search results matching tag: Slimy

» channel: weather

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (22)     Sift Talk (2)     Blogs (3)     Comments (141)   

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

I’ve been slacking….

176 Darrell Gilyard, Jerry Falwell protege, must really be some preacher, convicted of child molestation, on parole and back in the pulpit. So they ban children from the church

177 Conservative Baptist minister Matt Baker murdered his wife

178 Richmond County Republican Party official Brett Bennie Langham was indicted for child molestation.

179 FOX News Latino VP, Francisco Cortes - sexual harassment

180 Eric Bolling, formerly FOX News - sexual harassment

181 Kimberley Guilfoyle - FOX NEws - sexual harassment

182 David Garland, President of rightwing Baptist Baylor University, covered up rapes, said women willingly became victims.

183 Political hack and professional hypocrite Ken Starr covered up rapes while Chancellor at Baylor

184 Stephen Dalton Baril just got not jail time even though he took a plea for rape, perhaps because his grandfather was John Dalton, a former governor, and his father Steve Baril ran for Attorney General.

185 Greenville County Sheriff Will Lewis, Republican, indicted for rape, stalking, obstruction

186 While Oklahoma Republican representative George Faught did not commit rape and incest (as far as I know) he said it’s all part of God's will, so he joins the list of rape enablers.

187 Connecticut Republican politician Christopher von Keyserling was arrested and charged with sexual assault. Trump’s his role model. He said it, not me.

187 Bob Jones University Blamed Victims, not Abusers

189 Rhode Island state Sen. Nicholas Kettle, a 27-year-old Coventry Republican, of twice coercing a Senate student page to have sex with him

190 Milo Yiannopolous defended pedophilia, saying older men can show younger men who they are

191 Caleb Bailey, Trump delegate - child pornography

192 Paul Travis Williams, former Lumpkin Co GOP Chair, child pornography

193 Bishop Raymond Burke of Missouri said John Kerry should not get communion, excommunicated all sorts of people, but not pedophile priests

194 CJ Maheney covered up sexual abuse in his churches

195 Megachurch pastor Bob Coy raped and molested a girl from age 4 until she was 14 and his Republican pals helped cover it up, sealing his divorce file, not investigating the complaint

196 Baptist Megachurch Pastor Matt Chandler punished a woman for divorcing her pedophile husband. Did not punish the husband.

197 AZ GOP State Sen. Scott Bundegaard - domestic violence, not arrested at the time because cops believed him when he said he had immunity while House was in session

198 WA GOP state Rep. Matt Manweller is accused of sexual misconduct with students and legislative aides.

199 TX GOP state Sen. Charles Schwertner accused of sending sexting grad student, sending dick pic

200 Indiana Republican Attorney General Curtis Hill - groping

Party of debauchery. Waiting for you to post the list of Democrat politicians with similar convictions…it’s going to be short and a one time only thing…I’ve got at least 38 more pages to go listing high power conservative sex abusers just from this one list, and it’s not all inclusive. Who could be surprised? Your leader is a repeated publicly known pedophilic RAPIST and incestous creep.

Bonus’s E Jene Carrol already won her second defamation case against Trump the rapist…it’s going straight to the damages phase just like Giuliani and the poll workers. Wow your team sucks slimy donkey dicks in court, losing completely before you even start defending yourselves repeatedly!

What "defund the police" really means

newtboy says...

You misread. Please don't speak for me, especially when you're so wrong.

I support both disband the police, which means require all police to go through the hiring process again with those with multiple or serious complaints on their record disqualified or at least forced into retraining and a long probationary period...and I also support defund the police...meaning remove mental health from their job (and fund a mental health department that is sent on mental health calls, normally without police escort), it means the SWAT team is only called after weapons are used, not pre-emptive for non-violent calls, so can be cut in half or less. It means ZERO dollars for military equipment.
It does not mean eradicating the police, it does not mean cut ALL police funding, it means remove the second, third, and fourth hats they wear, remove violent or abusive officers, and cut their funding accordingly.

Mostly I think people want enforceable responsibility, criminal and civil, not immunity. If police had no shield from their actions, they would act better instantly. That's a no brainer and doesn't cost a dime.

Edit: eradicating the police unions would go a long way towards fixing the culture.

I think the demands of the public are more homogeneous than you claim....I know so, since you mischaracterized my position to create an outlier. That said, people do have different ideas of how to fix a problem we seem to agree on....but stripping immunity seems to be nearly universal outside police and Republican senator circles.

The people running the country aren't our best and brightest, they are those narcissistic enough to think they alone can make a difference and those slimy enough to think they can take advantage of an elected position for their personal gain. Trump proves undeniably that they aren't necessarily better educated , smart, or professional.

bcglorf said:

The cause isn't united either.

Another part of the problem is you have a lot of people like @newtboy who really DO mean defund the police by the dictionary definition. Those folks are mixed in with the protesters who mean 'reform' when they say 'defund'.

That's all to be expected though when you see the systematic failure of the national police force that is out there. When the number of bad actors in the force becomes too many, includes sheriffs and their deputies, and sees various police chiefs and police union leaders(not toe mention Presidents) defending the bad actors, the people that rise up in anger aren't going to be a uniform centrally organized entity.

As Dave Chapelle refers to it, these are the streets speaking for themselves. The public can't be expected to hold a single, uniform and documented solution that they are marching for. It is unfair to the point of dishonesty to try and discredit the protestors as a 'mob' because their calls for reform aren't consistent enough or well messaged enough. The presumably better educated, smarter professionals running the country(from the bottom to the top) are the one's whose job it is to find a good solution. More importantly, it's also their fault for failing to enact solutions to the problem before the public outrage hit the levels it has.

Chris Rock Didn’t Miss Talking About Bad Apples

newtboy says...

*quality dissection of what "a few bad apples" means in context.
This entire crop is spoiled, tainted by the toxic sludge oozing from the bad apple at the top all the way down.

Are there some police, even most, who would never attack citizens, arrest someone they know to be innocent based on race, or falsify charges? Absolutely. Unfortunately there's a statistical vacuum when it comes to policing themselves. That makes them all accessories after the crime under the law, and as a fact.
The bad apples couldn't represent the police if the police fired them with permanent nationwide records so they can't just move to the next police force after being fired for crimes. Instead they shield and hide those rotting apples behind their blue wall, tainting themselves in the process.

When I see an Apple going bad, I throw it out immediately...I don't wait until it's become slimy and furry, spoiling all my fruit.

ant (Member Profile)

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

No Bob. That's wrong....not surprising because Russia doesn't teach American politics, but that's not how it works.

Your simple illustration from a simple mind is incorrect. Impeachment isn't the same as a bill, if it was McConnell would just refuse to act like he has on almost every bill, killing it in political limbo. He simply cannot do that, because it's not a bill, it's a constitutional duty.

Yes, at this point the articles are legitimate, and the Senate's slimy trail began long ago. The trial can't start until the legitimate articles are submitted to the Senate.

A realistic illustration for a simple mind....this is like having a grand jury indictment that has yet to be put on the courts calendar because the judge is the defendant's best friend and business partner but refuses to recuse himself. The indictment is legitimate, but the trial hasn't yet started because the only prosecutor and the jury pool has stated publicly that they're all working for the defendant and will just exonerate him without a real trial, no evidence, and no testimony.
The Senate has to have a real trial to enforce it....but has already ensured any faux trial is nothing but a politically motivated rubber stamp where jeopardy is never attached.

Funny you ignored the bit about charity fraud and other high crimes, which he undeniably committed and admitted under oath so you have to call him a perjuror to deny it, stealing from veterans and children to pay for his campaign and inauguration, lying to Mueller which you applauded, and making hundreds of millions by renting resort rooms to foreign governments at inflated rates that aren't even used (which is pure bribery). That's impeachable, cause for removal, and should end in prison, he outright stole millions through fraud and admitted it last year in court. I suppose you must agree since you didn't contradict any of that.....and you can't, because he's admitted it all.

bobknight33 said:

..... till given to Senate for the trail.


A simple illustration for a simple mind.

If the House voted for a tax cut is not a tax cut YET. I has to go to the Senate and the Senate has to pass it

The articles have not been given to the Senate. At this point the article are legitimate. and the trail can begin.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Yep. That's exactly what you hear when facts are presented. That's probably why you don't know any.

No Bobski, you're the commie. We all know you're working for Putin, even if you're too ignorant to know it yourself....but it's clear you aren't really an American, so I think you do know it.

Swamp is slowly being cleaned....of the slimy swamp creatures Trump installed. >91 Republican convictions for every 1 Democratic conviction. Case closed on which party is more corrupt, there's no contest. Trump..Making Attorneys Get Attorneys

Can't wait for the next red tsunami.

bobknight33 said:

Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah .

Look commie, you wont be happy until another anti American globalist gets elected. Good luck might happen by 2028.

Swamp is begin cleaned and American see the BS lies from MSM and Trump will landslide 2020

Lt. Col. Vindman & Williams - Damning Impeachment Testimony

Kavanaugh: No More Nineties Reboots, Please | Full Frontal

ChaosEngine says...

Short answer: yes. 100%.

Long answer:
Well, let's unpack this.

"the acts of a 17 yr old boy"
I did some dumb shit when I was a kid. Nothing major, but I certainly wasn't a choir boy. But this isn't some drunken hijinx. It isn't even some petty crime.

This is an accusation of violent sexual assault.

Now, even then, I'd be willing to grant that people can change. If he'd paid his due, apologised, and proved he had changed, I'd be willing to say that everyone deserves a shot at redemption.

But...
"no other history of repeat offense"
you mean apart from the other two women accusing him of sexual assault?

Finally...
"destroy a career"
Let's cut this bullshit right here. Your career is not "destroyed" if you don't get to sit on the supreme court. I'm a software developer. I'll never work for Google or Apple or Facebook or whatever, but career is doing fine, thanks.

It's the Supreme Court... it should literally be the elite of the elite in legal minds. If you've got two candidates who are identical in all respects except one got slightly better marks in high school, you take that one BECAUSE YOU CAN.

Kavanaugh is clearly not the best available. If nothing else, this process has shown that he is woefully unsuitable for this position. He has constantly lied, deflected and then become hysterical (and yes, I'm using that particular word very deliberately).

But what saddens about this whole thing (and it really shouldn't surprise me at this point) is the hypocrisy of the right. Because it's Trumps pick, they're all "it's just youthful exuberance" and "let bygones be bygones" where you know if the tables were turned and it was a democratic pick who had even a minor misdemeanour they would be screaming from the rooftops.

The funny thing is, I still think that Kavanaugh (whatever I may personally think of the slimy fuck-weasel) deserves the presumption of innocence. If he really was the guy he's made out to be by the right, he would have said "I'm innocent, but of course this should be investigated. I am terribly sorry for this woman. She has obviously been through a traumatic incident, but she has me confused for someone else." and then it would have been investigated, probably nothing would be found (due to the age of the claims and the difficulty of gathering evidence).

He could have handled this with humility, sympathy and dignity.

But he failed every possible test. He has shown himself utterly unfit to be on the supreme court, and quite frankly, he's shown himself to be a poor excuse for a human. Fuck him so very much.

bobknight33 said:

you want the acts of a 17 yr old boy with no other history of repeat offense destroy a career?

If so we are all doomed.

McCain defending Obama 2008

MilkmanDan says...

I appreciate your response to my question earlier, @bobknight33.

I don't mean to try to drag you back into the thread here if you're trying to disengage -- I dunno what you mean by #walkaway. Anyway, this doesn't require a response.

I largely agree with you on the specific subtopic of both parties being pretty dirty and frequently engaging in "government theater" just to draw attention to trivialities while promoting their own self interests. I also largely agree with Trump being a "true outsider" in the sense that he holds no particular allegiance to party machinations, etc.

However, even though I was willing to give him a chance after the election, at this point I have zero trust in Trump's intentions. Trumps friends -- the "best people" -- have this interesting trend of becoming his detractors and enemies. Trump wants us to accept the word of people that vouch for him, but days, weeks, or months later they fall out of favor and suddenly he says that they are scum and we shouldn't listen to a word they say.

That's a "cry wolf" or "fool me once" sort of problem. Sessions, the guy you mentioned as protecting Trump from the "witch hunt", has been pretty relentlessly bashed by Trump for the weighty offense of allowing investigators to investigate. Giuliani spouts nonsense, doublespeak and contradictions. Huckabee-Sanders refuses to answer very basic questions from the press (which is her job) not because they misquote her or take things out of context (which would be legitimate gripes) but because she's been bitten in the ass a few too many times by people pointing out blatant contradictions in Trump's statements. And that's just the current people.
There's a large list of short-term Trump appointments that end up out of favor.

What all that stuff says to me is ... "something is rotten in the state of Denmark". Is it possible that there's a vast conspiracy against him in the media, justice department, etc.? Um, well, maybe -- but Occam's Razor tells me that other possibilities are rather more likely. Like, for example, that Trump being a "true outsider" doesn't preclude him from holding the same self-serving motivations that are unfortunately common in slimy career politicians. That he acts shady and dirty because he is shady and dirty.

I dunno. It just seems like it takes a lot of work to keep up with Trump's revolving door of steadfast allies that become traitorous enemies.

RLM discusses Alien: Covenant and plot holes (spoilers)

Digitalfiend says...

My biggest complaints about Covenant:

1. David killed ALL the engineers? How? Why would that be the only city on that planet? Makes no sense though I guess it can be implied that all life was *eventually* killed by the black spores.

2. The chestbuster morphing into a mini-xenomorph so quickly was retarded and looked so out of place. Also the gestation period was ridiculously fast.

3. No hazard/bio-suits when landing on an unknown planet with almost your entire bridge/command crew? Come on...

4. The stupid back/throat-bursters. I almost laughed when the first back-burster was revealed. Why even introduce them at all? More time could have been spent with David getting someone impregnated by a facehugger.

5. The whole premise of Alien is that no one really knows what the hell it is or where it came from. That mystery and uncertainty lends more weight to the terror of the xenomorph. Why do movies always have to try and explain every detail - leaving it up to the viewer's imagination can be so much more effective (e.g. see explanation of "The Force"...f.u. George Lucas lol...)

6. David creating the xenomorphs just doesn't make sense either. Why would he create something that requires a host when there is no life remaining on the planet and he couldn't have known that a ship would arrive carrying people to impregnate?

7. Having the xenos walk around in bright lighting doesn't make them appear very menacing. Alien and Aliens were all about claustrophobic environments, dim lighting, and surprise attacks.

8. Yes, let's do exactly what the clearly scheming android told us to do and walk right up to that slimy egg that just opened. You would think that these people should be smart, right? They are the custodians of over 1000 colonists, starship pilots, and scientists and clearly hold high ranking positions yet frequently make some of the WORST choices possible. Ripley might have just been a lieutenant of a simple cargo hauler but the idiots of the Covenant make her look like a genius.

glenn greenwald-no evidence of russian hacking

MilkmanDan says...

I found one thing extremely interesting in *2* separate interviews with Assange when he was asked whether or not there was any Russian involvement -- including the one with Hannity shown early in the video here:

Hannity: Did Russia give you this information? Or anyone associated with Russia?
Assange: Our source is not a state party.

Very close to verbatim that exchange appeared in a print interview a week or two ago. The resulting headlines: "Assange denies Russian Involvement in the Leaks", etc.

But look at that answer. It is very carefully worded, but it doesn't directly answer the question. "Our source is not a state party" doesn't rule out that the source is Russian. It sort of rules out a source with known associations with the government (of Russia or anywhere else), but it could be an independent / private individual at face value that got the information from state parties.

I find it odd that nobody (as far as I've seen) has brought up that carefully worded answer, when it stuck out like a sore thumb to me the first time I saw it in print.


That being said, I 100% agree with Greenwald when he suggests that accusations are not proof. And the CIA and other agencies have a massive track record of shady dealings done in the name of "national security", as defined by whoever is in charge. Taking them at their word seems pretty hopelessly naive at this point.


But beyond all of that, I honestly don't care who did the hacking and what their motivations were. The government seems happy to record and analyze everything we say and do, and to claim that people like Edward Snowden are traitors for simply telling us about it. Well, get used to some of your own goddamn medicine. If you are running for public office, you should expect that your rights to privacy are going to be challenged much more strongly than those of Joe Average. You're a person of interest -- for pretty legitimate reasons.

Assume that absolutely everything you've ever said on the record (and lots OFF the record) is going to be gone over with a fine-toothed comb. If you've got any skeletons in your closet, expect that there is a good chance they will get exposed. And probably at the worst possible time.

What should both parties take away from this? Gee, it might be a good idea to choose candidates that can stand up to at least a basic level of scrutiny. Backing slimy weasels that look great and charismatic after a quick once-over might come back to bite you in the ass.

Seth Meyers Interviews Kellyanne Conway

Seth Meyers Interviews Kellyanne Conway

Source of Antarctica’s Bleeding Glacier Found

Kids try Natto for the first time

Sagemind says...

Why is this a food??

What person said, it smells bad, it tastes bad, it's fermented (aka rotten) - Hey, lets eat this!!!??

Nattō is a traditional Japanese food made from soybeans fermented with Bacillus subtilis var. natto. Some eat it as a breakfast food. Nattō may be an acquired taste because of its powerful smell, strong flavor, and slimy texture.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists