Have a good morning.

@linuxace, you just advanced to level 5!

Thank you for a good conversation, sir.

Take care, @Doc ...

You too! I'll be around from now on so hope to talk to you again.

Man I step away for a few minutes and miss a ton.

Yeah, we were just discussing fine music and the fall of the western world.

@linuxace You mentioned your belief that Democrats working to tear down checks and balances. Democrats feel that is what McConnell and Trump have been doing with the Judiciary. How do you reconcile that? I feel that the there is plenty of blame to go around. Both sides have a win at all costs mentality that fundamentally seems un-American to me.

I don't feel that way because appointments have happened within the bounds of tradition and the law, it's just been publicized more than when Democrats tilted and maintained a left-leaning supreme court for decades. I don't have a problem with either side doing that within those bounds. It's the court packing, changing a states electorial votes to match the national popular votes, stacking electorial votes by adding new states or districts, and calls to abolish the electoral college and eliminate the 2A that I have problem with. I would have a problem with either side doing those things.

I fully expect the SC to swing the other direction before too long. Some areas of the country might never have a voice again if some of the other things are done.

I don't think you have to worry about the 2nd amendment any time soon. Since the pandemic, liberals have decided they aren't that opposed to it.

I'm not sure how that is going to pan out. It's not getting a lot of press but Biden is getting a lot of pressure to go full steam ahead on a lot of bad gun legislation and executive orders from what I've heard. NFA or mandatory buybacks of AR rifles, additional taxes for any gun owner, no magazine over 10-rounds, etc. I'm hoping that those are just token offers and are serious policy goals.

Regarding the SC, 20 of the last 24 justices were nominated by Republican presidents. It hasn't been a liberal court for more than 40 years. Until the last 4 years, Presidents seemed to be interested in maintaining a balanced court 3 Conservative, 3 Liberal, 1 Center Right, 1 Center Left, 1 swing... Roughly.

At least half of the country doesn't trust the government enough for that to go over well in my opinion.

I am a big fan of a balanced court and think that there would be nothing wrong with expanding the court to 11 seats. It would still maintain the conservative majority, but would appease the half of the country that feels it was a shady move on McConnell.

We need to start the healing.

I haven't researched the Federal and appellate judges, but those might be fine for now.

That's not going to go over well with the normal everyday conservatives, especially after the election. The healing isn't going to happen unless there are some apologies given to everyday Americans for how they have been treated.

I think that it's kind of like salary negotiations... if either side feels too good or too bad, it was probably a bad deal. Both sides should feel equal parts satisfaction and disappointment.

Liberals would want to tip the scales and conservatives will resent the deck not being quite as stacked.

For example, I'm not a Trump fan but my 85-year old grandmother is and had a Trump sticker on her car and had thousands of dollars worth of damage done to it. She was stranded at a grocery store by her self for hours until someone could come pick her up and had to borrow money from her kids to pay the deductable to have it fixed. These things have been a lot more common than has been reported and I'm telling you, it is going to take more than a shady election and calls for unity (while still being slandered) for that divide to be fixed after so many things like this have happened.

I get it... What happened to your mother was inexcusable.

There is no justification for that and I don't know a single person on either side of the political spectrum that would think otherwise.

You know, except the people who did it.

Well... I don't know them.

sorry, read "know" as "think"

I live in Orange County, CA in a very red part of the state. I have a somewhat unique perspective. Around here, folks have figured out how to coexist - more or less.

Way more than less.

To be fair.

I'm not even a Trumper and I damn sure not going to unify with a party that isn't going to apologize for excusing and encouraging that kind of behavior against normal citizens. I'm not angry with you. I just feel like people don't understand why the healing and unity is going to take more than "hey, we won, now lets be friends." That being said, I know a lot of moderates who are Democrats who I will always do my best to treat with respect as long as that respect is mutual. I don't want to judge all Democrats by the bad actors but someone has to start apologizing and making these things right. Talking down to people and telling them they are racist after they have been assaulted and had property destroyed is just going to anger them. Just saying. Unity and healing isn't going to happen for most of America until mutual respect for each side is restored and I don't see that happening soon. I'm honestly just hoping it doesn't get worse at this point.

Again, just trying to be honest with how I see things.

I hope more parts of the country can learn to live like you have. We get along pretty well here in Nebraska. Most of my family lives in Colorado and they have had a lot more problems between people in the two parties.

At this point, I'm more inclined towards intransigence than healing. Conservatism has simply become progressivism driving the speed limit, and that's a road I'd prefer to never travel down.

I think that social media has done our country a disservice, but I think it might go back to... well... the Jerry Springer show. It started to take off about the time that Rush Limbaugh was hitting his stride. I know it sounds weird, but before Springer, a particular segment of society that he exploited had been fairly hidden from the mainstream. And people became fascinated. Soon, content started focusing on the oddities because they were interesting. Then came "reality TV" and abhorrent behavior became the example that people emulated. It's come a long way since Leave it to Beaver and My Three Sons. In any case, everything provocative is now amplified. Watching it on TV this summer, Portland looked like a war zone. Having lived there and still having family there, it was only one block. Granted, it was horrible, but it was the same 50 or so people allowed to maintain the stupidity and it got amplified, as usual. The reality is that 90%+ of liberals were just as appalled.

But to hear it on conservative media, all liberals were in lock step. It's not true.

All conscientious Liberals and all conscientious Conservatives probably can agree on 90% of the most important things. I think we need to figure out how to focus on that 90% for a while..

I agree. There is a great diversity of opinions in the Democratic party and with liberals. I think the issue is the farthest left appear to be driving the agenda. It seems to me that Trump was a symptom of that rather the type of person or could generate a following without a significant external force. Also, there has been a very significant cultural divide between rural areas and urban areas. Each is very ignorant of the challenges the other faces and the unique legal considerations that each environment needs. I grew up in a small ranching town and live in a bigger midwestern city. Most people live their whole lives in one environment and it is handicapping our ability to communicate about important things.

Ever hear of the pistachio paradox? My 4 favorite ice cream flavors are chocolate, blackberry, coffee, and pistachio. I choose chocolate 80%, blackberry 15%, coffee 4%, and pistachio 1%. That's basically picking pistachio every 2 years.

Liberals dislike rioting, but they chose anti-rioting like I choose pistachio.

That becomes a problem when your wife's preferences are exactly opposite of your own and you only have enough money to buy one pint of ice cream.

I think that is not entirely accurate... I think that a minute percentage of liberals will ever participate in a riot. There are knuckleheads that get out of hand, but liberals don't have a monopoly on that. There is abhorrent behavior on both sides.

I'm specifically talking about choosing candidates who will enforce law and quell riots. That's the pistachio flavor. They'll choose an anti 2A candiate over a law and order one all but 1% of the time.