starrymessenger

Wasn't saying Pres Obama had a good foreign policy. That's a different question and, well, kettle of fish. Only that from what little I know Saunders's foreign policy seems to = the vacuum nature abhors.

Re Wall Street and the big banks in particular I get the impression that candidates on both sides say things, just about anything, just to cater to certain constituencies. Makes it hard to know what they actually think or whether they think at all. Hillary brandished Volcker over and over to appeal to main street as a check against "big banks". But Volcker doesn't break up big banks, it just prevents them from persuing quantitative proprietary trading strategies. Its also is basically pointless legislation that fails to target the real problems that just about brought down the world financial order in 2008. Institutional prop trading was never a problem. The problem was bank ownership of securitized mortgages in a real estate bubble. Mortgages are typically not a "trading asset". They are the most conventional of retail banking assets. At first the banks were smart enough to sell them to suckers but then they started investing in them because the spreads or mark to market gains were attractive on paper. The real problem was the failure of bank risk managers and government regulators to identify the risk based on their naive willingness to accept the opinions on credit worthiness of the rating agencies. Breaking up big banks like Saunders would like to do isn't going to solve the problem either if lots of smaller banks are doing the same (wrong) things. So Hilary appeals to main street and associates herself with Obama's "legacy" except that Volcker was hardly a shining moment of his administration.

Naysayers can say what they like about him but there aren't many bald men who need a haircut. What I don't get is how a man for whom foreign policy is an empty space can be taken seriously as a presidential candidate.

Is sitting on a ball a turnover?

Why is that a touchback? Down at the 2?

I've got no dog in this fight but if he said that (whether he took it back or not) he is not a serious person and he deserves to be whipped. We don't live in Russia.

Gotcha.

Just for my information, has Bernie Saunders proposed a 90% net income tax?

No doubt I am oversimplifying things. But are we quibbling. Saudi Arabia is also home to it in its most primitive aspect and Saudi Arabians, like Bin Laden, amongst its principal exponents. My point was that the people who run the country are not to be confused with them. If they were one and the same there would be an official policy for the extermination of all Shia Moslems, even Saudi citizens, since fundamentalist Wahhabism regards non-conforming Moslems as more contemptible than infidels, and clearly they don't do that. Besides the extremists in Saudi Arabia are a threat to the Royal Family and their mortal enemy. Hardly surprising that "official" Wahhabism looks to distinguish itself from them. OTOH, note that the Saudis are in no hurry to eliminate ISIS because they are a Sunni bulwark against Shia Iran and therefore they serve their regional interests.

You are right of course. Thank you. Wasn't confusing datology, just forgot.

They are not absolved of course but the impetus comes from the clerics they likely regret being in partnership with, as well as the unwashed masses. Don't forget their rule is fragile and thats probably why the age old compact perists. Picture them trying to ride a two ton Bramah bull. No, the House of Saud allied itself with Mr Wahhabi himself in the early 14th century in order to consolidate their hold on theArabian Peninsula.

Sure, and the mini mo Quataris. But the bearded bosses try and keep it under control IMO. They like money as much as they hate the Shia. And they periodically crown the crazies with ashtrays whenever they jump up and down too much - just as the Turks used to do back in the good old days of the Ottoman empire.

Its not rocket surgery. Wasting money through administrative inefficiency and duplication is not good. Subsidizing a permanent sub population of morons living off the fat of the land is not good. Providing the underprivileged with assistance and opportunity is good - for everyone.

Shakespeare couldn't spell either. For sure they don't like Shias, but the crazies give them more trouble than they are worth these days. 700 years ago it was a deal the House of Saud had to make.

Pick six IMO

Phew...

Is our historic comeback record in danger?

We the guys we deal with are not cazy. They like money and they have a country to run Problem is they made a deal with the devil 700 years ago. They probably regret it.

Except for the Saudi extremists of course, of which there are many. In fact they are institutionalized, and therefore legitimized, as the state religion.

False stat. Play like we do.

Guy stays in bounds, dumb playcall, waste the 2 minute warning. They play like the Bills.

Agree. Maybe Whaley can finally let go now that he has a new deal.

Second time he overthrows him badly for 6

Boy Kelce is really athletic for a big guy.

I thought the book on Tom was pressure up the middle. I'm not seeing it. Maybe KC doesn't have the right horses?