Elections Kamala Harris picks Minnesota governor Tim Walz as VP running mate

[nostradumbass]

So you now want god in the bedroom? Why do you creeps worry so much about other people do in private? You post about the imagined love life of other posters. It's just strange. You must be lonely AF.

What in the absolute shit does "God in your bedroom" have to do with raising your kids to eventually be parents themselves, or "storming the capitol" or never Trump republicans or any of the other weird tangents you've blurted out? Are you hearing voices again?

 

[HenryFlower]

Oh piss off. I’m a vet. I served in the gulf. So if I say I shot bin Laden that’s not stolen valor? Or if I said I was a front line commander?

okay

 

[emefer]

No, you contradicted my original point where I was making an accurate important distinction between driving 96 mph while drunk!! and driving carefully and slowly in back roads. No sane person would possibly ever try to make the argument that they are the same thing. But you did.

You did that because you thought I was trying to make Walz look bad because you thought I was against him and now you have found that out you're wrong and you're just going to double down on a really idiotic point to save face.

If this isn't true then you have one recourse which is to make your argument that drunk driving slowly and carefully on back roads is the same as driving 96 mph while drunk.

But if you do that, you're going to look a fool and so you'll obfuscate and lie instead.

My comment had nothing to do with Walz.
There is no such thing as careful drunk driving.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

My comment had nothing to do with Walz.
There is no such thing as careful drunk driving.

Then don't lie and straw man me.

I made a distinction between driving 96 mph while drunk which most cars are not equipped for for the most part even when you're sober, and carefully going down back roads trying not to kill anyone.

You made the argument that those are the same thing and I'm just saying it's okay to make intelligent distinctions and encouraging you to do so too.

Or at least encouraging you not to try to correct someone who is making basic accurate distinctions.


I would guess that the law would also make these distinctions wouldn't you? Do you think if you get a DUI doing 96 mph, your only charge would be a DUI? Or do you think the law might make a distinction there saying one is worse than the other??

LOL.

This is a really dumb hill to die on man..

 

[emefer]

Do you think if you get a DUI doing 96 mph, your only charge would be a DUI? Or do you think the law might make a distinction there saying one is worse than the other??

LOL.

Well the dui charge was dropped and he was only charged with reckless driving so you tell me.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

Well the dui charge was dropped and he was only charged with reckless driving so you tell me.

So you are arguing that there's no distinction to be made between a regular DUI and driving 96 mi an hour down a road while drunk?

Disingenuous hack noted.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

Apparently the last few presidents have all been teetotalers and Kamala would be the first to not be one in a while. I prefer a teetotaler POTUS but again I suspect I am in the minority on that.

Nah, Obama drank. Remember the "Beer Summit" he had?

Dubya didn't but something tells me Clinton did... a lot

 

[King Joffery]

Nah, Obama drank. Remember the "Beer Summit" he had?

Dubya didn't but something tells me Clinton did... a lot

Yeah I reckon Clinton enjoyed the drink, it's probably why even though Trump and Clinton are a similar age, Trump has aged far better.

 

[El Panteron]

Yeah I reckon Clinton enjoyed the drink, it's probably why even though Trump and Clinton are a similar age, Trump has aged far better.

I have zero proof for that but I'm about 70% convinced Trump uses cocaine or amphetamines, based on how he acted and looked during some appearances.
I don't think that's important at all though, and it shouldn't influence your vote.
And of course I couldn't even vote in US elections anyways.

 

[Rob Battisti]

So you are arguing that there's no distinction to be made between a regular DUI and driving 96 mi an hour down a road while drunk?

Disingenuous hack noted.

While I agree there are differences between driving with a BAC over the legal limit and going nearly double the speed limit, I’d be in favor of increasing penalties of DUI far in excess of where they are now.

 

[Anewt]

Well the dui charge was dropped and he was only charged with reckless driving so you tell me.

That's actually the most fucked up part about his dui....


Is he didn't get charged and found guilty with it for some reason.


And only got reckless driving.

Pretty messed up actually

 

[Deleted member 577981]

While I agree there are differences between driving with a BAC over the legal limit and going nearly double the speed limit, I’d be in favor of increasing penalties of DUI far in excess of where they are now.

Me too man. I think it's just the most despicable thing.ahuman being can do or at least one of the most despicable things a human being can do.

If you drive drunk, you are literally putting other people's lives in danger who have nothing to do with you and that is just a terrible, terrible, horrible thing to do.

The only caveat I would make is in some states the limit for alcohol is so low that I think it's punitive and probably not a good policy. My cousin lives in Utah and you can have one beer at a restaurant and get a DUI on the way home and that seems a little excessive to me.

But walz driving home bombed doing 96 mph is atmospheric levels of b*******.

 

[emefer]

That's actually the most fucked up part about his dui....


Is he didn't get charged and found guilty with it for some reason.


And only got reckless driving.

Pretty messed up actually

That’s how a lot of them used to be handled. Not anymore.

 

[emefer]

Nah, Obama drank. Remember the "Beer Summit" he had?

Dubya didn't but something tells me Clinton did... a lot

Dubya had a dui

 

[cincymma79]

That's actually the most fucked up part about his dui....


Is he didn't get charged and found guilty with it for some reason.


And only got reckless driving.

Pretty messed up actually

common for first offenders

 

[Deleted member 577981]

That’s how a lot of them used to be handled. Not anymore.

Yes, this is true. Lots of people used to get away with it, but I think it's almost impossible nowadays and rightly so.

 

[Rob Battisti]

Me too man. I think it's just the most despicable thing.ahuman being can do or at least one of the most despicable things a human being can do.

If you drive drunk, you are literally putting other people's lives in danger who have nothing to do with you and that is just a terrible, terrible, horrible thing to do.

The only caveat I would make is in some states the limit for alcohol is so low that I think it's punitive and probably not a good policy. My cousin lives in Utah and you can have one beer at a restaurant and get a DUI on the way home and that seems a little excessive to me.

But walz driving home bombed doing 96 mph is atmospheric levels of b*******.

Yeah it’s not good. If it were more recent it would be worse. Has he commented on it? He also apparently tried to lie his way out of it and they dropped charges which is a whole other issue.

 

[Anewt]

Me too man. I think it's just the most despicable thing.ahuman being can do or at least one of the most despicable things a human being can do.

If you drive drunk, you are literally putting other people's lives in danger who have nothing to do with you and that is just a terrible, terrible, horrible thing to do.

The only caveat I would make is in some states the limit for alcohol is so low that I think it's punitive and probably not a good policy. My cousin lives in Utah and you can have one beer at a restaurant and get a DUI on the way home and that seems a little excessive to me.

But walz driving home bombed doing 96 mph is atmospheric levels of b*******.

In my state in Australia our legal limit is 0.05%.

0.128 which he got via blood test would be considered very high level dui here. In Nebraska it's 0.1% so a big difference I guess.

By our standards

( and the fact our freeways top speed is 100kph. 62mph )

Would be a hefty charge in Australia

 

[Poon Goon]

and the fact our freeways top speed is 100kph. 62mph

Luckily America had Sammy Hagar who successfully fought against bullshit like this.

 

[emefer]

So you are arguing that there's no distinction to be made between a regular DUI and driving 96 mi an hour down a road while drunk?

Disingenuous hack noted.

I’ll concede that nowadays, the speeding would exacerbate the dui charges and may make one ineligible for ARD.

I was interested of his level of drunkenness. He had a BAC of .128. The state limit was .1 so like one too many beers in an hour. There was also some time between the stop and when they took a blood sample to determine his BAC. This time passage could lead to him having a higher BAC when the sample was taken and his BAC at the time of the stop, depending when his last drink was.
He wasn’t plastered is my point. Probably at the point where he was feeling really good.
So we’re talking 1995 on a highway in Nebraska (guessing it was night). Back in 98 I worked near Philly airport and would drive 40 miles on the highway to get home at 10:30pm and was the only person on the road. He was probably the only car on the road, except for the cop, and decided to open it up with all that courage in him.

But, there’s no excuses once you get behind the wheel if you’ve been drinking.
He’s gonna get flak for drunk driving but a lot of people doing so are also guilty of drunk driving, they just haven’t been caught. It doesn’t take much to put you over the limit. There’s an equation but for an average guy about 2 drinks in an hour will get you close and anymore than one per hour after will put you over