Okay, silly and naive question, and forget the politics. Why would this message have to come from the president? Why not just from the emergency management agency itself?

Poking around other sites, I came across a tweet saying that her yearbook and social media accounts were wiped out. I tend to be cynical of tweets like this, so has anyone else heard about this?

I just sent the following to both my senators and my representative:

This has nothing to do with Kavanaugh, or with Democrat/Republican, liberal/conservative.

Imagine your son or daughter has just been sexually assaulted or bullied.

Can you imagine you, or a school counselor, or a social worker, or an emergency room doctor, telling your child "Don't worry about it, it won't matter thirty years from now?"

Somehow, I can't.

I just find it interesting that they wouldn't pick up on this right away. They may be waiting to confirm the numbers, which is what they should do, but I wonder if they just don't want to go there "in case."

Just poked over at Fox out of curiosity. So far nothing on his denial. Other outlets do.

Okay, now that I have your attention...

I've been a fan of horror movies for a long time, although I'm very picky about them: they have to have a reasonably "sound" storyline, believable characters, and decent dialogue. And no slashers or zombies, thank you very much. Although most horror movies nowadays suck, or are just copies of another one -- "Five friends decide to go to a cabin in the woods for the weekend and do stupid things" -- I'm always looking for a good one.

One of the things I've often wondered about is why, in possession movies, the possessed is always nutzo. Screaming, bleeding, spitting, levitating, and so on. Nothing new for me: back when I was a kid and vampire movies were different, I always wondered why "all" vampires seemed to be Catholic, or at least Christian. In any case, in typical possession movies, it just doesn't seem to me that there would be anything in it for the demon, as in why would they bother. They're supposed to be evil, but they're just raising a ruckus over one individual. And all those movies are basically the same story anyway.

I don't have a clue whether possession is "real," and I'm not going there. But, if it were real, and if the possessor were really evil, wouldn't it make more sense for it to take over someone quietly and have the possessee do evil things in the world?

So, if such things were real -- and I'm not going there -- would it make sense to think that maybe Trump is possessed?

(I wasn't sure where to post this, so if GD is not the proper place, I'll be happy to post it elsewhere)

This has been covered before, but nowhere near enough. Not even close.

Kaepernick took the knee during that game back in '16 to protest police brutality against blacks. It had nothing to do with disrespecting the flag. I agree that it was a bad choice of method to protest police brutality, but it was not about the flag.

But suddenly it was spun out of context and tweeted and retweeted and the media picked up on it and his original message got lost. Soon there was no listening to anybody who wanted to set the record straight. It was too convenient to yell "traitor" and bury the cause for the protest.

And large portions of the American public fell for it and and still believe it.

Okay, this is not about throwing spitballs or name-calling. I'm asking a real question which I hope those of you who are on social media (which I'm not) can answer.

From reading tweets here and elsewhere, and seeing Republican comments and responses to various issues in various places, I'm under the impression that the language used by Republicans is different from that of Democrats. And maybe I'm wrong. Republican commentary seems to be very short and to the point: short sentences, catchphrases, slogans. Democratic commentary seems to be longer and often rambling. Okay, maybe "rambling" is not the correct word.

What made me think of this is advertising, where the focus has changed so much over the years. Back in the late 1800s it focused on the product itself, then changed to the features of the product, then to the benefits of the product, and, more recently, screw the product and just focus on the lifestyle to be attained by using the product. "Lock her up" is easy to say and remember, and guaranteed to get people riled up. Democrats don't seem to have anything like that.

Again, this is not about throwing spitballs. I'm just fascinated by the idea that the two parties may be using different language to communicate with their followers.

There are lots of posts already about the Op Ed, so my apologies if this has already been mentioned...

The timing, with regards to the Bob Woodward book, seems funny, like the writer is expecting a load of backlash and wants to defuse some of it before they all have to defend themselves.

It would have probably been too obvious to get it published in the WaPo, so so "they" went to the NYT.

'nuff said.

Okay, fine... MANY of them are.