Taro T

That your point is that one idea is worse than the other idea because it is actually getting implemented in places while the other is still merely conjecture and overwhelmingly criticized was in fact missed. Apologies for that. But, again, wadr, THAT the 2nd idea has not been implemented in this country yet does NOT make it a better idea than the other one. Not sure how you're missing that point. They both are really bad ideas and are IMHO representative of the extreme ends of the authoritarianism spectrum. One designed intentionally or accidentally to increase the chaos the general citizenry has to encounter on an ordinary basis which is almost always necessarily required for a communistic revolution to eventually take hold and the other a step towards a fascist dystopia where undesirables are "humanely" permanently removed from society.

Probably not. It's a darn shame for those that are losing their jobs that he's no longer able to make that argument; he possibly could've been an advocate for them. But, have yet to see someone advocating for someone to be fired for speaking ill of Kirk. So far, have only seen people advocating for those CELEBRATING his death to face the consequences of public opinion for putting their own hatred out there for the world to so plainly see.

Wadr, not missing your point at all. You are saying one "humanely" rendered act of insanity is better than another act of insanity (or evilness or stupidity or whatever it was that describes that judge's decision to release him essentially on his own recognizance). Will not agree that it is better, again wadr. IMHO it's like being asked to choose whether it's better to die in a fiery autocrash or merely a severely violent autocrash. At the end of the consideration, neither is a good option.

Are you asking that PRIOR to him having taken innocent life? Because if you are, you are heading to a REALLY dark place. And that man that murdered the Ukrainian girl AFAIK had never murdered anyone prior to taking her innocent life. And, for clarity, WHY do those have to be the only 2 options? There are a LOT of stops on the continuum between release violent felons with little or nothing more than a slap on the wrist and executing lovingly those that are violent or those we deem inconvenient.

The appropriate thing to have done would've been to not release him into the general public for a 14th time. That horse is sadly out of the barn.

Even IF what he said was strictly directed at the violent homeless and mentally ill people, such as the man that slaughtered the Ukrainian refugee woman; that still is a horrible thought. To advocate for involuntary lethal injections for the mentally ill displays a level of compassion that is right there with those that are celebrating the death of Charlie Kirk. If someone is mentally ill, they by definition aren't fully in control of their actions, and therefore should not be made to forfeit the rest of their natural life for whatever it is that person is accused of. The person on the left in that discussion suggested that these people need to be institutionalized if they are a danger to those around them (not the exact words, but the sentiment) AND they refuse treatments / medicines that can keep the true mental illness under check. That is a reasonable position to take. How to actually implement something like that would require far more discussion and nuance before implementing it; but it can be considered particularly if we're looking at stuff like schizophrenia to be the mental illness and not conservativism or liberalism to be the mental illness. Kilmeade apologized for the comments he made. Hopefully they were a misspeaking in the moment that went horribly awry; but even if they were, he should consider himself very fortunate if he still has a job in front of the camera.

Do not agree with everything Kirk has said through the years. Have not personally heard him say anything that would be actually hateful when taken in full context but am willing to believe there may be something in all his 1,000's of hours of speaking that comes across that way. If there is would disavow that. But there are myriad examples of what he's said NOT being hateful that have been described as such and would expect there's a pretty good likelihood that most, if not all, of what you are claiming as hate speech falls under that umbrella. But definitely do not support YOUR hate Mr. "Hoping you dullards lose 1-3 grandchildren to diseases we already defeated thru scientific research and medicine." Yeah, 'cause THAT isn't hateful at all, right? And your interaction that my original post was in reference to was what typically is generally considered doxxing and had nothing to do with what the 2 of you were discussing. But your advice to him that maybe HE should sit this one out is advice that you might consider heeding yourself, Mr. Hate.

When you can't rebut the argument, attack the one making the argument.

Interesting. For the 2nd time in just over a month have heard a very respected leadership expert speaking about how we are to be "salt and light." Haven't heard anyone focus on those in a very long time and then there they are in concert once again.

Well, if you go, I'll meet you there. Hoping we get a few others pop in, but if not, well, been a long time since weve had a chance to chat. Will be a good time either way.

You and 90% of everyone else. Went 15-1 last year in week 1 in the Pick 'Em. Wanna guess which was the only L & which was that week's suicide pick? D'oh!!!!

Thanks President Obama.

Would you be kind enough to expand upon this thought? Not sure what you mean by this.

Anyone planning on hitting up Nick's on Friday 9/5? If there is any interest, I should be able to get there this year. Once again won't be going to the opener but will be going to a home game a little later in the year. @Rock Pile @Just Jack @JÂy RÛßeÒ @aussiew @todd @R. Rich @jimmy10 @Dan Gross @holmz56 @judman @SuperBowlOrBust Any others? (for some reason @mead107 isn't tagging)

Presumably it's woke in the same way removing the Indian madien from Land O'Lakes butter was; removing Uncle Ben from Uncle Ben's rice was; and so on and so forth. They're maybe right that it was in that same vein. They got rid of the old white guy that pretty much symbolized their company. But, it could simply be following in the footsteps of "this is not your father's Oldsmobile." Either way, it's likely a poor decision. There's only 1 Cracker Barrel in the general area that we live and it isn't terribly convenient to get there so have only been there once or twice when meeting with others; so really don't have a horse in this race. Have seen the tweets purporting to be the more "modernized" decor that goes along with this rebrand. Presuming they're legit, would put this more in the Oldsmobile category than the woke one as it seems they're getting rid of the "charm" by making it far more generic than it was. But could easily be mistaken about that. Either way, it appears they very likely are sending their current customers the message (whether intentionally or unitentionally) that they aren't really the customer base the company wants eating their food nor buying their knicknacks. And expect the message will go over as well as when in GM's attempt to woo younger car buyers who were not interested in them over to the Olds brand they did so by accidentally telling their existing customers that the cars they were selling were literally not for them anymore. And the younger car buyers didn't become enamored with them and the older car buyers decided they could buy something else - those LTDs and Crown Victorias Ford was selling were just as roomy as their old Olds whose marketers had offended them.

Actually, they promote the idea that 47's DoJ could be releasing what info is in the FBI files that doesn't include GJ testimony nor material that identifies the underage victims of Epstein's teen prostitution empire. Unless that material is going to be part of ongoing or forthcoming prosecutions, they're right that the info should be released in whole and unredacted (again, except for the portions that indentifies the victims or is itself "kiddie porn") and let the chips fall where they may. Do realize at this point they seem to have no intention to do so.

You're seriously blaming 47 for inflation over the past 4 years when he's been in charge for ~1/8 of that time frame? How much of that increase occured on 46's "watch" and how much on 47's?

Well, 4" schlong will stop posting here any day now that TC is over and Bills season is almost back. Don' cha know, he only posts in politics threads during the off-season.

Not so sure it's that they have to worry about losing their job it the report is unfavorable; more so they have to worry about losing their job it their initial estimate ends up getting significantly revised consistently in the next 2 quarters. The initial jobs reports have been wildly inaccurate since she took over in 2022. Hate the way 47 made it look like he's canning her for not giving him results that are favorable to him because she actually has been giving initial reports that were favorable to him (at least the last 2 months) and she did that consistently for 46 as well. If he nominates someone for that post that actually starts getting the estimates close to correct, that would be beneficial. Time will tell if he does or not.

Dude, if you're going after Catherine Herridge, you've already lost. Hers is the gold standard of investigative reporting.

Would prefer the monies raised from the tariffs go towards deficit reduction and if they were to ever get to a point where the budget is balanced (which we'll never get to and never actually did, not even when 42 had a "surplus" (that was due to SS receipts exceeding expenses, but those were already supposed to be allocated to be used exclusively for future SS expenses)) then reduce / eliminate personal income taxes. Realistically, they'll be used to primarily increase spending and modestly reduce the deficit.

If the kid has a horrible credit rating, could see them offering him a ridiculously high interest rate. And he'd be very wise to stick to his guns and pay cash or walk out to another dealer. (As you suggest at the end.) Cousin had a friend that had a couple of bankruptcies in his past; he ended up having payments on a 5 year old car that were more than those for much nicer new cars. But the real money for dealerships is in selling the extras: warranties, undercoating, paint sealants, etc. And their service department makes way more money than the car sales department does.

Two additional points, though much of Russia is in Asia, the portion where most of the population lives is in Europe and, are we really going to judge how good a deal actually is by what the chattering class thinks of it at the time? Seward paid less than half of what Jefferson paid 64 years earlier and got about 60% of the land mass and an incredible trove of resources. There also were those that weren't happy with Jefferson's deal either as the nation still had debt from the Revolutionary War and they didn't fully know what he'd bought; thus the Lewis and Clark expedition.

Umm, Seward's folly was a pretty big deal too. And came 64 years later.

You're point being ...