The Frankish Reich

I have no idea what you're talking about.

In other words, QAnon. And Trump's daughter-in-law is there supporting this crap.

Like I said, it's a lawyer's argument. One that is problematic to make from a PR perspective, but not a bad hairsplitting distinction.

Putting on my objective lawyer hat ... it's actually not a bad argument! His lawyers are arguing that the insurrection clause wasn't meant to apply to the President. In support of that argument, they're saying the insurrection clause, by its own terms, applies only to those who took an oath to "support" the constitution. But the "support" language isn't there in the Presidential oath of office. Hence (the argument goes) this supports the theory that it was never intended to apply to the President. I'll grant you this: it's an awkward, even embarrassing argument to have to make (you're basically saying, "so what if Trump's actions didn't support the constitution"), but on a purely legal basis, kind of clever ...

Trump and Netanyahu previously had a mutual love thing. Here's 2019, when Trump recognized Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights: WASHINGTON — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu compared President Trump to Cyrus the Great, Lord Balfour and Harry S. Truman — historic giants who helped secure the future of the Israeli people. Mr. Trump called Mr. Netanyahu a “very special man.” I wonder what changed Trump's opinion ....

Say what you will about his age/competency. The facts: Biden has faced two major international crises in his presidency: the Ukraine invasion and the Hamas mass terrorist attack in Israel. He has handled both of them as effectively as anyone could.

With Trump everything is transactional. Netanyahu was among the first to congratulate Biden for "winning" in 2020. That is an unforgivable sin. The childishness of this 77 year old will never cease to amaze.

True. I guess times have changed. From Kim's wiki page: while interviewing for a waitressing gig, she met Terry Pegula who was dining at the restaurant. In 1991, Terry offered her a job at his natural gas company and they eventually entered a relationship; they married in 1993.

In other words, you've got nuthin It's just fun to blame Biden

You don't even need to go to the scripture. The 1988 Hamas Charter says it all (from the wiki page): The charter states that "our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious" and calls for the eventual creation of an Islamic state in Palestine, in place of Israel and the Palestinian Territories,[3] and the obliteration or dissolution of Israel.[4][5] It emphasizes the importance of jihad, stating in article 13, "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."[6] The charter also states that Hamas is humanistic, and tolerant of other religions as long as they "stop disputing the sovereignty of Islam in this region".[7] The Charter adds that "renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion [of Islam]".[1] The original charter was criticized for its violent language against all Jews, which some commentators characterized as incitement to genocide.[8][9] They tried to tone it down a bit around 2010, but they still will not accept the State of Israel. In other words, Hamas - an entity dedicated to the elimination of Israel - controls Gaza and its "army," a terrorist army. Obviously in retrospect, when Hamas was elected by the people of Gaza to run its government, Israel should have taken immediate action to stop that from happening.

I'm not sure what any of that would do to actually aid Israel now. There may indeed be Intel failures on our part as well as on Israel's part, but now is not the time to be airing all of that. Biden came out strongly, unequivocally in support of Israel. That was the right thing to do at this critical moment. Everything else (money) can follow.

So what do you think he should be doing? Committing troops to the invasion of Gaza? Sending money/armaments to Israel? That one is the job of Congress, which of course has no Speaker of the House so nothing can be appropriated. So ... what?

Israel was attacked. We say it was by Hamas terrorists, but Hamas is in de facto control of the Gaza strip. In other words, it is the government of Gaza, and Hamas terrorists are therefore the Gaza army. Israel has a right to self defense, and that includes trying to eliminate the threat from that foreign aggressor. That includes going after Gaza/Hamas command and control sites, weapons stockpiles, and Gaza/Hamas terrorists/fighters. But you do make a good point: what is the endgame? Israel may cause another huge refugee crisis, and some of those Gaza residents are going to end up at the U.S.-Mexico border asking for asylum too. And at some point legitimate self defense butts up against illegitimate punishment of an entire population whether or not it had anything to do with the attacks on Israel. I think Biden is doing the right thing for now: expressing support for Israel and outrage at the terrorist operation. He is giving Israel some leeway for a legitimate counterattack in its exercise of self defense. But at least privately I hope he is telling Netanyahu that this is not anything goes. There need to be limits, and there needs to be a strategy beyond revenge.

So ... the question: You want to make America great again. What year would you revert back to if you had a magic wand? (We already saw that 1960 wasn't a great choice) I think the question is too big if we talk about everything in society. So I'll talk about the time period when I believe that governance and policy made the most sense. For me, that was the second Clinton administration, when Clinton moved to the center after the Republicans took the House. Balanced budgets. Post-Soviet affairs managed pretty well. Clinton signed a law in 1996 strengthening border enforcement and deterring illegal immigration. (that would be almost inconceivable with subsequent Democratic presidents). Strong economy. Not utopia in America, but problems were met with sensible policy responses.

Big picture: I questioned the wisdom of the U.S.-brokered deal in which Saudi Arabia would officially recognize Israel as a legitimate state. This is really a continuation of Trump's so-called Abraham Accords with minor Gulf states. Why question it? Well, because it upsets a delicate balance. It was seen as a provocation by Iran, and it is becoming pretty clear that Iran has a large role in funding and even training the Hamas militants. Hamas undertakes its largest terrorist action ever (by far). Israel responds by destroying Hamas' stronghold in Gaza. The Saudis feel like they must side with their Arab brothers under attack by Israel. The deal - which would have included nothing about the status of the Palestinians - falls apart. Iran wins.

49ers have gained a little separation here. The question was whether Brock Purdy would be figured out by defenses and hit a wall. He hasn't. They have the most talented roster, are well coached, and are remarkably healthy right now. In retrospect they were the best team in the NFL last year until Purdy went down and they were forced to go with emergency QBs. I would agree that Bills/Chiefs/Eagles are all about even, fighting for second best. And I'd be inclined to throw the Dolphins in there, although there's a lot more variability there. But the injury situation in the playoffs will not be the injury situation today, so that will have a huge impact.

Yes. It's not so much the time change, it's the early kickoff that doesn't take into account the players' circadian rhythms. But the NFL doesn't want that. It wants morning games in North America. That's probably even baked into the Sunday Ticket deal with YouTube, since that allows Youtube to offer all "Sunday afternoon" games exclusively, leaving the morning product to NFL network or whoever might bid for it.

Niners are the best team in the NFL and it's not even close

It sounds ridiculous, but ... a little reminiscent of Joe Montana?

So ... is Brock Purdy actually good? I mean, I've been like almost everybody else, saying it's a very talented offense, he distributes the ball effectively, doesn't try to do too much, knows his limitations, etc., etc. But at some point when a guy never has a bad game, don't we just have to say he's a really good QB?

EX wife. English ex-wife. Not that she traumatized me or anything ....

It's finally happened. They are really bad. Not mediocre like the last couple years after Brady left. Just plain bad. And the bright spot for Bills fans: unlike some of the other bad teams, there's really no turnaround in sight.

To be called Diggsian is indeed a great hono(u)r.

Iran will almost certainly get what it wanted: to derail the Saudi-Israeli-U.S. agreement. There is indeed a proxy war going on here, but it isn't a proxy war against the U.S. It is the war between Iran and Saudi Arabia, previously fought in places like Yemen.

Tommy Sweeney? Come on. I think he's at least as good as Tyler Kroft in that one game when he was healthy