In addition to Bidenâs disturbing record on domestic policy, he has been a consistent warmonger. He has supported every military intervention heâs been able to, including, most disastrously voting for the 2002 resolution authorizing war against Iraq and ushering the country into the endless war against âterrorâ we remain immersed in.
I am reading and hearing a lot of mediocre and poor reasons to not politically support Biden but his track record on foreign military adventures is a good reason not to vote for Biden.
More fundamentally, are American voters ready to elect a President who will defy Israel as well as raise excise taxes on polluting fuels? Probably not so folks should simply brace yourself for more wealth-destroying military "training". Is the US$5 Billion per year spent on maintaining the naval fleet close to the Strait of Hormuz money well spent to maintain the US addiction to polluting fossil fuels and cheap energy entitlement? You tell me. One estimate suggests that the USA has spent US$18 trillion protecting the Strait of Hormuz.
Frankly if it were not for full on support for the Israeli nation building process, would the USA have invaded and occupied Iraq and Afghanistan and currently be at loggerheads with Hamas and Iran?
Will any Democratic Party candidate have the courage to stand up and directly question the US War on Terror? Probably not.
Biden is Wall Street and Corporations' choice, not ours. He is safe to them, he'll still look out for their interests. His immediate meeting and cash haul from Comcast says EVERYTHING we need to know about him. Yet . . . I'm behind whoever gets the nom. Just don't think ol Joe's past will pass muster with women and youth. The recent Kavanaugh Calendars and Confirmation spectacle brought back Anita Hill ...on steroids. Women are still fekked in 2018? A long ago sore spot has become a festered wound for many women now. Joe's part won't easily be forgotten or forgiven, unfortunately.
In addition to Bidenâs disturbing record on domestic policy, he has been a consistent warmonger. He has supported every military intervention heâs been able to, including, most disastrously voting for the 2002 resolution authorizing war against Iraq and ushering the country into the endless war against âterrorâ we remain immersed in.
I am extremely emotional, touchy and huggy with my inner circle of family and friends and none of them will not know how I feel about them when I or they go. But I don't act that way to acquaintances and strangers and certainly not children acquaintances and strangers.
I'm not arguing the general premise, but politics is weird. If we elected people based on their skill set alone, this wouldn't be an issue. But a politician MUST appeal to more than a person's rational thought. "He seems like a guy I could have a beer with." They have just seconds to win a person over. Maybe we're entering a time when this touchy-feely tactic isn't going to be effective, but for certain politicians it's what got them where they are. In that light, this is less than zero as a sexual predation thing; it's more likely a political survival technique. Learned, mastered, worn out, and can be un-learned.
Yes, there is that. There also are other differences in play, some of them generational and some of them gender-based; some are just differences from individual to individual. Let me say at the outset of this comment, that I certainly am not trying to minimize inappropriate touching and certainly not anything that rises to the level of sexual assault. That said, there are differences in socialization. For example, as a young man, I realized (or at least it appeared to me) that men tended more to shake hands as a greeting than hug in social settings whereas women tended more towards hugging. Over time, that difference has decreased quite a bit . At various times, I remember being unsure whether I should be greeting a female friend or acquaintance with a hug or a handshake. It was sometimes awkward for me to figure that out at that precise moment, but not because I thought hugging would be inappropriate or offensive. Another example: in my experience, it is not unusual for women in social or business settings to touch me on the arm while making a point, be it a humorous one or a more emphatic one. Nothing romantic or offensive about it, at least in my mind. Men, on the other hand, were more prone to clap someone or touch someone on the shoulder. A lot of this has changed, but some of it still exists. I am probably not explaining this very well, but maybe the general gist of what I am trying to say is apparent.
I dunno about anyone else but I don't want any politician being touchy/feely with me at all. That is not the reason they are leaders. Then again I am rarely star struck or impressed by so called celebrities either. Someone that does their job well is enough for me. As far as touching at work. Handshakes and hugs are too be distributed at the participants discretion. If I worked for a huge firm or corporation, I would never hug anyone, male or female. At a smaller business where the atmosphere is more family like, I have hugged both males and females at the appropriate times. A little common sense goes a long way but as my boss always says......."Common sense is not evenly distributed."
I completely concur. Speaking of common sense, I know the difference between an affectionate person and someone who likes to cop feels. Joe happens to be both. It can be subjective of course and I may not be the smartest man, Jennaay, but I was given a good heap of common sense.
I am extremely emotional, touchy and huggy with my inner circle of family and friends and none of them will not know how I feel about them when I or they go. But I don't act that way to acquaintances and strangers and certainly not children acquaintances and strangers.
I'm not arguing the general premise, but politics is weird. If we elected people based on their skill set alone, this wouldn't be an issue. But a politician MUST appeal to more than a person's rational thought. "He seems like a guy I could have a beer with." They have just seconds to win a person over. Maybe we're entering a time when this touchy-feely tactic isn't going to be effective, but for certain politicians it's what got them where they are. In that light, this is less than zero as a sexual predation thing; it's more likely a political survival technique. Learned, mastered, worn out, and can be un-learned.
Yes, there is that. There also are other differences in play, some of them generational and some of them gender-based; some are just differences from individual to individual. Let me say at the outset of this comment, that I certainly am not trying to minimize inappropriate touching and certainly not anything that rises to the level of sexual assault. That said, there are differences in socialization. For example, as a young man, I realized (or at least it appeared to me) that men tended more to shake hands as a greeting than hug in social settings whereas women tended more towards hugging. Over time, that difference has decreased quite a bit . At various times, I remember being unsure whether I should be greeting a female friend or acquaintance with a hug or a handshake. It was sometimes awkward for me to figure that out at that precise moment, but not because I thought hugging would be inappropriate or offensive. Another example: in my experience, it is not unusual for women in social or business settings to touch me on the arm while making a point, be it a humorous one or a more emphatic one. Nothing romantic or offensive about it, at least in my mind. Men, on the other hand, were more prone to clap someone or touch someone on the shoulder. A lot of this has changed, but some of it still exists. I am probably not explaining this very well, but maybe the general gist of what I am trying to say is apparent.
I dunno about anyone else but I don't want any politician being touchy/feely with me at all. That is not the reason they are leaders. Then again I am rarely star struck or impressed by so called celebrities either. Someone that does their job well is enough for me. As far as touching at work. Handshakes and hugs are too be distributed at the participants discretion. If I worked for a huge firm or corporation, I would never hug anyone, male or female. At a smaller business where the atmosphere is more family like, I have hugged both males and females at the appropriate times. A little common sense goes a long way but as my boss always says......."Common sense is not evenly distributed."
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
Apr 2, 2019 - 3:26pm
ScottFromWyoming wrote:
sirdroseph wrote:
I am extremely emotional, touchy and huggy with my inner circle of family and friends and none of them will not know how I feel about them when I or they go. But I don't act that way to acquaintances and strangers and certainly not children acquaintances and strangers.
I'm not arguing the general premise, but politics is weird. If we elected people based on their skill set alone, this wouldn't be an issue. But a politician MUST appeal to more than a person's rational thought. "He seems like a guy I could have a beer with." They have just seconds to win a person over. Maybe we're entering a time when this touchy-feely tactic isn't going to be effective, but for certain politicians it's what got them where they are. In that light, this is less than zero as a sexual predation thing; it's more likely a political survival technique. Learned, mastered, worn out, and can be un-learned.
Yes, there is that. There also are other differences in play, some of them generational and some of them gender-based; some are just differences from individual to individual. Let me say at the outset of this comment, that I certainly am not trying to minimize inappropriate touching and certainly not anything that rises to the level of sexual assault. That said, there are differences in socialization. For example, as a young man, I realized (or at least it appeared to me) that men tended more to shake hands as a greeting than hug in social settings whereas women tended more towards hugging. Over time, that difference has decreased quite a bit . At various times, I remember being unsure whether I should be greeting a female friend or acquaintance with a hug or a handshake. It was sometimes awkward for me to figure that out at that precise moment, but not because I thought hugging would be inappropriate or offensive. I was just more oriented toward shaking hands than hugging. Another example: in my experience, it is not unusual for women in social or business settings to touch me on the arm while making a point, be it a humorous one or a more emphatic one. Nothing romantic or offensive about it, at least in my mind. Men, on the other hand, were more prone to clap someone or touch someone on the shoulder. A lot of this has changed, but some of it still exists. I am probably not explaining this very well, but maybe the general gist of what I am trying to say is apparent.
metaphorically speaking, i find it a bit suspect that an opponent waits four years and when he comes up to bat calls him out on his juicing
of course media can be edited to make his (potentially) minor snarfing problem a flashing sign
i searched and saw him snuggling with men too
it also looks like he isn't shy about professing feelings/love for the people in his circle (the guy has loved and lost a lot)
==========
admittedly, as i have gotten older and lost quite a few people very close to me, i have started "completing" conversations
Yeah, I thought the same thing about that NV politician. IIRC she said she would vote for Biden over Trump, though...
Joe has been a demonstratively affectionate guy for a while, though. The hugs and back rubs aren't new. I posted this pic somewhere in this forum a while back, and nothing about it was staged or Photoshopped:
Some older folks, you worry that they're going to fall and break their hip. Joe? You worry that he's going to innocently going to make a fool of himself on a regular basis.
Trump? You know he's sleazy enough to break every law if he thinks he can get away with it, and stupid enough to drag us all down with him when things go sideways.
I am extremely emotional, touchy and huggy with my inner circle of family and friends and none of them will not know how I feel about them when I or they go. But I don't act that way to acquaintances and strangers and certainly not children acquaintances and strangers.
I'm not arguing the general premise, but politics is weird. If we elected people based on their skill set alone, this wouldn't be an issue. But a politician MUST appeal to more than a person's rational thought. "He seems like a guy I could have a beer with." They have just seconds to win a person over. Maybe we're entering a time when this touchy-feely tactic isn't going to be effective, but for certain politicians it's what got them where they are. In that light, this is less than zero as a sexual predation thing; it's more likely a political survival technique. Learned, mastered, worn out, and can be un-learned.
I am extremely emotional, touchy and huggy with my inner circle of family and friends and none of them will not know how I feel about them when I or they go. But I don't act that way to acquaintances and strangers and certainly not children acquaintances and strangers.
I'm not arguing the general premise, but politics is weird. If we elected people based on their skill set alone, this wouldn't be an issue. But a politician MUST appeal to more than a person's rational thought. "He seems like a guy I could have a beer with." They have just seconds to win a person over. Maybe we're entering a time when this touchy-feely tactic isn't going to be effective, but for certain politicians it's what got them where they are. In that light, this is less than zero as a sexual predation thing; it's more likely a political survival technique. Learned, mastered, worn out, and can be un-learned.
metaphorically speaking, i find it a bit suspect that an opponent waits four years and when he comes up to bat calls him out on his juicing
of course media can be edited to make his (potentially) minor snarfing problem a flashing sign
i searched and saw him snuggling with men too
it also looks like he isn't shy about professing feelings/love for the people in his circle (the guy has loved and lost a lot)
==========
admittedly, as i have gotten older and lost quite a few people very close to me, i have started "completing" conversations
I am extremely emotional, touchy and huggy with my inner circle of family and friends and none of them will not know how I feel about them when I or they go. But I don't act that way to acquaintances and strangers and certainly not children acquaintances and strangers.
I will say this and it is not often I will give credit to either of the 2 parties, but it is commendable of the Democratic party that it is much more problematic to be a suspected sexual predator of some degree in the Democratic party than the Republican. On one level at least both parties are not being hypocritical in their relatively different responses to such incidents because the Republicans in general don't even pretend to be sympathetic to admitting that there is a long standing issue of rampant sexual abuse towards mostly women and children and the Democrats are and will call out their own ergo Biden is out and has no chance in the primary. You either believe the women and put aside your partisan blinders (this goes for Trump supporters as well) or you don't. Oh and to stay on topic, I would put Biden in the definite "You ain't going around my children" category at least, but there is no allegations I know of actual assault just your basic garden variety dirty old man copping feels off the girlies. I think Bush Sr. pulled a few of those too.
