Azalin

Whether or not there have already been telephone conversations, whether or not any of this is scripted, whether or not Un isn't sincere, this is something that I have not seen occur in my lifetime, and it's significance shouldn't be dismissed by either side. At least Trump and Un are talking face to face. That's FAR greater an accomplishment with regard to NoKo than anything since the cease-fire.

There's no doubt in my mind.

I didn't want to quote your entire post, only for the sake of keeping it brief. You provide an insight all too rare around here; an opportunity to see things from a point of view not shared by most of us. I'm grateful for that, and would appreciate it if you were able to find the time to post here more frequently. And it's good to see someone who knows the proper use of the word verisimilitude.

So we are clear: " The lawsuit in question was filed in February by Texas and 19 other GOP-led states, arguing that ObamaCare is unconstitutional and should be overturned. " followed by: " The conservative states and DOJ point to the Supreme Court's 2012 ruling that upheld ObamaCare's individual mandate under Congress's taxing power. Now that Congress has repealed the mandate penalty as part of last year's tax bill – while technically keeping the mandate itself in place – they argue the mandate is no longer a tax and is now invalid." That's the nuts & bolts right there. So, your point is.............?

The DOJ has nothing to do with health insurance. Good lord, read a %$#@ing book, for crying out loud.

I have a better idea, Einstein - why not tell us what you think. I'm sure this will be most illuminating indeed.

That is honestly one of the most stupid things I've ever seen anyone say here, which is really saying something. Go think about that for a while before getting back to me.

Because you can't insure that something that has already happened might not happen. You can't buy homeowner's insurance to cover a fire that has already burned your house down. Is this %&#$ really that hard to understand?

Why does it need to be "financial conservatives" (whatever the $#@% that is supposed to mean) overspending the budget?

For Foxx:

It's too bad that "petards" isn't a synonym for "scrotum".

He's trolling. You guys must see this. He's like Gator, only way, way lamer (no Gator, that's neither a compliment or an endorsement). For the life of me, I'll never understand why so many people give legitimacy to people like Gary. Gary, Baskin, Gator, 34, LA Grant, the bug, and the like are not the slightest bit interested in dialogue, debate, or discussion. They know that there are a select few here that they can count on to provide them entertainment by yanking any chain they can find. You guys are being played. Seriously, why bother - does anyone actually learn anything from the exchange? Does anyone come away wiser for having engaged? Does coming out on top from a head to head exchange with any of them somehow impart a feeling of accomplishment? Personally, I see as much value in trying to convince a pile of crap that it stinks. Try as you might, when all is said and done, it's still just a pile of crap, and it always will be.

Especially since they have horses.

It kinda casts their slogan "we always get our man" in a new light, doesn't it?

So THAT's why them call them "mounties".

One of the very few pundits I actually listened to, I've always held him in the highest regard whether or not I agreed with him.

No, I agree with Rob's House completely. There was nothing extreme or spiteful in what he originally posted, the bulk of which I believe to be both accurate and well-stated. Your reply on the other hand, was condescending and came off as being unnecessarily arrogant. It was almost as if you were emoting rather than intellectualizing.

No, I believe he means that many people emote, mainly because they lack the fundamental understanding of civics, politics, and current affairs that would afford them a more informed opinion.

If you've been at it for that long, then I'm compelled to ask: who exactly is abusing who?

I have no idea what O'Reilly said, and I don't care. We're talking about what YOU said. Deflect if it makes you feel good. You're not going to change anyone's mind by doing so, though.

If believing that makes you feel better, then by all means.... You refer to an African American woman as "Aunt Jemima" because she's African American, I say that's racist. Disagree? I couldn't care less. Live with it.

Holy crap, talk about the pot and the kettle. In the immortal words of Bugs Bunny, what a maroon! When you call people stupid, you may wish to do a spell and grammar check when making those pronouncements, because I know farm hands with a 3rd grade education that have a more extensive vocabulary and can spell freaking circles around your illiterate ass. And it's great that people here provide entertainment for you, because trust me - you return the favor in spades. You very obviously don't read most of what people here post, because most people here are extremely critical of Trump. You don't let that, or any other facts stop you though - you just soldier on with your pin-headed, monosyllabic diatribes, completely oblivious to the fact that we are all laughing at you. Thank you. It's you and people like you that provide a needed respite from the intellectual exchange that occurs here daily.

Most people here know them for the biased, spin-merchants that they are. But seriously - Aunt Jemima? C'mon, man - nobody wants to hear that racist shite.

Thank you - best laugh of the day!

Good luck!