enough votes that way. So they started specializing in issues to rile up the base around fringe issues: abortion, guns (that was carefully crafted), evangelicals - and of course racism - in later years as dog whistle. All issues that do not cost the big donors (that become even more important when in 1978 the Supreme Court decided that money = free speech). The Dems also serve the big Donors and they also use abortion, gun violence etc. to get out the vote. That said: those fools in Alabama, Ohio etc. just overdid it. THAT will get out the vote in 2020 and it will activate non-voters (YOUNG people). Republicans back in the day (the 1970s) were often for making abortion possible in the early stage (the first 3 months) and with restrictions later - even if they were against it in their personal life. the reason ?- they TOO knew about the horrible stories when women died (or almost died) of backalley abortions. Even Republican politicians had come across such stories and were influenced by it. It is different when you watch the girlfriend of a friend bleed to death. Also see dailykos Her Name was Susan, read also the comments ! I remember one comment: I worked in a bloodbank before Row versus Wade: when there was another case of an abortion gone wrong, they would often empty out the bloodbank. You could only hope there would not be a major car accident.
1
Wants to kill husband (they have a regular divorce no major quarrel) AND his daughter. That boyfriend know what she would do to him if he ever crossed her ;) - I wonder if she assumed she was still in some life insurance contracts (people often forget to amend those) and hoped to cash in on that ?
1
I think he wants to go into politics
1
Alcohol impacts females more !
1
On a side note - the families of state legislators were given a free ride. (So they have a good income but THEY are getting favours - because if all had gone well they would have had a fun day - and it cost something for a family of 6).
1
or a side effect of medication he was getting.
1
@fallibleangel9101 Rich Jewish donors !
1
He does not need a job from anybody. Sanders would not have made him part of the cabinet, but no doubt may have listened to him. He also listens to Rev. Barber.
1
Of course he will criticizing Biden and has done so before (although as always very resepctfully).
1
Chris Hedges mentioned that he is always impressed with Dr. West when he meets him (he has read all the books ...) Well, a man that impresses Hedges with his knowledge and intelligence - that is good and smart enough from me.
1
well she was not alone with them - maybe he would have soothed his bruised ego with shooting her w/o any witnesses and footage.
1
@imbubbajones it is not incest because they are not biologically related. it is frowned upon in Western culture. Was an duty according to the Old Testament (survining brother marrying the widow of his brother. Especially if she did not yet have children or sons with her former husband). - I wonder why they did not wait longer, it gives the impression they were together even before Beau died - that may or may not be true. Hunter separated from his wife and 3 kids, so that makes it more objectionable. But all in all if that would have been his worst offense, I could give him a pass. Whatever works for their family. Refusing to pay child support for a child he fathered (during a fling) - that . Looks like they settled, in the age of court mandated DNA testing there is no way out. The addiction, getting into the navy with a waiver (he was too old, normally recruits have to be younger) and then being kicked out (again because of drugs most likely). I assume the family place him in the navy with the hope it would keep him sober. Well he was not _kicked out,: any other soldier would have had a dishonorable discharge. The Amtrac board gig and later leeching off the poor people of Ukraine. Didn't Biden find an American big donor that would provide a cushy no-show job for his underperforming son ?
1
@imbubbajones I just googled the child support case. The courts were needed, and the settlement was in March 2020. From a Fox article: Biden met Roberts in 2016 at a strip club where she worked in Washington, D.C.Their baby was reportedly born in August 2018, and DNA testing has confirmed Biden is the father. [Brother Beau died in 2015 I think, so the grieving process, the widow and her brother in law getting closer if we assume that started only after the death of Beau must have been in 2016 or early 2017. The separation of Hunter from his wife and the 3 children ... he could fit that all into the time between 2015 and 2017. AND he also started the affair in 2016 and must have met her in late 2017, as well - then he fathered a baby born in August 2018. And fathered another baby with his current wife, I guess that is the widow of his late brother. Does he realize there is this thing called condomes ?? He does not seem very considerate of the reputation of his father. Joe Biden considered running for president in 2019/2020 in the years before (never mind that he publicly declared to be indecisive), but even if not, he was still the VP when Beau started the relationship with the stripper. Beau died in 2015, and VP Biden left office in January 2017 - so very likely Beau also had started the romatic / sexual relationship with his sister in law before his father left office] More from the article. Biden, 50, and the woman, Lunden Roberts, notified Independence County, Arkansas, Judge Holly Meyer of the development on Wednesday, with Roberts’ attorney writing that they had reached the agreement “late last night.” The last-minute agreement was reached just hours before Biden was supposed to be at an office in Little Rock, Arkansas, to answer questions under oath pertaining to his finances. Biden’s attorney had previously said his client would not be available for a deposition until April, but the judge mandated his appearance. Even up until the 11th hour – on Tuesday afternoon – his attorney was attempting to postpone the deposition date. Most recently, he cited coronavirus concerns, wife Melissa Cohen Biden’s late-term pregnancy and media attention for reasons why he could not travel to Arkansas. He had previously agreed that Roberts should have primary custody of the toddler, and later conceded that he would pay child support once a month, and on the first of each month, different court papers released at the time show. But the designated child support amount was expected to change as the court was awaiting Biden’s financial information, which would potentially have included records related to his involvement in Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings.
1
Addiction is horrible - but considering the escapades of his son Beau one would expect the father to be a little more compassionate towards those who have also an addiction but no father to bail them out. Largely not with the money of the father but with throwing his political influence around. Back in the day then young Senator Joe Biden egged on Reagan to go harder with the War On Drugs. Weed is STILL a schedule one drug. The only other one is heroin. Under Nixon it was defined as very dangerous, no medical value, highly addictive. That also meant it was for decades almost impossible to do research. They even banned hemp (the fibre). Nixon and his croonies did that to have a tool to go after the war protesting hippies and the black community. Needless to say no Republican president was willing to end that nonsense. Whatever you think of weed, there is no way it is more dangerous than cocaine, meth etc. (all substances that are graded below heroin and marijuana). But also president Bill Clinton and Barak Obama that had experiences with weed (so they knew it was not that dangerous) could not be bothered to sign the Executive Order. Or to appoint a reasonable head for the FDA. Congress and Senate are NOT needed. Nor did Biden (a big fish in the Democratic party) ever show compassion for drug users, addicts, or the overly harsh penal code regarding selling and using weed (justified by that insane classification). That is still in the books. Not holding my breath that president Biden is going to change it. The Crime Bill was supposed to help Bill Clinton getting reelected: he had sold out the unions by signing NAFTA. Bush had signed it with the head of states of Canada and Mexico, but Congress did not pass it. It needed Democrats and Bill Clinton to sideline the unions and the voters. Clinton did not deliver for the unions, the ECONOMIC interests of working class people, they did not persevere with the promised healthcare reform. Republican grifters and the special interests behind big healthcare gave them a lot of grief - so they just dropped the project. They got something passed (maybe regarding Medicare and at least coverage for children). It was obviously an issue that seemed to be politically convenient, but not dear to their heart, and when it was not that easy to be "successful" and win political points with it - they just dropped it. The need to have healthcare organized in a fair and cost-efficient manner for the whole nation did not vanish because the Clintons (both) did not find it worth their effort anymore and completely dropped the issue after the very watered down bill was passed (they also never picked it up after leaving the White House). The Nixon admin changed that healthcare could be for profit (the insurers I am not sure about hospitals). Before the 1970s that was not legal. Having many insurers adds plenty of red tape and no value - but the most toxic incentives were banned by the mandate to handle it by non-profits. It only took 20 years of for profit healthcare (insurance) and they gave the American voters enough trouble that Bill Clinton would make it a central issue of his 1992 campaign. Unions and black voters were instrumental to get Bill Clinton elected in 1992, but it was questionable they would come out for him again in 1996. So he (and Hillary) did some law and order grandstanding and Senator Joe Biden was instrumental to getting the Crime Bill passed. With even harsher death sentences and for more types of crimes (also for drug dealers). Biden proudly announced his new nickname the "Grim Reaper". The Crime Bill also brought a lot of people (w/o influental daddy or money for good lawyers) for a long time into prison for non violent (drug) crimes. I do not know if Biden ever makes the mental jump from how his son was protected from the consequences of his addiction (he never had to burglar, daddy got him no show jobs) and the masses of normal folks with (minor) drug crimes, he helped to lock up. Even w/o compassion, if you count law enforcement and court costs ... Locking up one person can cost up to 80,000 USD per year. A lot of after school programs, vocational training and drug rehab could be financed with that money. A lot of threats for middle class citizens and their property could also be avoided.
1
The election was not stolen. It was close in the electoral college (so was the 2016 election, that chips fell toward Trump in 2016). The SWING states have an R lregislature and most have a R govenor. and ONLY there a theoretical manipulation would have made any impact on the OUTCOME of the election.
1
Republicans (in the crucial states) had been in charge of the chain of custody for absentee voting in elections before, so let's hope they did their job. In 2020 they had to apply the same procedures, just to much higher volume. Republican politicians had badmouthed the process already in summer (because they knew that mail voting tends to increase turnout and Republican candidates do not fare well when more people participate in elections). To their credit the boards that are usually tasked with organizing the elections did their job (typically the state legislatures are not involved with the nitty gritty of elections they once pass a low to delegate that to a board) Politicians intentionally and cynically sowed distrust. The people in charge of the practical aspects of the election certainly had an incentive to revisit their protocols. Did they hold up for mass handling ? Did they have to finetune ? They certainly needed more resources (staff)
1
Same for the private university Notre Dame (in Idiana). Closing in person learning after cases pop up.
1
chris mclaughlin her endorsement is like the kiss of death. Someone had the good sense to not put her forward.
1