Biden To Give Televised Address To Nation
President Joe Biden is about to give an evening speech on national television. This shouldn't be all that rare an event, but with Biden it sadly has been. Last March, he gave such a speech on the COVID-19 pandemic response. Last March. Biden himself has reportedly been frustrated by his inability to get his message out, but he really bears a goodly portion of the blame for this himself. Where was the speech to the nation on the Russian invasion of Ukraine? How about a primetime address on inflation? Or the infant formula bottleneck? Or gas prices? Maybe he shouldn't have given a speech on each and every one of these important issues, but it would have been nice to see at least one or two of them addressed by the president, or perhaps a few within just one speech.
Joe Biden was supposed to have learned a big lesson as Barack Obama's vice president. Everyone involved with the effort now acknowledges that Obama and the Democrats in general did a terrible salesmanship job promoting the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as "Obamacare." Critics had already slapped that name on the new law, meaning Obama must have known it would be literally seen as his signature piece of legislation. And yet they still dropped the ball. They did such a bad job that Obamacare didn't become politically popular until years after Obama and Biden exited the White House. It took Donald Trump, and the Republicans' almost-successful assault on the law, to push the approval numbers where they should have been from the very start. Again: Biden was supposed to have learned this lesson about salesmanship.
He hasn't. Oh, he does keep trying, but he refuses to use the biggest megaphones at his disposal and still sees the media universe through the lens of the 1990s. Or 1980s, even. He is, after all, 79 years old. A recent in-depth article by CNN pointed out how this is reinforced by his senior advisors:
Aides regularly talk about how little traction they're getting from one-off [President Joe] Biden appearances or events and then -- whether on inflation, the baby formula shortage or mass shootings or the other crises landing on Biden's desk -- he's often left looking like he's in a reactive crouch on the issues that matter most to voters rather than setting the agenda. Sometimes clipped moments from those speeches that the White House puts out on social media generate huge traffic but, at least as often, moments from the President appearing to be caught off-guard go viral on their own.
Aides and allies worry that the West Wing is making the same mistakes as they tout the White House's big pivot to inflation -- which they know is a defining issue for the midterms -- using all the methods Biden and his top advisers keep going back to: A Wall Street Journal op-ed, a basic photo-op Oval Office meeting with the Federal Reserve chairman and Treasury secretary, dispatching Cabinet secretaries for short TV interviews.
. . .
The President is a 79-year-old man who still thinks in terms of newspaper front pages and primetime TV programs, surrounded by not-quite-as-senior aides in senior positions with the same late 1990s media diet. Lifelong habits don't tend to fade when people get to their desks in the West Wing.
This is a rather sobering article all around, actually. One of the methods Biden keeps going back to was indeed a tried-and-true method for media outreach, probably for the entire 20th century: travel to some poster-child facility in a key state (key for whatever reason, electoral politics or demographic makeup or whatever) and give a short speech in front of lots of local media outlets. This generates some (usually) positive feel-good press at the local level, which gets the president's message out unfiltered by the national media. The problem with this model in the modern world, however, is that local media markets barely even exist anymore -- small-town newspapers and local news stations have declined from their 20th century peaks, sometimes disappearing altogether. And even when Biden does manage to get his message out locally, it is completely ignored beyond that locality. That article begins with:
Being familiar never makes the feeling less dreadful: White House aides emailing each other during one of President Joe Biden's stops on the road, tracking who's covering what he's saying, which TV channels are taking the speech live -- and realizing a number of times that the answer was none.
"You are thinking," said one person familiar, "why are we doing this?"
And yet, to Biden, that is what a president is supposed to do to get his message out. Which makes his absence from primetime television all the more baffling, because part of the old-school playbook for presidents that Biden seems to be following is the primetime televised address -- sometimes from the Oval Office, sometimes in some other impressive-looking room at the White House. It is a powerful tried-and-true arrow in the presidential messaging quiver -- or it should be, at any rate.
The benefits to giving such a speech are obvious: the president gets to talk directly to the American people, most of the nationwide networks pre-empt their programming to air it, and the president doesn't even have to answer questions afterwards. He can take as much or as little time as he wishes (up to, perhaps, a full hour) and he can lay out exactly what the issue is and how he is attempting to deal with it. A president can "talk straight" to the American people. Which Biden even apparently knows:
After 50 years of looking up to the Oval Office, televised speeches and front-page stories are how he thinks of a president making news, still conceiving of the presidency as a sort of Rooseveltian ideal where he can lay what's happening for an audience gathered around to hear from a commander-in-chief whose schedule keeps getting cleared for him to write, edit and review each set of remarks.
"A speech is presidential, remarks are presidential. His view is if he can just explain to people what's going on and why, that people will understand," said one person familiar with Biden's thinking.
That "Rooseveltian ideal" harkens back to F.D.R.'s fireside chats. But Biden hasn't been doing the modern equivalent (town hall meetings) much, or doing much more than quick forays out into the countryside that never seem to have much impact at all:
Biden did more traveling around the country during May than in any month of his presidency so far. But nearly every stop was the same toe-touch, take-a-factory-tour-then-give-a-speech-then-back-on-Air Force One routine, one-off events with a couple of mournful condolence trips to Uvalde, Texas, and Buffalo, New York, added.
Nothing happened that wasn't on script. Nothing that's not fully planned.
When they're on message, aides will take solace in driving local news coverage, despite the events not registering outside of whatever media market he lands in. When they're being frank, they acknowledge that they've been slow to realize that doing single events on any topic never seems to make much of an impact.
It's not like Biden isn't trying, in other words. He's just not being very effective. And there have been reports that he is frustrated with his own team and his inability to communicate with the public on things like inflation or gas prices. But he consistently leaves his biggest media tool in his toolbox, untouched.
So it will indeed be interesting to see President Biden speak tonight. But it's also going to have a very limited impact. He will be essentially begging (or trying to shame) Congress into doing something on gun safety. But even if he is wildly successful in this endeavor, whatever they do manage to put on his desk will be incremental, limited, and nowhere near adequate to dealing with the problem. Gun safety legislation is one of the biggest political third rails there is in American politics, so any progress will likely be measured in inches.
I called on Biden to give a speech way back in November (I thought he should do it a couple days before Thanksgiving, to piggyback on all the holiday goodwill). So I am at least glad that he is finally giving one, on any topic. Back then I wrote:
[Biden's speech has to have] a nationwide audience, and it's got to be fairly short and sweet. Biden has been doing old-school boosterism, by travelling to local sites, giving a speech, and giving the local media lots of access. This used to work wonders, in American politics. Not so much anymore. These speeches are carried on the cable news channels, but the only people who see them are mostly political wonks anyway. Perhaps nine seconds of it (one soundbite) might play on the evening news, if that. Unless, of course, Biden stumbles on a word or phrase, in which case that becomes the story.
He's got to do a better job. He's got to reach a wider audience. He's got to frame all the political issues his own way, rather than letting the right-wingers or the media frame things for him. He's got to do a job of salesmanship.
The problem has been pretty evident for a while now, in other words. So I am glad that Biden finally seems to have become motivated to use the most powerful bully pulpit at his disposal. I wish it were on an issue not quite as intractable as gun safety legislation, but current events certainly do demand a response from the president, as Congress grapples with what can actually pass the Senate.
But there's nothing that says that Biden can't deliver more such direct appeals to the public in the near future. He's even avoiding pre-empting primetime by giving his address at 7:30 tonight, instead of later in the evening. That's polite to the television networks (and their audiences) who hate their favorite shows not appearing on time. Instead of a monthly town hall meeting with Biden, a monthly address from the White House would go a long way towards actually communicating his own message directly to the public. In other words, while it is nice to see him finally utilizing his most powerful megaphone, it would be even nicer if Joe Biden would do so on a much more regular basis.
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Chris: You're the wordsmith. but I'm offering this everywhere.
A thought came to me earlier. We should stop saying “shootings [are] the number one killer of our children in America.” Or, at least, we should stop leaving it there. Let’s give it a name:
The John Roberts Legacy: Shootings are the number one killer of our children in America.
I get that long-term, his lasting legacy and core agenda is legalized corruption (coupled with wealthy, well-connected white people are above the law).
Still, this is visceral. We should never mention one without the other. Let that seep into the lexicon.
Obama is a wonderful author, and his wife isn't half bad either. But he made the cardinal mistake of overcaution in using his presidential authority to push his agenda. Biden started off a lot stronger but then let a few setbacks disuade him. Biden has been most popular when he's being bold and taking charge, least so when he's allowing himself to be influenced and second guessed by his advisors. He's been president less than a year and a half, which is a double edged sword. There's enough time to turn things around, but there's also enough time to dig a ditch to big to climb out of
Too big. Dang autocorrect.
No kidding on the (Satanic) auto correct feature.
I reserve the right to hope that Joe's relative lack of visibility is akin to DOJ's relative lack of visability... you'd think that they're not doing dink but wait until the levee breaks! It ain't over until...
Nobody is paying attention to politics right now so Joe isn't in a position to move the needle much at the moment. Maybe this is a version of Joe keeping his powder dry until the moment is right.
Joe's been around the block. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if this is what's going on.
But yeah, CW. Joe gives the impression of being not only lame but not particularly game, either. Whistle stop shit doesn't work in this century.
Russ,
Overall, Chicago could have had 51 people being shot by 47 different shooters. And since you are not listing the number killed in these shootings, we must assume that they all survived.
A single gunman walked into the Unvaldes‘ elementary school and KILLED 21 people!!!
So, NO, TWO AND A HALF Unvaldes DID NOT occur in Chicago over a single weekend!!
I am sure the people brutally murdered in Chicago appreciate your semantical pretzel logic..
The simple fact it. Over TWICE the people died in Chicago over a single weekend that died in Uvalde..
And Democrats say NOTHING..
Maybe it's because they were only black people is why Democrats are silent..
The point is, Russ (I am not surprised I have to explain it. :eyeroll) is that Democrats are simply USING these mass shootings to further their anti-gun agenda..
Democrats really don't care about the number of dead..
You people REALLY need to face reality..
There won't be any "assault rifle" ban because Democrats CAN'T define what an "assault rifle" is..
"Oooohhh the scary looking rifles" does not make for good law...
Every law that CAN be passed that is allowable under the 2nd and will actually address the problem of CBMSs HAS been passed...
The ONLY laws that will have a chance of passing are Red Flag/Mental Health laws..
But Democrats REFUSE to give those kinds of laws any real teeth..
So, NOTHING of any consequence will get passed..
JUST like after Sandy Hook...
And, need I remind ya'all, that it was DEMOCRATS who derailed anti-gun WOULDN'T IT BE NICE laws after Sandy Hook..
And it will be DEMOCRATS who will prevent any anti-gun WOULDN'T IT BE NICE laws now...
"These are the facts of the case. And they are undisputed."
-Captain Smilin' Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN
Speak2,
A thought came to me earlier. We should stop saying “shootings [are] the number one killer of our children in America.” Or, at least, we should stop leaving it there.
Absolutely... We should ALSO mention the 63 MILLION children that were killed by Democrat supported baby killing..
Your concern for children's lives is nothing but politically based..
Else you would show some similar remorse for the 63 MILLION children butchered by Democrat support for baby killing, AKA abortion..
Biden says Second Amendment is 'not absolute' in call to reinstate assault weapons ban
Biden said Congress should reinstate an assault weapons ban, raise the purchase age for firearms, and pass red flag gun laws
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-address-gun-control-assault-weapons-ban
First of all, let's be clear.. As I said above, there will be no assault rifle ban...
Secondly, even if there WAS a reinstatement of that flawed and loop-hole ridden law, it would have absolutely NO EFFECT on ANYTHING..
Even the effect in the 90s was ambiguous and equivocal..
Today?? It would mean less than nothing..
THERE IS NO LAW THAT CAN BE PASSED THAT IS ALLOWABLE UNDER THE 2nd AND WILL PREVENT OR HELP PREVENT CROWD BASED MASS SHOOTINGS
It's THAT simple..
And until Democrats get that through their heads and pass some REAL laws that will have a REAL effect, these shootings will continue to happen..
I can't dumb it down any more than that...
Biden keeps hammering on this non-existent argument that the 2nd is not absolute..
NO ONE is claiming this..
But the FACT is, the 2nd has been watered down as much as is permissible..
There are simply NO MORE laws that can be enacted under the auspices of the 2nd that will have ANY impact on the Crowd Based Mass Shootings these laws are intended to address..
The cupboard is bare, Democrats.. There is no more 'there' there..
The *ONLY* laws that will have an impact and are allowable under the 2nd are Red Flag/Mental Health laws..
But Democrats worship at the altar of Personal Privacy.. Until they come down off their altar, nothing will get done..
Biden is the most monitored, the most nurse-maided POTUS in the history of this country.. :^/
The simple fact is, Biden's Handlers are incompetent.. They over-estimate their support by FAR and then wonder why the American people are so against their policies...
:^/
For the record, the last 2 comments were from Democrat Water Carrier CNN...
So, I think we can dispense with the claim that I don't have any LEFT Wing sources for my comments, eh?? :D
Biden admits gas and food prices aren’t coming down anytime soon
https://nypost.com/2022/06/01/joe-biden-says-gas-food-prices-arent-coming-down-anytime-soon/
TRANSLATION:
My administration will continue to be an EPIC FAILURE
If only President Trump were still in charge..
Gas prices would be a buck oh five, 13 soldiers wouldn't have lost their lives in Afghanistan and Ukraine would still have all those tens of thousands of people still alive... :^/
UPDATE: Trend continued in May of more Dems switching to GOP
https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/many-more-dems-switching-parties-than-republicans-during-last-three-months
Looks like Nevada is going to be the new Texas... :D
Remember when Democrats were so delusional that they thought they could turn Texas blue!?? :D
What a fun time that was, eh? :D
DeSantis wins again!!!
Florida Supreme Court won't block DeSantis redistricting map
https://www.axios.com/2022/06/02/desantis-redistricting-map-florida-supreme-court
Dems lose BIG in Florida.. Not surprising..
Dems lost even BIGGER in New York!! THAT is surprising.. :D
You people REALLY need to face reality..
A gun is no more responsible for Uvalde or Buffalo than an SUV was responsible for Waukesha..
When a gun walks into a school of it's own volition and makes a sentient decision to start shooting people..
Then... and ONLY then.. Will Democrats have a rational and logical argument..
Hysterical Anti-Gun laws won't prevent a Waukesha..
Hysterical Assault Vehicle laws won't prevent a Uvalde..
Mental Health laws?? THOSE will prevent or help prevent BOTH....
The answer here is a no-brainer...
Which is probably why Democrats miss it... :eyeroll:
Michale,
Is is possible for you to post a comment without having to resort to a link??
It's always better to think for yourself, in other words.
You don't think links are facts, do you?
Since I am always accused of never having any facts, the link to where the FACTS are seems especially relevant..
But if we want to impose a ZERO link policy throughout Weigantia, I will follow that policy as long is everyone else does..
Out of the 20-odd comments here in this commentary, only 6 of mine have links...
So.......
Is it POSSIBLE that it's not the links that bother you but rather the FACTS contained within those links that show Democrat malfeasance and incompetence is the real bother??
Hmmmm? Possible?? Slightly???
https://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/cb060122dAPC20220531104505.jpg
Exactly ^^^ This ^^^ Exactly this ^^^^
Democrat agenda in a nutshell...
This just in..
An OI shooting in Kansas City... Officers shot an "unarmed black pregnant lady" 5 times..
Of course BLM went apeshit crazy...
THEN LEO body cam shows woman actually holding a gun...
What morons these Democrats are...
And ANOTHER perfect call....
https://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/afb053122dAPR20220531064509.jpg
That REALLY does say it all...
I confess, I rarely if ever click on your links, MIchale. There isn't time enough in the day for that.
But, again, links don't equal facts.
Joshua,
Too big. Dang autocorrect.
Heh.
I love how we feel compelled to point out our own spelling mistakes when they are actually just typing errors. :)
The problem isn't autocorrect - it's that we don't always use that preview thingy and proofread our comments!
But, again, links don't equal facts.
So, all of the links in the administration's commentaries do not equal facts??
OKaaayyyy... If that's the claim you want to stand by.. :D
Apparently, Democrats did NOT learn their lessons from their Build Back Broke debacle..
Swing district Dems break with Pelosi, call for gun package to be split into smaller bills
The Dems, many facing tough re-election races, say smaller gun bills stand a better chance of passing Senate
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/democrats-pelosi-moderates-gun-package-split-senate-vote
Pushing thru huge grandiose bills that have ZERO chance of going anywhere only serves to emphasis and advertise gross Democrat incompetence..
The problem isn't autocorrect - it's that we don't always use that preview thingy and proofread our comments!
The preview thingy won't catch typos.. Especially grammar based typos..
Due to it's limitations, the Preview Thingy is only good for pointing out un-closed attributes..
Of course, Michale, some links contain facts.
The preview thingy allows us to see our comments in another perspective and gives us time to proofread rather than just hitting the submit thingy because we just can't wait to see our comments posted.
There are a number of autocorrect features that are both ubiquitous and particularly hard to notice until it's too late. It is hard to correctly get 'too' with two O's, its without an apostrophe, and for some reason my keyboard keeps inserting the word 'be' where it doesn't belong.
Joshua, are you able to proofread your own comments?
Of course, Michale, some links contain facts.
So, in your opinion would you say it's fair to say that the factual nature of the links is solely based on what the facts say vis a vis political agendas??
The preview thingy allows us to see our comments in another perspective and gives us time to proofread rather than just hitting the submit thingy because we just can't wait to see our comments posted.
Given the limited factor of the preview thingy, it makes proofreading HARDER as it just throws things all in a big mish-mash.. Given that, actual proof-reading is better done on the comment as it is typed, rather than relying on the mish-mash preview thingy..
The preview thingy "forces" me to take the time required to proofread.
In other words, I post more spelling and grammar errors when I don't use the preview thingy.
Facts are facts, Michale, whether found in links or anywhere else.
“After Columbine, after Sandy Hook, after Charleston, after Orlando, after Las Vegas, after Parkland, nothing has been done”
-Joe Biden
Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold (Columbine) didn't purchase their weapons, they were obtained through a 3rd party person, who purchased them illegally from unlicensed sellers.
Adam Lanza (Sandy Hook) stole his mothers guns.
Dylann Roof (Charleston) should have been prevented but an FBI examiner failed to do a thorough investigation
Omar Mateen (Orlando) legally purchased weapons because the FBI deemed he wasn't a threat at the time.
Stephen Paddock (Las Vegas) legally purchased his guns over a period of 30 years because there is no law when a person owns a lot of weapons, nor is owning a lot of weapons illegal.
Nikolas Cruz (Parkland) legally purchased his gun legally but the FBI failed to act on tips of the threats he made on social media.
Biden left out quite a few mass shootings, for example Devin Patrick Kelley, who should have been prohibited from buying guns after a 2012 conviction for assaulting his wife and breaking his stepsons' head, as well as a bad conduct discharge from the USAF. He passed an FBI background check. Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik should have also been prohibited from purchasing weapons because the FBI deemed them to have been radicalized Islamists long before they purchased their guns, but they still passed background checks. All 4 of their weapons were purchased in California.
Gun laws wouldn't have prevented ANY of the above shootings..
But Mental Health laws WOULD have...
Facts are facts, Michale, whether found in links or anywhere else.
OK.. So you concede that my links DO contain facts..
Then we're good.. :D
I would wager that your links contain few facts and a lot of hyperbole.
I base that assumption on many of your linkless comments. :)
You do love twising what I say into something I didn't say.
I really detest that sort of thing, just so you know.
Fortunately pie comes out perfect almost every time. Pie pie pie.
Speaking of which, cw, you've already written about Trump's fear of pie in his face, so it's not such a leap to start to take pie seriously as a political strategy. It's simple baking and tasty food, which can save our country. Nobody has ever had the guts to try it before, but the appetite is there.
If guns kill people...
Cars kill people..
Pencils fail exams..
And spoons, forks and knives make people fat..
:eyeroll:
We can all join to fight big dough. It just takes some fresh ingredients to overcome the stale thinking of the millet grain industrial complex and free our country for generations to come. Just think of all the possibilities:
mince and cheese pie. viennese pie.
alevropita. galatopita.
chiffon pie. parmesan pie.
grasshopper pie. apple cobbler pie.
ice cream pie. rice dream pie.
cherry pie. berry pie.
peach pie. quiche pie.
meat pie. sheet pie.
low-carb pie. rhubarb pie.
prawn pie. pecan pie.
pork pie. torte pie.
succotash pie, baby smash pie,
chocolate mousse pie. grapefruit juice pie.
key lime meringue pie, orange tang pie,
chicken pot pie.
got pie?
get edible.
From Marie Antoinette all the way back to the fall of Mohenjo-Daro, those who subsisted on cake were doomed to fall into the dustbin of history. Pie is the change that can save us.
Yunno, there was a movie made about a society where only military and cops had guns..
It was called SCHINDLER'S LIST...
Ouch! And the ref takes a point away
The 2020 election was between "a venal, over-the-hill mediocrity", and "a moronic, dishonest ass hole of a human being" (quoting myself).
Biden wasn't elected because he's an outstanding orator, magnetic public speaker, etc. He was elected because he wasn't Trump.
We knew what we were getting, no sense complaining because he doesn't give enough presidential speesches.
I would wager that your links contain few facts and a lot of hyperbole.
Since you don't LOOK at the links, you will never know, eh?? :D
I'll save you some trouble.. ALL of the links are factual and/or relevant.. :D
Ouch! And the ref takes a point away
Really puts it all into focus, eh??
We can also point to Native Americans re: trusting a government that disarms it's own people..
Gun Control is not about guns, it's about control.
A disarmed populace is a controllable populace..
History is replete with examples..
In the Post Heller world, an assault rifle ban will NEVER pass..
NEVER... EVER...
a ban on assault pie is unconstitutional
And yet, you demand a ban on assault cakes..
Where is the logic??
Michale [47]-
You know, the nazi gun control argument has been debunked long ago...
Bashi,
Oh I am sure you think so.. :D
But, since Democrats have already nullified the reductio ad Hitlerum argument with President Trump, it's no longer a valid debunking..
Sucks eh? :D
From your own link, Bashi..
In early 1930s Germany, few citizens owned, or were entitled to own firearms,[2] the Weimar Republic having strict gun control laws.[8] When the Nazi party gained power, some aspects of gun regulation were loosened, such as allowing firearm ownership for Nazi party members and the military.[5]:?672? The laws were tightened in other ways. Nazi laws systematically disarmed so-called "unreliable" persons, especially Jews while relaxing restrictions for "ordinary" German citizens.[5]:?670,?676? The policies were later expanded to include the confiscation of arms in occupied countries.[9]:?533,?536?
The simple fact is, Jews were easy pickings in Hitler's Germany because they were disarmed..
A disarmed populace is a controlled populace...
The Native American situation in America's past ALSO proves that fact..
Biden's Handlers' address can be summed up thusly..
Nothing new was said.. Just the same old bullshit retread arguments that failed after Sandy Hook...
That is Biden's Handlers' speech in a nutshell..
Bashi,
If yer still around..
I have a chance to get another Oculus Unit..
Are there provisions within the Oculus to play games (tennis, etc etc) with another person in a VR environment..
Biden's Handlers' address can be summed up thusly..
Nothing new was said.. Just the same old bullshit retread arguments that failed after Sandy Hook...
That is Biden's Handlers' speech in a nutshell..
In short..
All that can be said HAS been said..
All the laws that CAN be passed have been passed..
Democrats need to get off their hysterical anti-gun kick and look at Mental Health laws.
THOSE laws have the best chance of preventing or helping to prevent crowd based mass shootings..
@m[57],
NOBODY has EVER died of a pie in the face! just like your idol trump, you are gripped by an irrational fear of pie and the changes it will bring.
CAKE on the other hand, if one of those hits you in the face it can be like a brick, and you're lucky if you escape without any permanent scarring!
there should be both an assault cake ban and a federal cake registry, to prevent such attacks from occurring.
peanut butter pie, crust cutter pie.
mince and cheese pie. viennese pie.
alevropita. galatopita.
chiffon pie. parmesan pie.
grasshopper pie. apple cobbler pie.
ice cream pie. rice dream pie.
cherry pie. berry pie.
peach pie. quiche pie.
meat pie. sheet pie.
low-carb pie. rhubarb pie.
prawn pie. pecan pie.
pork pie. torte pie.
succotash pie, baby smash pie,
chocolate mousse pie. grapefruit juice pie.
key lime meringue pie, orange tang pie,
chicken pot pie.
got pie?
get edible.
Are there provisions within the Oculus to play games (tennis, etc etc) with another person in a VR environment..
I have PSVR so not sure with the Oculus. On PSVR you can play multiplayer. I don't have many games that support it. Beat Saber and No Mans Sky are the only ones that come to mind. In both cases multiplayer is over the internet with separate systems. Check the game details in whatever store you use. It should list multiplayer and how many players it supports...
Thanx Bashi..
I have to work a buttload of extra hours (for free) to earn the extra Oculus...
Doesn't appear to be worth it..
Thanx again..
"Biden made the GOP out to be the problem in his remarks on gun violence tonight. But in 2021, a dozen U.S. cities broke their homicide records. All of them are led by Democrats."
FACT
"Joe Biden wants to ban ‘assault weapons’ and ‘high capacity magazines’ yet Democrats refuse to prosecute violent crimes in Democrat cities all over the country, and refuse to protect your children at school with armed security. Same Democrats are protected by armed guards daily."
FACT
If Remington and Winchester are legally liable for gun deaths than Chevy and Ford are legally liable for auto deaths...
Gas prices in my home county...
https://ewscripps.brightspotcdn.com/14/04/22f819f0436f871e57a0f8f9732b/high-gas-prices-california-052422-ap.jpg
"I did that!!"
Joe Biden
Gas prices? What about cake prices! Yet another reason to support pie! What is wrong with you that you'd focus on the cost of fuel when dessert is a much more valuable commodity?
Get edible!
Michale
44
If guns kill people...
If guns didn't "kill people," why in Hell would anybody need one for the security of either the State or the individual?
Cars kill people..
False equivalency analogy even though cars actually do kill people (every day) although not purposely built for doing it. If cars didn't kill people, there'd be absolutely no need whatsoever for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and all those federally mandated automobile manufacturing statutes and driving safety laws designed to protect yourself and others: Mandatory automobile insurance, registration, seatbelt laws, no drinking and driving, etc.
https://www.nhtsa.gov
Pencils fail exams..
Another false equivalency analogy (like cars) since pencils aren't purposely built to fail tests or to kill people.
And spoons, forks and knives make people fat..
Another false analogy (like cars and pencils). You might as well be arguing that eating a bullet out of a gun won't kill you. :)
Why would ANYBODY eat a bullet when there are so many delicious forms of pie available?
Kick,
It is irrelevant as to what the afore mentioned items are DESIGNED to do...
Yes, guns are DESIGNED to kill people.. Yet killing people is not illegal.. I am living proof of that...
The point is, if an item is used ILLEGALLY it is the person who illegally uses the item that is legally liable. NOT the manufacturer of the item is NOT LEGALLY LIABLE for the illegal use of said item..
Is WILSON liable if someone illegally uses a WILSON BAT to murder another person?? Of course not..
Such a claim is completely and utterly ridiculous..
The same is said for those who ILLEGALLY use a gun to murder someone.. The gun manufacturer is NOT legally liable.. ANY fool could see that.. :D
But, hay.. Thanx for the response.. It's ALWAYS awesome to hear from you... :D Even if you are always wrong.. :D
Why would ANYBODY eat a bullet when there are so many delicious forms of pie available?
Bullets are infinitely more tasty than pies..
Those who bake pies should be held legally liable for the pie mayhem that ensues..
I suspect we should follow Michale's lead and just not interact
Thank you Bashi... I have my moments.. :D
NOT the manufacturer of the item is NOT LEGALLY LIABLE for the illegal use of said item..
Tortured syntax... One too many NOTS in there.. :D
The simple fact is, a GUN is no more responsible for a person's death than a car is responsible for a person's death.. Unless it's a car full of pies.. Then we throw the book at the car..
A GUN is no more responsible for a person's death than a fork or spoon is responsible for a person being fat..
It's the PERSON who wields the tool that is responsible..
Plain and simple...
Now a person who wields a fork for pie??
Well, those people are just idiotic...
nypoet22
80
Why would ANYBODY eat a bullet when there are so many delicious forms of pie available?
Heh. I know, right!?
Pie is the greatest tool on Earth... also NOT designed specifically as a lethal weapon... but watch out for those killer cherry seeds! :)
Michale
81
It is irrelevant as to what the afore mentioned items are DESIGNED to do...
Relevancy is always relevant when you're making a comparison of one thing to other thing(s).
Yes, guns are DESIGNED to kill people..
Are you going to falsely claim (again) that murdered people aren't killed people?
Yet killing people is not illegal..
I would wager that Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, Dennis Rader, Jeffrey Dahmer, et alia would agree with you, and they killed lots of people.
I am living proof of that...
Everything (still) isn't about you.
The point is, if an item is used ILLEGALLY it is the person who illegally uses the item that is legally liable.
I don't think Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, Dennis Rader, Jeffrey Dahmer, et alia would agree with you because they killed lots of people.
NOT the manufacturer of the item is NOT LEGALLY LIABLE for the illegal use of said item..
Incorrect. It is a FACT that manufacturers of all manner of items are held liable if their products are found to cause injury and/or death. Sellers of guns used to kill others have also been held liable.
Is WILSON liable if someone illegally uses a WILSON BAT to murder another person?? Of course not..
They actually could be held liable for that, yes, if someone could actually prove they negligently marketed and sold the bat as a killing weapon or that a manufacturing defect in the bat helped to negligently cause someone's or multiple persons' death.
Such a claim is completely and utterly ridiculous..
You made the actual claim; I agree that it's ridiculous, though.
The same is said for those who ILLEGALLY use a gun to murder someone.. The gun manufacturer is NOT legally liable..
Because they are largely protected under the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act and cannot be held liable for the use of their products in a crime. However, gun manufacturers can still be held liable for negligence, breach of contract regarding the purchase of a gun, and/or certain damages from defects in the design of a gun.
As recently as 2019, the Supreme Court allowed a lawsuit against a gun manufacturer, Remington Arms Company to be specific, to continue. The plaintiffs are a survivor and the families of 9 of the murdered victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School mass shooting. It was Remington Arms Company who manufactured the semi-automatic rifle that was used in the killings at Sandy Hook, who are being sued for being partly responsible due to their marketing practices, another area where gun manufacturers can be absolutely be held liable for the murders.
ANY fool could see that..
ANY fool could also keep up with the recent Supreme Court decision allowing a manufacturer to be sued for their product in the Sandy Hook massacre.
As for that baseball bat of yours? A swing and a miss! :)
I would wager that Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, Dennis Rader, Jeffrey Dahmer, et alia would agree with you, and they killed lots of people.
Once again, you try your semantical jousting.. But it just serves to show how ill conceived your argument is..
Ted Bundy et al MURDERED people..
Killing people is not illegal... This is fact....
But, by all means, continue to miss the mark.. :D It gives me more reasons to post comments.. :D
MtnCaddy
5
*
you'd think that they're not doing dink but wait until the levee breaks!
A DOJ federal grand jury is apparently doing some "dink." :)
@m,
If not a fork, what then? A spoon? I'm quite sure any reasonable utensil would make the same or similar political impact.
JL,
If not a fork, what then? A spoon? I'm quite sure any reasonable utensil would make the same or similar political impact.
The ONLY rational approach is to ban PIE...
Pie serves NO USEFUL purpose..
Like Biden and Biden's Handlers... Pie is a Dunsel...
Michale
89
Once again, you try your semantical jousting.. But it just serves to show how ill conceived your argument is..
The semantical jousting is all yours.
Ted Bundy et al MURDERED people..
Murdered people are also killed people... no matter how many times you wish to pretend as if there is some kind of semantical difference.
Your insistence that killing isn't illegal is semantical nonsense; killers can definitely be murderers.
Killing people is not illegal... This is fact....
Killing people is not necessarily illegal if there are mitigating circumstances. Your general statement that "killing is not illegal" is false.
But, by all means, continue to miss the mark.. :D It gives me more reasons to post comments.. :D
Post all you want; knock yourself out. You certainly don't need anyone's help in the posting BS department.
Once again, you try your semantical jousting.. But it just serves to show how ill conceived your argument is..
Since you're claiming that "killing" isn't illegal, the semantical jousting is all yours. :)
Killing people is not illegal... This is fact....
You can keep posting that; there will be no magic number of times you post it that will magically make it be a factual statement.
Maybe if Democrats would actually PUT PEOPLE IN JAIL for murders and attempted murders instead of letting them go free..
https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2022/06/896/500/Impact.jpg?ve=1&tl=1
Mass shootings would be lessened..
Some people would have ya'all believe that ALL killing is illegal..
I am here to say, FOR THE RECORD, that sometimes killing people is a GOOD thing..
Ted Bundy... It was GOOD that he was killed.. And it WASN'T illegal..
William H Gacy... It was a GOOD thing that he was killed. And it WASN'T illegal..
Timothy McVeigh... It was a GOOD thing that he was killed.. And it WASN'T illegal..
Those with misplaced pedantism will try and say that ALL killing is illegal..
But we Weigantians are smarter than that, eh?? :D
The simple fact is, gun makers are NOT liable when their product is used illegally..
Just like car makers are NOT liable when THEIR product is used illegally..
This is fact..
Biden's Handlers' have laid down the marker..
Gun Ban....
Biden's Handlers' are going to FAIL...
Just like they failed with their Build Back Broke..
EPIC..... FAIL....
:D
Welp, my time is now my lovely wife's...
See ya'all bright and early...
Same bat time... Same bat channel... :D
Michale got me thinking with his comment that Democrats only want scary looking guns banned. We’ve been going at this the wrong way this whole time!
We recognized years ago that toy makers that made realistic toy guns were putting out a product that led to many children being shot and killed by those that thought the toys were the actual firearms. We then required toy makers to make their realistic toy guns out of brightly colored plastics — bright orange or bright red — so they would more easily be recognized as being toys. The brightly colored toy guns are more recognizable as toys, and they also were found to be less desirable to kids who did not think they looked “as cool or as tough” as the real things.
Sadly, kids learned that a black Sharpie could be used to paint their toys to look more like the real thing. The penalties for doing so are little more than a slap on the wrist. If being brightly colored made the toy gun less attractive to young buyers, maybe we should see if adults are just as turned off by brightly colored firearms.
Require makers of assault rifles to make them a solid pink color. Make any alterations to the gun’s color a felony with massive fines. According to Michale’s logic, if the guns aren’t so scary looking, then gun lovers won’t have to worry about Democrats going after them. We cannot ban the guns, but we can take advantage of the fragility of the male egos of those that are drawn to such weapons to make them less attractive.
DH [101]
Is this meant to be a rhetorical question or are you simply wanting the credit that you think you deserve? I’m fairly certain it would be unanimous that you are the correct answer to the question.
Who is most decidedly NOT responsible for the comments sections being used incorrectly.
Heh.
I think the promotion of delicious pie is the PERFECT use of this comments section.
Just THIS comments section?? Not all CW comments sections?
Michale
95
Some people would have ya'all believe that ALL killing is illegal..
So you want to get more semantical now and toss in the word "ALL" to the discussion? This is your familiar putting words in people's mouths that they never said and also an exercise in goal post moving that is easily recognizable, you know?
I am here to say, FOR THE RECORD, that sometimes killing people is a GOOD thing..
You're already on written record that you'd be a "baby killer" to protect the life of the mother... even though you denied it afterwards when it was brought up by Russ.
Love you, Russ!
Ted Bundy... It was GOOD that he was killed.. And it WASN'T illegal..
Since we're getting technical, the serial killer Ted Bundy was actually EXECUTED... but also killed, of course, because when a serial killer like Ted is convicted in a court of law for his killing, some states impose the death penalty, whereas some states do not. Ted brutally killed at least 30 human beings in the 1970s, some of them in Florida, including a 12-year-old girl for whom Ted was found guilty of killing when he went on trial in 1980 in Orlando, Florida. After exhausting all his legal appeals, Ted was (finally) executed in the electric chair by the State of Florida in 1989.
William H Gacy... It was a GOOD thing that he was killed. And it WASN'T illegal..
Might you be confusing William H. Macy, actor and NOT killer (I hope), with John Wayne Gacy? Gacy is the serial killer who killed at least 33 people in the 1970s and buried them under the crawlspace of his house. He was found guilty and sentenced to death and executed via lethal injection after sitting on death row in an Illinois prison for 14 years.
Timothy McVeigh... It was a GOOD thing that he was killed.. And it WASN'T illegal..
McVeigh was also executed via lethal injection for the deaths of multiple people. McVeigh's execution at the time was the first federal death penalty in the United States since 1963. He died at the Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana for the multiple deaths in the Oklahoma City Bombing.
Those with misplaced pedantism will try and say that ALL killing is illegal..
Those who know your modus operandi will easily recognize that you're attempting to move the goal posts (like you do) by putting words in another poster's mouth that they never said -- that word being the word "ALL" -- and thereby attempting to move the goal posts. Not even a good try this time.
But we Weigantians are smarter than that, eh?? :D
I believe they're definitely smarter than that and will obviously recognize your goal post moving... since it's totally transparent.
The simple fact is, gun makers are NOT liable when their product is used illegally..
It's actually NOT that simple. Since 2005, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) has provided near total immunity for gun makers and dealers from liability for crimes committed with their products. The PLCAA was passed after lawsuits by several cities attempted to hold companies liable for gun violence committed with their products.
BUT, as I explained already, the PLCAA contains several provisions that allow a gun manufacturing company to be sued, including for claims that they've knowingly violated laws that are related to the marketing of their product related to a shooting. I can keep explaining this if need be.
In 2019, the Supreme Court of the State of Connecticut found that the PLCAA permitted a lawsuit by some of the families of the victims of the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Again, the families are suing Remington for violating the state's marketing law by allegedly promoting their Bushmaster rifle for criminal use. Fast forward to now, and Remington (which twice filed for bankruptcy during the case), in February 2022 has agreed to pay the families of the Sandy Hook Elementary killing $73 million, the first settlement of its kind.
Following the Connecticut Supreme Court ruling, other cases were launched that are working their way through the courts now since there are exemptions in PLCAA wherein gun manufacturers can be held liable for the harm caused by their products.
Victims of a 2019 mass shooting at a California synagogue sued Smith & Wesson, saying the company negligently marketed the AR-15 style rife used by the shooter. In 2021, a California judge rejected Smith & Wesson's argument that the lawsuit was barred under PLCAA. Stay tuned.
In 2022, the Supreme Court of the State of Texas ruled that an online seller of ammunition -- Luckygunner -- was NOT protected by the PLCAA from a lawsuit on behalf of victims of the 2018 shooting at a Santa Fe, Texas, high school. The company is being accused of knowingly violating a law that makes it illegal to sell ammunition to minors.
In 2021, Mexico sued Smith & Wesson Brands Inc., Sturm, Ruger & Co., and other firearm makers for the flood of weapons across the border from the United States. The lawsuit alleges the companies designed, marketed and distributed military-style assault weapons in ways they knew would arm drug cartels. Stay tuned.
The governor of New York has recently signed into law a measure that allows firearm sellers, manufacturers and distributors to be sued by the state, cities or individuals for creating a public nuisance. A U.S. judge recently ruled against the firearms industry which sued to block the law. Stay tuned.
Very recently, State of California senators have approved a bill just hours after the Texas shooting in Uvalde that would allow private citizens to sue anyone who manufactures, distributes, transports, imports, or sells assault weapons and untraceable ghost guns. That bill, which is supported by Governor Gavin Newsom, is styled on a the Texas anti-abortion "vigilante" law that is meant to skirt conflicting federal law, and that bill will now be considered by the the California state assembly. Stay tuned.
Just like car makers are NOT liable when THEIR product is used illegally..
Cite any law that proves your statement. I'll wait.
In the meantime, keep in mind that car manufacturers are responsible for the financial consequences of their defective products so if a person was injured/killed in a car accident where a motor vehicle operator was found to have illegally been driving drunk and killed another motorist, the car manufacturer could be held responsible if the victim was harmed/killed due to the fact their faulty airbag or seatbelt failed. It's not uncommon to see car manufacturers sued for collisions by drunk drivers who commit crimes in their vehicles.
This is fact..
Nope. :)
Don Harris
98
What the fuck is wrong with you people?
I'm wet and shivering from a dip in the pool, but nothing a towel and a margarita won't cure. It began to rain and thunder in the distance so I got the hell out of there and ran immediately inside.
You do deserve to killed by something, anything, anyone, anytime, anywhere but not for any reason.
Violation of the rules against promoting violence on Chris's website.
I hope you all get raped in the eyeballs before you are killed.
Violation of the rules against promoting violence on Chris's website.
Have a nice day. :)
ListenWhenYouHear
102
Russ is making a great point here.
Require makers of assault rifles to make them a solid pink color.
Yeah, and make them glow in the dark too.
Make any alterations to the gun’s color a felony with massive fines.
Punishable by execution by your own altered weapon.
I like the way you think, Russ.
Love you, Russ! :)
@Liz,
Of course, what was i thinking, yes! All comments sections on all blogs everywhere!
Pie-a-Palooza
All PIE... ALL the time! :)
Don Harris
113
Grow the fuck up or get lost.
You first.
Cunts.
You seem desperate for CW's attention; maybe he'll give it to you in the form of that Red Card... who knows?
Who cares? :)
Not i
Kick,
Love you, too!
-Russ