With the latest couple of announcements, one wag at National Review said the House majority has lost the will to live. It’s down to what, 1-2 votes? The 2024 prospects for the GOP seem much better for the Senate than the House.
Printable View
With the latest couple of announcements, one wag at National Review said the House majority has lost the will to live. It’s down to what, 1-2 votes? The 2024 prospects for the GOP seem much better for the Senate than the House.
I sure hope Kristi Noem doesn’t have other dogs.
Years ago, I was the Controller for a county government about 50 miles north of Madison, WI. One of the stormiest board meetings I ever attended was a debate on building an animal shelter. On one side, we had farmers who took an unsentimental view about the way to deal with sick, destructive or superfluous animals. On the other, we had members of our little arts and boutiques community, and university types from Madison, some of whom actually wept during the debate. It was quite the dramatic evening.
As for myself, if I had a dog that attacked people and killed my neighbors’ chickens, I would have no problem putting it down. That would seem to be the responsible thing to do. But I wouldn’t brag about it in a campaign biography. That strikes me as politically tone deaf.
Besides being politically tome deaf it also strikes me that it’s an admission that one has no clue how to train a dog.
Yeah, I don’t think it is that simple in the world of hunting dogs.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
Leashes and muzzles are a thing that can be used if someone knows their dog is poorly trained.
For decades now, I have adopted "troublesome" dogs. Usually large scent hounds that some halfwit purchased, who had no idea how to properly train and work such animals. Generally with focused training I have been able to turn the dogs into productive members of society. This is not a project for the inept.Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
I grew up around such dogs. When I was a child my grandparents took care of me during the day, and my grandfather maintained a pack of black & tan Coonhounds, and a pack of beagles. He *never* let those dogs inside the house, though he was very kind and caring and attentive to the animals. He used them for their purpose, and spent a lot of time and effort training them and breeding them to his requirements.
I have a 150lb Bloodhound sleeping on my feet as I type this. A neighbor got the cute little male puppy. She was a first-time dog owner, and a single Mom of two toddlers. Living in a two story home with wooden floors. She came to me when the dog was about 1.5 years old begging me to take the dog - it was knocking over the children, eating the food off their dinner table, dancing on the kitchen counters and furniture, and resource-guarding. And was about 120 lbs and still growing. It took me months of work to turn him into a perfect gentleman (for a Bloodhound(*)). This dog was well on his way to being destroyed, but now he's both a great working dog, and a fine companion for my life. I use him for search and rescue work, and one day he arguably saved a few dozen lives when he alerted to a fire in the village in our senior housing apartment building as I was walking him nearby. After I called it in, we went in and knocked down the fire with a water extinguisher before the fire truck managed to arrive from the station down the street. Good dog.
https://i.imgur.com/pEV8yjS.png
(*) Some of the scent hounds are the hardest dogs to "train" to perform traditional tasks, they aren't quite like regular dogs. A "smart" dog may be able to learn a new behaviour with a handful of repetitions. These hounds may take hundreds and hundreds of trials, and constant reinforcement will be required ongoing.
that’s great, bae. Those houndDogs are so silly looking, they are like cartoon dogs, but I know they’re not silly dogs.
100s of repetitions? I am inept for sure.
this is why we’ve had foster dogs who were so well-behaved we took them on vacation, and we put our own dogs in the kennel because our dogs would not behave in a hotel.
I think that's how I end up with them. They look so cute, especially as puppies, that people get them as pets and don't realize what they are getting into. I had Bassets for years and years, nearly everyone had the same origin story "We got this cute puppy, now it is a monster". A Basset, cute and cartoonlike as it is, is just a dwarf-form Bloodhound, but with extra deviousness thrown in. My last 3 at full adulthood weighed 80lbs, 75lbs, and 65lbs. I usually try to have at least a pair of hounds (they work better in the field that way), and the Bassets were capable of coming up with complex schemes to accomplish their evil ends. I had a pair that would move several pieces of furniture around in my kitchen so that they could end up atop the counters and kitchen pass-through, working as a team. Devils.Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
I think a lot of people give up early because they don't know that success is quite likely, as long as you commit to consistency and the correct sort of reinforcement. (Negative conditioning doesn't seem to work well at all with the sorts of dogs I end up with, for example).Quote:
100s of repetitions? I am inept for sure.
I am of the opinion that most people should not have dogs. I shudder when I hear people baby-talking their "fur babies" and see them letting the dogs run the household.
Son-in-law has an obsession with a certain breed - Cane Corso - and they are now on their third one. First was a gentle giant and died from cancer, second was a terror that attacked DD unprovoked several times and having small children, they were advised by their vet to have it put down which they begrudgingly did. They learned later that had it been bred and raised by a woman later arrested for animal cruelty. The third - we shall see. I wish they would just get a sweet-natured mutt.
Cane Corsos are trendy and have been for the past few years. I put them in the same trend category as Dobermans were 30+ years ago,, then Rottweilers followed, then pitbulls. But I remember your daughter had a big dog before the cane Corso so maybe they’re just attracted to very large dogs.Quote:
Originally Posted by pinkytoe
I enjoy large dogs, and had always hoped to have a Cane Corso, but once a dog becomes "trendy", problems appear. Wow - I just looked, they are #18 on the list of breed popularity in the USA!Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
I had a great pair of Portuguese Water Dogs some years ago. It took me quite a while to source the pair, the breed was pretty obscure and in short supply in the USA. Then Obama got elected, and was given one as First Dog. The breed suffered as a result as less-skillful breeders started cranking up the production line.
I have things to say about the current "doodle" trend too, but...
I'm planning ahead for the next dog(s), and am leaning towards the Otterhound or the Grand Griffon Vendéen, both of which are tricky to source.
We have had several neighbors acquire doodle dogs and all have come down with cancer and passed at young ages. Funny how political talk turned to dog talk:)
My sister and her husband spent $6k on a "doodle" puppy a few years ago. They both work during the day. It is a very high-drive dog, and they treat it as if it were their child. It has never received any significant training, and is a total handful.Quote:
Originally Posted by pinkytoe
Hilariously, they live here within walking distance of a very very good full-size poodle breeder, who breeds working poodles. They could have had one of his puppies for less money, and with more guarantee of long-term success. But he likely wouldn't have sold them a puppy, he carefully places each one.
Anyways, see above, most people shouldn't have dogs.
Well, politics is going to the dogs, so it seems oddly appropriate :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by pinkytoe
oh yeah, try Frenchies, number one on the AKC list. I have had eight French bulldogs in the past 15 years. I’m sure you all remember when I got a clump of them all at once on the same day. I got them for free because they were in need of a home. God, are they dumb and that was back in the day when ours were from Champion stock from respected hobby breeders, and a couple of them were out and out champions. I can’t imagine how dumb the over produced French Bulldogs are these days a decade later.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
doodles aren’t even worth talking about. As my friend in dogs points out, people who have quality poodles are not going to breed them to goldens, it’s just not going to happen. So you’re going to get…stuff… in poodle x golden breeding.
I’m famous in our old neighborhood for causing a ruckus at a dinner party when I told our friends I would shun them if they bred their stupid idiotic doodles. Only I left out the phrase “stupid, idiotic.”
One wag said that Gov Noem’s dog is still biting her from beyond the grave.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
I caught a news feature bringing up the point that if Trump were elected there is a good possibility he would have 2 more Supreme Court picks. Elections come and go, but Supreme Court picks are a gift that keeps on giving.
That is cool. I like that idea. It’s not enough to vote for Trump, but good reminder.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogar
And in the latest on pathetic republican politicians I see that they now consider the FBI doing it's job to be an assassination attempt. The ridiculousness of these people is more bottomless than the mimosas at Sunday brunch.
And now Jack Smith is requesting an equally absurd gag order prohibiting Trump from uttering his absurd claims about the 2020 election.
We are engaged in a race to the bottom.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corne...-order-motion/
So you think trump should be able to encourage violence against law enforcement agents?Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
The author of the piece lost me in the two free paragraphs for nonsubscribers. The only reason all trump's trials are coming up so close to the election is trump's delay delay delay efforts. To try to pin the blame of that timing on anyone other than the head of the republican party, trump himself, is dishonest and makes the rest of the article suspect.
Since I couldn't read the article I'm going to take a guess that it had to do with Smith's most recent motion in Florida? Did the author also point out that trump's lawyers lied by selective omission about what the FBI's directive said? Or did he gloss over that as well as a good little shill for the traitor in chief?
Honestly, I'm willing to bet that at least 80% of the population doesn't care about this trial, or all the minutiae that almost no one is going to take the time to consider. It's a non-issue to most.
I am more and more convinced, unfortunately, that Trump is going to win. I see that RFK is, so far, likely to be a spoiler. I am more and more convinced that swing states are going to go for Trump. Biden's messages are not getting through to a lot of people. Trumps transgressions are completely dismissed by his base. My own DH, who is neither dummy nor "deplorable," sees Trump as a victim of the left with this trial circus.
I think we need to buckle our seat belts, folks. It's going to be a bumpy ride.
Hmmm, I would argue that Biden’s messages ARE getting through. ;)
Most voters are low information. If Biden can get them to pay attention for five minutes they will remember why they hated the orange dirtbag and his entire party four years ago. If not then it will be time to move to another country while the American experiment implodes spectacularly.
Of course when you base your political future on hate you risk alienating a huge segment of the population. The unending hate Democrats have felt towards Republicans for at least the last 8 years has pretty much guaranteed they're going to be really miserable for the next 4 or so.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
As a parent, I've watched children work themselves into an emotional frenzy many times and learned that it's best to hug them, speak calming words and help them transition back to normalcy. I don't have much experience dealing with adults in that state, I think for now I'll just watch and be amused.
Really?? this is just silly. What are Republicans, then, the Love Party?? Republicans are flush with hatred, and thrilled to brandish threats, not to mention guns. To be clear, I believe that the spewing of hatred and working into emotional frenzy is endemic on the fringes of BOTH parties, but I sure see it much more in the right wingers. I have a friend with whom I've agreed that political talk is off limits, because I'm really concerned he's going to stroke out. He believes - really!- that Biden is the devil. He fired his VA therapist for pointing out that his VA benefits come from the "evil government" and that such programs are, in fact, socialistic in nature. He tolerates me because, in his words - he knew me as a person "before Obama tried to make us all Black Socialists". (He is one of many, but he's the only one I continue to communicate with.) Our neighbors, Republicans who don't particularly like Trump, have said they are afraid to say so aloud, and are not putting up yard signs for their candidate of choice any longer. And it's not those of us on the left they are afraid of.Quote:
The unending hate Democrats have felt towards Republicans for at least the last 8 years
DH received a MAGA hat back in 2016 from one of my DILs (the only other Republican family member)--and he won't wear it because he fears how people will view him. Honestly, I think intolerance is a bipartisan emotion. Both sides suffer from intolerance to the opposite party's ideologies.Quote:
Originally Posted by early morning
As a bleeding heart liberal and Democratic Socialist, I am ashamed that my husband is afraid to wear his hat in public (even as I cringe at the thought of it--and I personally feel he doesn't want to identify with the true Trump fans. He simply doesn't like Biden and he has this crazy idea that we were better off under Trump--haha).
But the GOP definitely has the same disgust for what has become the left wing caricature--people in ivory towers passing moral judgement. If anyone believes the GOP is less "emotional" than the Democrats over their distaste for what the liberal elite class has come to represent.. well..
I do not like Trump because he has way too many "character flaws" for my taste for a leader of the free world. I cannot respect one inch of him. In fact when I think of my Trump-fan friends, I want to tell them, "You guys are GOOD PEOPLE. This guy doesn't deserve to lick the soles of your shoes." (Did anyone see that Memorial Day text that Eric Trump posted about how his family "has sacrificed everything"?)
But we are never going to get anywhere by attacking the peoplehe is hoodwinkingwho truly think he is best for this country. I think most Republicans will vote for him because of his GOP policies--not because they would want him as a family member.
I watched Ken Burns' Brandeis commencement speech, which was excellent until he got to the part where he warned us against voting for Trump. I later learned that he has been called a "yellow dog" Democrat, meaning that he would vote for a yellow dog before voting Republican. I don't think that that kind of ideological fervor is healthy in either camp. We need to learn to ask more questions of each other.
Catherine, your DH could wear his MAGA hat here and fit right in. :~) I don't mind MAGA hat wearing per se. If people believe THEY have the right to wear political attire, then they need to extend that right to all OTHER groups. MAGA hats do not trump Pride flags or BLM shirts, or vice-versa. I do believe that's what the US is supposed to stand for. Equal rights for all (and leave whatever god anyone may wish to invoke out of it). And I agree with you, Catherine, that we need to ask more questions of each other. Just be careful who you ask what, because lots of people have really thin skins. And some of them carry. Just sayin'. But all this inspires me to go dig out my big "I Hate Elvis" button and see if I can tick off boomers on all sides, lol.
You can say what you want about The King. Just don't wear an "I hate the Beatles" button around me. I might just beat you up regardless of all that peace and love stuff they sang about! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by early morning
Ah, I don't mind the Beatles, although I'm more of a Stones/Zeppelin/Floyd fan, personally. I got the button when I was a teenager, to tick off a rabid-Elvis-fan cousin. It's been great fun for many years now! She still cries on his death-versary. To each their own!
Alan, I’m curious what emotion you feel is appropriate towards a former president that attempted to overthrow the government of the country I love in an attempt to stay in power who still has the support of 40% of voters, many of whom wish he had succeeded in overthrowing the government?
Guilty times 34.
Does anyone know what the crime was that elevated a possible misdemeanor to a definite felony?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogar
An NBC headline calls it “falsification of business records a class E felony”Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
Here's what fact check says and the official charges. My interpretation is that he he used to coverup (a crime) to influence the American public in an election. I would assume the judge explained this to the jury and they agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
Or answer "B", it's Biden's witch hunt and a politically motivated national disgrace.
In New York, in order for the charge of falsifying business records to be bumped up to a felony, one must commit the crime of falsifying business records when the “intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.”
“The defendant DONALD J. TRUMP repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New York business records to conceal criminal conduct that hid damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election,” the statement reads.
“From August 2015 to December 2017, the Defendant [Trump] orchestrated a scheme with others to influence the 2016 presidential election by identifying and purchasing negative information about him to suppress its publication and benefit the Defendant’s electoral prospects,” according to the statement. “In order to execute the unlawful scheme, the participants violated election laws and made and caused false entries in the business records of various entities in New York. The participants also took steps that mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme.”
That's my question, what was the other crime? As I understand it, since there were no charges in this case relating to another crime the judge gave the jurors a list of possible crimes not charged to the defendant in any jurisdictions anywhere and allowed them to choose independently which ones they'd like to apply to the expired misdemeanor in order to achieve the desired result.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogar
I suppose if us common citizens would just take a plea deal for a reduced charge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
I'm not a legal authority, but I'm just guessing the intended use of the illegal coverups to influence an election were part of what elevated the charges and what specifically the jury convicted him of. Does a second conviction of a crime actually have to have existed previously? Is intention sufficient? Did the brilliant Trump attorneys argue that aspect or is it just a social media talking point without any legal backing? He has a right to an appeal.
Ummm.....a real reason to not vote Republican? The presumed Standard Bearer is as of this afternoon a convicted Felon. Isn't that reason enough for a sane person? I rest my case. Rob
What illegal coverups would that be? The charge against him was claiming monies paid to his lawyer as a legal expense. Of course those monies were then used to purchase a non-disclosure agreement with a porn star, but there's nothing illegal about that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogar
If the claim is that it is illegal to do legal things to influence an election, I'm curious to see what type of Pandora's box we've opened. Our current President constantly lies about things such as the rate of inflation when he took office any how many jobs he's created, all in an effort to influence an upcoming election. Do you think we should charge him for that?