When I was kid in the 80s I listened to shock jocks like Bob Lassiter on talk radio. I grew out of it. As time went on shock jocks had to push the limits increasingly farther to get a reaction, as audiences became inured to outrageous content. Now the gatekeepers of broadcaster are gone, and it's created this feedback loop the gives us outrageous claims, like wanting US leaders murdered. I wonder if there will be a backlash. Or maybe people like me who learned at young age to ignore lurid tabloid headlines will have to learn more self-restraint to ignore the children of the world who print crap viewable on the same screen where I read journal articles and real news and commentary.

Reveling in Pelosi's death, let alone encouraging it, is not "completely legitimate". Contemptuous dismissal of her and her plight is and would be legitimate; "driving around town all day with the windows down, playing 'Ding, Dong, The Witch is Dead' at full volume" would be a waste of a day in one's own life, ascribing more importance to her than she deserves for such personal attention.

What kind of sense of life is that? That is not the source of happiness to a rational individual. With all those ready to follow and take her place it wouldn't even be a victory. At most it would warrant a momentary sigh of relief, bracing for the next stage. It overestimates her importance even to the belligerent collectivists she unoriginally represents. Celebrating and wanting Pelosi to die is an uncivilized and mindless substitute for a proper response to them and what they stand for.

Completely legitimate.

The minimum that should be done considering the vicious actions of the left.

It is not "perfectly right" to crudely revel in a desire for Pelosi's death as a response substituting for rational argument against the Democrats' belligerent movement. Nor is it "perfectly right" to engage in emotionally personal bulk 'downvoting' posts regardless of content.

Yes. "I don't know which is worse."

Pelosi has a daughter who is the exact duplicate of her in terms of ill will and hatred.

Your idea has a point.

You are perfectly right.

https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post... The same goes for 'joking'. And this one doesn't sound like a joke: https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...

(I deleted my duplicate post, which appeared twice as a partial draft that had been deleted and wasn't supposed to be there at all.)

Contempt for Pelosi is understandable (and widely shared), but publicly wishing she were dead is not appropriate and a misdirection of protest. That doesn't mean we shouldn't prefer that she leave or that we should have any respect for her whatever happens to her.

The idea (joke) there was to go back in time and convince her parents to go ahead and abort.

You're correct on all points. I was just throwing in a little sophomoric humor. The day it happens, though, I'll be driving around town all day with the windows down, playing "Ding, Dong, The Witch is Dead" at full volume.

The right of abortion is the choice to not have children and the responsibility that goes with them, not to kill people in a time machine. Nor would killing off Popeye Pelosi solve anything. She is not unique and many of the progressives running the Democrats are as bad or worse. The cause of political dominance by politicians such as Pelosi is the spreading wide acceptance of collectivist ideas. Expressing glee over the prospects of death is a crude, inappropriate reaction and sidesteps the real source of problems.

yeah, and it similar fate was in the cards for diane feinstein, chuck schumer, maxine waters, and elizabeth warren, and Ruth Ginsburg, I wouldnt cry a single tear. As a matter of fact, I would celebrate

One can only hope...

Well, she is OLD and could have a heart attack or stroke at any time I suppose. How terrible that would be....

I'm generally opposed to abortion, but in Pelosi's case it would have been warranted. Does anyone have a time machine?

Trump stopped shutdown:

“After 36 days of spirited debate and dialogue, I have seen and heard from enough Democrats and Republicans that they are willing to put partisanship aside, I think,” Mr. Trump said.
The stopgap spending bill, which would end the longest government shutdown in U.S. history, provides no immediate funding for a border wall. Mr. Trump said he would continue to push for funding for such a barrier in the next three weeks, declaring: “Walls shouldn’t be controversial.”
He thanked federal workers for going more than a month without pay and said he would ensure they received back pay “very quickly or as soon as possible.”

See what comes out of this.

Not the compromise he expects.

Who are the worst?

You are wrong.

I know exactly how he thinks and how effective he is in upsetting the left's manipulations.

It very well may be that he was willing to lose the battle in order to win the war.

We'll see.

You read my thoughts.

I think the idea to deliver the SOTU to Congress is that Congress supposed to represent the people, so it is a symbolic set where "all of America" is listening to the Commander in Chief.

However, it has been fatally distorted over the years to express the personal preferences of Senate and House members. When half of the floor stay seated, with stone face and not clapping, while the other half does the opposite, we realize the distortion.

Excellent Blarman.

I think the president will say what you did, one way or the other. He has already done so, before the stalemate.

In her dreams! All the cards haven't been played. Wait until he drops the other shoe. She may lose that little girl voice and start screaming! I like the idea of him going to the Arizona Border and using it as a backdrop when he addresses us.

I pray Trump won't let her be the first Speaker of the House to ever deny and get away with blocking the SOTU of a duly elected President of the United States of America!

they always show his rallies. I already know what the state of the union is, and how the dems are trying to stop trump in any way they can. I see the caravans and migrants, I saw what happened to europe with their version of the migrant invasions, so I am not sure what he could say that would be enlightening to me. The libs would discount ANYthing he said, so whats the use really. Changing liberal minds is a useless endeavor, IMHO