BullBuchanan

Jesus christ. Did you hit your head on something? I've defined it in every post I've made. I don't believe you "fight" for jobs by trying to prevent others from taking them. i believe you fight for them by equipping your team to take on new ones. You can try to 'make the wishbone" great again all you want, but history shows that evolution is always the best path. Now if you came out with a calm and rational plan that said something like, "hey it's 2019 and fossil fuels are dying. We still have a lot of people whose livelihoods depend on it though. We should provide some subsidies to make sure they continue to be employed and also use the bulk of that to train them on wind and solar farm operation" I would be all the way in. Instead what I get is a bunch "Dey took er jerhbs!" And that's useless. It helps no one.Those jobs are still going away and those people are just going to be more behind when they do.

I'm not in favor of trade deals like NAFTA, no. They were put in place to help corporations and hurt everyone else. Right now, mankind is the league. You're on the right of me, by about a billion percent. The right helps people who they want to help and they try to hurt everyone else. You keep tossing around the term globalist, but you don't seem to know what it means and keep trying to convince me I believe in things I dont. Just stop, it's tiresome. "World Order" lol. gtfoh

Not sure I'm following your fictional scenario. I believe in countries whole-heartedly in that the country we live in should act in the best interests of the people within it. I view countries as nothing more than the government equivalent of a team. As part of that team, everyone should share in the highs and the lows, and the manager is responsible for making sure we're on the correct trajectory. However, I believe that ultimately it should be far easier to go to a country that has ideals you support and play for that team. What I get from most on the right is that they don't really believe in the concept of countries, because they don't have any interest in supporting their teammates. I also don't view other teams as the enemy, because our ability to win doesn't depend on their ability to lose. As long as they let me have my liberty, they can have theirs. I have no interest in assassinating foreign leaders and installing fascist dictators in their place.

In the definition you're likely after, probably not, but I think it's completely ignorant to ignore the impact the the world economy has on the people within it and how we must adapt our way of life in order to compete and thrive. I've worked with people all over the world every day for the last 18 years, and probably will the rest of my life. They face the same challenges we have, do or will. You can try to stop immigration and outsourcing, just like they tried to save the steel mills in the 50's. The math just doesn't work and progress stops for no one. If you don't figure out a better way, someone else will, and I like fight for things that move toward that better way. The days of getting a job or a career at 18 and riding that to retirement are long done. I've had 7 jobs in the last 12 years, and that's the new normal. basic programming will be the new Ford assembly line worker, Coal Miner, or Steel Mill in 20 years. You can either bemoan it or you can figure out what's next. exactly.

Why wouldn't they?

There's no problem with Indians being in the country. Outsourcing is always going to happen, and it's going to become more prominent than ever. We can't stop it and we shouldn't try. instead we need to be investing in ourselves to be able to compete in that market.

is the opinion of the blog more relevant somehow?

Every major city in Texas voted blue in 2016 and 2018, and the population has been increasing. Dallas, Houston, Austin, San Antonio, El Paso are all shifting more an more. Why do people make such a big deal about this? Can someone lead and not win a thing? I mean I've heard of that happening at least once or twice.

Those jobs are going to India. While everyone's been worried about losing their jobs to fruit pickers, landscapers, and house cleaners, $150K jobs that buy homes, cars, restaurant trips and vacations are going bye-bye. Add in the fact that a lot of those now out of work programmers have 6 figures in student loan debt and the real problems should become a lot more clear.

You have your right to believe in religion, and live in a way that accords with it, as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of someone else to live theirs. Being able to bash religion is EXACTLY what liberty is, just as your right to believe in it is also EXACTLY what liberty is. Go ahead and tell people that having an abortion is wrong or morally bankrupt. That's your right. What isn't your right is supporting a cause that prevents them from exercising their own choice

Sure, that's cute at all, but it's not relevant. It's not a person. You can watch a BMW being made in the shop and at a certain point it can look like a car, but you can't drive it. Everything has to have parameters

Those are some nice triple word scores you have there, unfortunately, the definitions aren't relevant at all. A zygote, embryo, or fetus is not a person any more than a tree is a house, a cow is a steak, or a piece of steel ore is a BMW. It's almost universal that different laws and regulations apply to materials and organisms in different states of existence, because as human being we can understand all of the above to be true. The issue comes when you start to involve religion, because then all of that basic understanding goes straight out the window in lieu of following stories in a book that most proponents probably haven't even read. Without religion, the amount of anti-choice proponents would probably not be statistically significant.

I'm not forcing you to have an abortion, but you seem pretty keen on forcing people not to.

we could use a bit of the former.

When my bias is liberty, science, and reason, I'm perfectly ok with that. You can have Jesus, and we'll see how the cards play out. There really isn't anything more cliche than people on the right trying to call an egg a chicken.

Do you have the numbers?

Lotta white men in here with a lot of strong opinions on women's rights. Opened this thread and wasn't disappointed.

Hey Mexico, for every person you allow to cross into this country, we're going to destroy our economy a little more. It's amazing that so many people don't know what tariffs do or how they work. If I were Mexico, I'd send every person I had. Is it though? How do you determine "important" In the realm of "must have" "should have" "nice to have", I think it belongs in the "Should have" category. We have plenty of our own major problems to deal with. Folks aren't coming here to be homeless, they're coming here to work for people like Trump.

on pure ability it's Reggie and it's not really close. However, you cannot ignore the fact that Bruce was a dominant player over a 19 year career. It's kind of insane for a pass-rusher. Even Reggie had ridiculous longevity, but Bruce was on a different level. We may never see their likes again.

How about Montana and Rivers? I always thought Young was extremely overrated in the all-time comparisons list. He was an exhilarating highlight machine, but If I was building a franchise with any QB I could take, I don't think he'd be in my top 15. I think Elway is better than Rodgers and leaves Young in the dust.

Sills

They have no real star power in a league that requires it. I'm not saying they can't be competitive this year, but there's a 0 percent chance they run over everyone and then keep that up as a dynasty moving forward. It's possible for them to make the playoffs as a 5 or 6 seed, but they're likely a 1 and done at this stage unless they can play a really weak team. This is essentially a brand new team combined with a small core that the staff has decided to bank on. This year we should find out if their core is solid, and if it is they can move forward with the rest of the team. You can all but guarantee there will be flameouts in this FA class, given how many they brought in and the relatively average talent level of most of them. They'll have to recycle part of that next year while trying to develop additional stars. I think you need a minimum of 5 legitimate stars on your squad to be a perennial winner. if we get 2&3 this year and 4&5 next year, we'll be ready to be a favorite in 2021. My hopes are Allen and Edmunds this year + 1 WR. If Oliver can be that by early next year and Knox can flash end of next we're in pretty good shape, but there's so much work to be done. Allen and Edmunds need monumental leaps and Knox needs to force his way onto the field this year. It can look right and they can still miss the playoffs. I think we can be a very good team this year and still come in 3rd place.

That may be so, but it's the most likely thing to occur. Who do they have right now that makes you think they can compete with the Patriots, Chiefs, Rams, Eagles, or some of the up and comers? We are extremely far behind the good teams in the league so far. It doesn't mean they aren't getting there though. If you want to put money on the Bills winning the SB this year or next year, I'll beat Vegas' line. Yup. Rivers is a great QB, and so is Luck. How have they fared thus far?

I think if you're looking for them to win this season, you might have the wrong mindset. I think absolute best case we have a 2016-esque season. If this team ends up being good I don't see them ready to really compete until 2021, or year 5 of the rebuild. As of today the only star we have in their prime is White. Hopefully a couple come into that role this year, including Allen, Edmunds and one of Zay or Foster. We also need some of the new faces to flash that potential. If we get several, we could accelerate the close of the rebuild by next year, but I think 2 more years is more realistic.

Everyone "cheats", they just don't get caught.