GG

The beautiful part about anti anti-Semitism is that it can fit every situation.

What a fun game to watch.

That may be needed for some Allen throws ?

But that's what I mean when I say he isn't honest. Taxes on the middle class would go up by way more than 4%, and he's being dishonest about it. He refuses to provide any detail on the funding for Medicare for all, but it's easy to see how he plans to implement it by hearing what else he says about his plan. Essentially he wants to eliminate all private insurance and replace all the premiums companies and individuals pay for health insurance with a health tax. Because most of these premiums are paid by employers, he can claim that taxes on individuals will only go up by a little, because the big part of the health tax will be paid by employers. The trouble with the plan is that you are replacing a voluntary $12k premium payment by companies with a compulsory $12k tax per head. Realistically, the tax would be higher because you would need to cover the costs of the unemployed. This scheme could work with large employers;oyers, but would be more painful for smaller employers, whose participation will be necessary to provide universal coverage.

Don’t forget the credits that are applied to taxes. The biggest is the $2k credit per child, which drops the tax bill a lot. A family with one child in a household making $50k will pay $1k in total taxes after basic deductions and credits. There was an op-ed in the WSJ today talking about how the US has the most progressive effective tax regime. The EU countries may have higher top marginal rates, but the income tax burden is spread much more evenly in them. If Bernie was honest, he’d be upfront with the voters that all their taxes are going to be raised by a LOT! For all his talk about taxing millionaires and billionaires, the reality is that there isn’t enough money available to pay for everything he wants to do.

I'll take a faster smarter version of Duke any day.

Not the best example to use for a guy who got sent down to the minors for being too weak for the big leagues.

Read the follow up stories. It surely appears that USA Today took liberties with their interview with the judge, who also wasn't speaking on behalf of the group.

Hah, I would have picked Aztec & Maya

No respect for the Aztecs? Heretic.

I guess you have no comment about the factual information that was brought up in that opinion piece? Do you also wonder why no press outlets rushed to correct the initial USA Today story?

Definitely agree on the timeline, considering the movement started in Europe. But as soon as it crossed the Atlantic, racial strife became a central plank. A race war was always promoted by Soviet elements in the US.

Dunno, looks more ancient Central American influence than anything from the other continent.

That's not what the PFT article says, at all. It would be so much simpler to say, Oops I misread one bullet point, and move on.

To repeat, It would be so much simpler to say, Oops I misread one bullet point, and move on.

Come again? The PFT take in this case is FOR the owners.

Still doesn't make sense. Why would the conservative owners agree to a test that has no meaning? Do you think the conservative owners are that stupid? Agreed. It would be so much simpler to say, Oops I misread one bullet point, and move on.

Actually it does, because the fact sheet specifically mentions the word "strictly," which means there will be ways for a player to be suspended for weed that falls outside the definition of what "strictly" is supposed to encompass. That's why PFT followed up to get a clarification from a direct source and attributed this line to the source "a new CBA also would include dramatically reduced penalties, with suspensions happening only in the event of extreme and repeated disregard of the policy or significant violations of applicable law regarding the possession and use of marijuana." Seems pretty clear

No, you said no suspension for weed. That's different than what the rules are going to be. The threshold is higher, but serial offenders who disregard policies, like Josh Gordon would still be subject to suspensions.

Read what that bullet point says. It doesn't eliminate all suspensions

Why are you harping on this? All stories point to the threshold for suspensions to be changed, but there definitely will be suspensions. "As one source explained it, a new CBA also would include dramatically reduced penalties, with suspensions happening only in the event of extreme and repeated disregard of the policy or significant violations of applicable law regarding the possession and use of marijuana." Read what that bullet point says. It doesn't eliminate all suspensions

Looks like penalties will be reduced, not eliminated.

I haven't seen that in any of the stories. This is one of the few mentions in PFT I thought the players would take a tougher stance.

Surprised there's no mention about changing the substance abuse policies.

Gary, Since you're not a partisan hack, why haven't you followed up on this story?