GG

Why has Flynn's sentencing been postponed again & again?

I'm guessing that you read about the continuity rationale this week, and noot 18 months ago. Thus, the first instinct should be to question why is continuity important 18 months after the fact.

Who said this, and stuck by it when presented with contrary evidence?

These are just slogans. If you believe in your convictions, you should be asking why you should blindly trust sources who have actively worked to undermine the Constitution over the past 2 years, just because they disagreed with a valid outcome.

If there's one thing this board has proven in the last 3 years, is that you always, always have to consider the source of the reporting, and even then you have to take a step back and ask yourself if the story makes sense. If you look at all stories that were written by the mainstream news outlets over this period, and apply the benefit of hindsight, you will realize how woefully wrong the original takes were, and then how the stories morphed, without ever admitting a retraction. That's why you're being called an idiot. There's already overwhelming evidence out there that the news that you blindly trust is anything but "news."

Too soon?

I see a GEICO commercial in her future

I disagree with the main thesis because it's a meandering jumbled mess.

I'll defer to you on that. But everyone always overstates the role that the military industrial complex plays in the DOD budget. At the end of the day it's a massive pork barrel program for each Senator's hom state, with most of the costs having nothing to do with defense contractors, but with keeping the bases open.

That minor statement is emblematic of the wide misses in the entire article. I can make the argument that the whole reason that US "allowed" Russia to catch up is that because over the last 20 yrs, the US military has been preoccupied with rebuilding itself to combat Chinese and asymmetric terrorist threats.

Reading this is kind of funny in the context of the fact that conservatives donate more to charity than liberals.

There were 220 shootings so far this year in TO, and this year stands to set a record. What have your super strict gun laws done to prevent the escalation in gun violence?

Have you been called an idiot yet?

Oh, where would the world peace be without the benevolent intervention of the Iranians?

Because, you know, it's like I feel that if only US had sensible gun laws, all violence would stop immediately

In trying to make sense of the article, what would you consider a source who was a highly placed USSR military officer, but is now an "independent" Russia consultant based in the US, who somehow still has deep insight into Russian military capabilities? And is writing freely about it? The contention that Russian navy was catching up the US in the '70s, is laughable to anyone who stepped foot on a Russian naval vessel in the '80s & '90s. Finally, in one breath, the article scolds the US military apparatus for foisting the Russian scare to drum up military spending only to warn that Russians are now much more advanced than the US in the latest technologies.

You are not going to grow the middle class by raising taxes on those who provide the jobs that create the middle class. Infrastructure programs are a feel good measure that don't have a correlation to long term economic development. If you want to see capitalism's effect on economic growth, look at Trump's first 18 months as he obliterated Obama's business obstructions and red tape. Of course, don't look at his economic policies now, which could not only undo all the good things he's built, but make matters far worse than Obama's years.

So to recap, MSM is advocating going to war with Russia over a few thousand Facebook ads, but are aghast about a possible war with Iran over killing American soldiers in ME?

That's quite the syllogism. I don't know how many times people have to explain the basics of US law to you. The 2nd amendment established the RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The language is pretty unambiguous. There's nothing in the wording that even hints at the right being a privilege. You're probably mistaking the privilege term from a vantage point of never having to make a difficult decision as a sovereign nation, but having the moral superiority to pontificate upon your patron. Kind of like a spoiled trust fund kid. Now, please tell me how your superior gun privileges saved people in Toronto in the last 6 months?

I'm still trying to wrap my brain around the revelation that the leading guy who's screaming about Russia collusion is the guy who voted Communist in the '70s.

America and its gun laws?

And you keep missing the bigger point. As more and more people don't pay ANY income tax, it's a lot easier to push populist platforms that promise them more free stuff. There's zero incentive for them to vote no on those proposals, which eventually will lead to a fiscal disaster. Everyone should have skin in the game, and the minimum income based tax should be 15%.

I'm sure it's real to him

Univision is trying to unload these assets, so that could explain the more evenly spread out target list.

She grew up in a working class town. Not all Westchester is uber-rich. But why would you spend a second doing your own research, moron? So in the same breath that you admit that it's ok for people earning 52% of income to bear 87% of the income tax burden (and growing) you talk about tax fairness? The whole point of bringing up Scandinavians is that the tax base is more ratable, and nearly everyone has skin in the game. When you have an increasing share of population that doesn't pay an income tax, and whose payroll tax is largely invisible to them, it makes it a lot easier to push through populist/socialist policies that will collapse in the end. The fiscal model of relying on a smaller and smaller percentage of population paying taxes to support increasing social programs is reckless and unsustainable.