Somewhat political post, non baseball

[NorCalAtlFan]

though, in light of today's news, i am coming around to a donald's view of McCain.

[KJ Duke]

though, in light of today's news, i am coming around to a donald's view of McCain.

Don't forget, Donald is a closet Democrat. He'll go whichever side he thinks will get him more *****.

[NorCalAtlFan]

closet? he's an out and out democrat. this is all an act. he's proving he's twice the actor of regan.

[KJ Duke]

closet? he's an out and out democrat. this is all an act. he's proving he's twice the actor of regan.

Ehh, seems like he's gone telenovela which anyone can pull off.

I gotta give Reagan the edge here. He took a premise, stuck to the script and created an enduring legacy right up there with MASH and the Sopranos.

[COZ]

Huffington Post.[/i]

Lol. You lost me at Huffington Post. Is that where the anger (passion?) comes from... the feminist within, trapped inside?

No, I didn't write this as you can see, but it's one of the best articles I've read out there on why people feel the need to hate Hillary Clinton. So let's stop with this bullshit of even attempting to put Trump in the same league as HRC let alone comparing his horrific level of ignominy as equal to hers. It's not. It isn't. And it never has been nor will it ever be even close. If you want to come on here as a Republican who longs for a capable candidate who espouses Republican values and a conservative platform, great. I have all the respect in the world for you because it's part of what makes our Democracy great. But if you want to be a Republican (or worse yet, someone from the Alt Right camp) and come on here espousing the "virtues" of a Donald Trump or a Trump presidency as good for this country, you are misinformed or have been sadly misguided, and your position of supporting him at this point is indefensible, though I'm sure some of you will continue to try. So be it, but I'm not going to engage it. Is Hillary the perfect candidate for the presidency? No, but she is the best one who is running by far.

Just throwing my usual, non-polarizing and populace position into the ring as I always do. Now back to my hibernation until baseball drafting resumes for me in November.

Although your post was made yesterday, I will give you the benefit of the doubt, since you appear to be a HuffPost lap dog, & thus are likely unaware of these "WikiHackLeaks," that came out a week ago. But, unfortunately for the Democrats, & unfortunately for all Americans, Wikileaks has pretty much proven everything in this article to be false. And it is quite brilliant by the author here, laying out the case, without ever saying it, that if you don't vote for such a "well-qualified" candidate, that there is something wrong with YOU (sexist?), but not her. Typical liberal spin: the problem is with YOU the voter, not with this perfect candidate. But keep lapping up the BS the Huffington Post & MSM is serving on a daily basis & quit pretending why YOU don't know why people are not just not voting for Hillary, but despise her. The truth is finally coming out. You can either pay attention or keep patting yourself on the back because 'tsk gosh o golly, doesn't it feel just so good to be free & liberated from the shackles of your own racism & sexism to help elect the first woman president after electing the first Black president. "Everybody just pat yourselves on the backs....by voting for them, you showed us, you PROVED you're not sexist nor racist like these other people, welcome to the club, your're not the problem, it's these other people." Fools.

[NorCalAtlFan]

closet? he's an out and out democrat. this is all an act. he's proving he's twice the actor of regan.

Ehh, seems like he's gone telenovela which anyone can pull off.

I gotta give Reagan the edge here. He took a premise, stuck to the script and created an enduring legacy right up there with MASH and the Sopranos.

that's a reach. i'll give you three's company however

[King of Queens]

"Alternative" candidates:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3O01EfM5fU

[KJ Duke]

"Alternative" candidates:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3O01EfM5fU

"QE is a magic trick and that's all you need to know about it", Jill Stein. Outstanding. I presume she heard a one-liner from an economist once and it stuck with her. She doesn't know what it means but likes the sound of it.

I like Gary's "general" philosophies but I don't get the sense he's "quite" as prepared as he would be if he thought he had a shot. Having a consumption tax predominantly replace income tax should be a focal point, but the starting point of any tax policy fix should be eliminating payroll taxes. That's a day one boost to the economy and job growth.

[headhunters]

a couple of points- and these are pretty obvious to me- there are more and more people that owe their living to one of the parties. my dad owed his to the democrats and never hid that. by the time he died he hated the what the democratic party had become. died a reagan democrat in 1986. he would have really HATED nafta because even with an 8th grade education he would have known that wasn't going to help the "working man". he would have been extremely disappointed to learn reagan made government A LOT bigger and therefor lied about being a "conservative'. pretty sure that reagan saw what happened to goldwater and was having none of that. my dad would then read what edward kings wrote and saw that the big republican on the board who has all the facts and figures on the great republican party just wrote that reagan took the debt from 32% to 49%of gdp. a more than 50% increase in just 8 years WITH GOOD RESULT. dear edward- you may be a republican but you are no fiscal conservative. you wrap war under conservative. war is not conservative- it is war. conservatives do not believe increasing govt debt is good. they NEVER believe government creates jobs. true conservatives never say that. republicans say that. which is disgusting to me because in the 50's 60's and 70's they sure didn't. now i am making an assumption for you by assuming the good result was the demise of the soviet union. if that is it- here is my problem with that stupid logic- russia is still dangerous as is china and worse the republicans and now many a democrat want us to spend about 5 trillion to defeat about 50,000 terrifying people in the middle east. the reason those guys are there is because the repubs rushed off to defeat irag because they had those" weapons of mass destruction". and got us into another war. just stop. you are the party of hate and war- that is it. ya i am against obomacare- but the old system was completely broken and the repubs never came up with anything viable and so the dems did and it sucks. you did come up with war- which cost the u.s. way more than obomacare. you edward, are that guy with his head in the sand. your party is toast. you need those racists and gun lovers and war mongers to vote or you are nothing as trump is proving. the only way you win is if the economy tanks and you can blame hilary and wink at each other knowing full well she didn't cause the economy to tank. what a joke. if your wife or someone in the family owes their job to the repubs- just admit it- but if not then all i can say is look at kj's picture of the guy with his head in the sand and that is you. all you need to know about your republican part is that i see all these republican "leaders' saying they can't vote for trump even though trump got more votes from their constituents than any republican in history. he is more republican than any of them- the votes prove it. but WORSE they won't endorse the libertarian candidates even though both of them were republicans. the platform must be too conservative for your party- you know not spending trillions on WAR. hate and war- that is your party. conservative? no -WAR. they are not homonyms.

[headhunters]

kj- just read your 'get rid of payroll taxes". are you referring to the employer part or both the employer and employee. the employer part i agree with but unfortunately both parties have spent us into a situation where the taxes have to come from somewhere. not triple taxation like we have now but some taxation.

[Edwards Kings]

Oops!

[Edwards Kings]

my dad would then read what edward kings wrote and saw that the big republican on the board who has all the facts and figures on the great republican party just wrote that reagan took the debt from 32% to 49%of gdp. a more than 50% increase in just 8 years WITH GOOD RESULT.

Never hid nor denied the facts about what Reagan did. The argument that some people make is the result. I say the result was good and laid the foundation for the longest period of peacetime economic growth.

dear edward- you may be a republican but you are no fiscal conservative. conservatives do not believe increasing govt debt is good.

Depends on what you define a fiscal conservative is. I define it as spend what you have, not more, and when you do spend it had better be a good investment. There is such a thing as an amount of debt that can be carried with a healthy economy. But let me say again, I am now an Independent as the Repiglicans have fouled themselves too completely.

you wrap war under conservative. war is not conservative- it is war.

Not sure where this is coming from, my friend. I do believe in a strong defense. I believe based on what I have seen and based on what I have studied that a strong defense and dealing from a position of strength prevents war, saves lives, and protects our natural rights.

they NEVER believe government creates jobs.

What I define as a fiscal conservative believes (correctly) that a healthy free economy is better served when the private sector is the lead in creating jobs. You seem to have some opinion (correct me if I am wrong) that it is by the benevolent
hand of the Government that jobs are created. That somehow power and privilege flows from the Government to the People. If you do, you share much with President Obama and Secretary Clinton. I instead believe the power flows from the people in this Republic to the Government.

President Obama and Secretary Clinton would do well to read the entire Constitution as well as the Federalist Papers. Unless you, like much of leadership of both parties, feel the Constitution (you know...that thing they all swore to uphold) is just an archaic relic of our past.

now i am making an assumption for you by assuming the good result was the demise of the soviet union.

Yes. You are correct. It was a good thing. Now the Russian people have allowed a feckless thug (buff though he may be) take them a step back. Still, the demise of the USSR was, without fear of rational contradiction a good thing even if Russia now creates a renewed challenge to world peace.

I wish we had a strong leader with a history of success in foreign relations in the Oval Office or the bullpen. I truly do.

if that is it- here is my problem with that stupid logic- russia is still dangerous as is china and worse the republicans and now many a democrat want us to spend about 5 trillion to defeat about 50,000 terrifying people in the middle east. the reason those guys are there is because the repubs rushed off to defeat irag because they had those" weapons of mass destruction". and got us into another war. just stop. you are the party of hate and war- that is it.

Not sure who crapped in your Wheaties! this morning and why you thought it was me, but ok, old friend, let's see if we can get the genie back in the bottle.

I did not realized I was a Party. Do I get matching funds now? Since I was once a Republican, I will go out on a limb and infer that you feel the Republicans are historically Hawks whereas Democrats are historically Doves. I do not believe that.

WWI - President T. Woodrow Wilson (D)
WWII - President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (D)
Korea - President Harry S Truman (D)
Vietnam - President John F. Kennedy (D); When the decision was made to allow "Advisors" into active combat.
Vietnam - President Lyndon B. Johnson (D); Escalation
Gulf War I - President George H. W. Bush (R); 2 August 1990 – 28 February 1991; US casualties during that period was 327. Total Coalition other than the US 383.
Gulf War II - President George W. Bush (R); 20 March 2003 to 1 May 2003 if measured to the end of the Ba'athist regime. US casualties, including the subsequent civil war were 4,424 total deaths (including both killed in action and non-hostile) and 31,952 wounded.

Just for frame of reference, in March 2013, the total cost of the Iraq War was estimated to have been $1.7 trillion by the Watson Institute of International Studies at Brown University. Or about two years of President Obama and the current Congress additions to the National Debt...in what is described as peacetime.

You were and are still obviously against the Gulf conflicts, and I will not argue the point as you will never believe I guess that there is a time and a place to defend your interests. But you can take from the list above that certain administrations from both parties have decided that use of arms was necessary for national defense.

ya i am against obomacare- but the old system was completely broken and the repubs never came up with anything viable and so the dems did and it sucks.

Grab your nuts on this one...I agree.

you did come up with war

Nope. Not that powerful. Hell, I have to ask my wife for permission to go outside by myself.

- which cost the u.s. way more than obomacare.

Technically correct...for now. President Obama has touted Affordable Care Act as a way to save money on health care costs. New projections from the Congressional Budget Office, however, anticipate that the federal government will need to spend more on Obamacare than previously thought. The non-partisan office estimates that the program will cost the federal government $1.34 trillion over the next decade, an increase of $136 billion from the CBO’s predictions in 2015. In 2016 alone, Obamacare will cost a total of $110 billion.

So, for now, yes, slightly lower than the $1.7 trillion. But this number does not cover how much more WE are spending as individuals.

you edward, are that guy with his head in the sand.

I am sorry you disagree with my posts. I try to actually back my opinions up with facts and quote my sources, which I know can be difficult to those who choose to argue with insult and hyperbole.

your party is toast.

My wife says I can't have toast...too much gluten. Sorry.

you need those racists and gun lovers and war mongers to vote or you are nothing as trump is proving.

You are one for four. I love my guns (Second Amendment to the US Constitution when you get to your assigned reading...want to borrow a highlighter?).

the only way you win is if the economy tanks and you can blame hilary and wink at each other knowing full well she didn't cause the economy to tank. what a joke.

Correct again. The joke part. Amazing how an economic decline is never a Democrats fault.

if your wife or someone in the family owes their job to the repubs- just admit it- but if not then all i can say is look at kj's picture of the guy with his head in the sand and that is you.

Sorry you are so frustrated with me. I do not support Secretary Clinton, whom I believe is not qualified. I do not support Donald Trump, whom I believe is not qualified.

You seem to be doing your best to insult me personally throughout your post and only our long association has kept me from responding in kind. If you disagree with me, fine.

all you need to know about your republican part is that i see all these republican "leaders' saying they can't vote for trump even though trump got more votes from their constituents than any republican in history. he is more republican than any of them- the votes prove it. but WORSE they won't endorse the libertarian candidates even though both of them were republicans. the platform must be too conservative for your party- you know not spending trillions on WAR. hate and war- that is your party. conservative? no -WAR. they are not homonyms.

I am sorry. Perhaps you have me confused with Reince Priebus. You can contact him at [email protected].

[KJ Duke]

kj- just read your 'get rid of payroll taxes". are you referring to the employer part or both the employer and employee. the employer part i agree with but unfortunately both parties have spent us into a situation where the taxes have to come from somewhere. not triple taxation like we have now but some taxation.

Payroll tax on both sides is a pure disincentive to hire workers. Absolutely the worst tax possible given the employment problem we have. Dump it 100%.

Federal spending could be cut in half over time, in the meantime consumption tax on non-basic goods should replace payroll and the bulk of income taxes. I'd probably get rid of all income tax on households earning less $100-150K, focus on consumption.

Income tax is a disincentive to work, something we don't need for people trying to provide for their families.
Consumption tax is a disincentive for consumerism, I'm fine with that.

[cfolson]

Federal spending could be cut in half over time

Please tell me more.

[KJ Duke]

Cut them all, Clark.

Healthcare costs would fall dramatically if the industry had to compete like every other industry in the world and wasn't gov't funded, except where necessary. In addition to gov't payments ramping way back, the starting points for fixing the HC industry are open price competition for all services and tort reform to bring ridiculously costly liability under control.

Same for education, it can be provided far more cost effectively by the private sector. And defense spending is based on a 1960's world. They can all be cut, a lot. On top of that, tons of govt departments have no business being in existence as such services can be provided by the private sector or local governments.

Pretty much all large organizations ▬ big businesses, labor unions, other special interests ▬ deplete gov't resources by minimizing competition via regulation thereby securing excessive payments. It used to be that big business wanted to minimize regulation, the opposite is true in most industries now as the largest cos pursue more regulation to eliminate competition and raise prices. Your very own labor union, the Teachers, is probably the country's worst offender as unions go, although much of that is at the State level. In terms of business, it's the financial services, legal and healthcare industries. So long as we keep tolerating this corrupt two-party system, it's not going to change.

[cfolson]

Cut them all, Clark.

Healthcare costs would fall dramatically if the industry had to compete like every other industry in the world and wasn't gov't funded, except where necessary. In addition to gov't payments ramping way back, the starting points for fixing the HC industry are open price competition for all services and tort reform to bring ridiculously costly liability under control.

Same for education, it can be provided far more cost effectively by the private sector. And defense spending is based on a 1960's world. They can all be cut, a lot. On top of that, tons of govt departments have no business being in existence as such services can be provided by the private sector or local governments.

Pretty much all large organizations ▬ big businesses, labor unions, other special interests ▬ deplete gov't resources by minimizing competition via regulation thereby securing excessive payments. It used to be that big business wanted to minimize regulation, the opposite is true in most industries now as the largest cos pursue more regulation to eliminate competition and raise prices. Your very own labor union, the Teachers, is probably the country's worst offender as unions go, although much of that is at the State level. In terms of business, it's the financial services, legal and healthcare industries. So long as we keep tolerating this corrupt two-party system, it's not going to change.

If only it was that easy.

I do agree that healthcare costs are out of hand, but privatization would be even worse. Look at people with without employer or ACA insurance.

Private education has already proven to be a disaster. Arguing that the private sector does the better is simply false.

I am all for cutting defense spending. You might find push back from Republicans, though.

Arguing that the government is the problem here has been proven false over and over.

P.S. I'm not a member of a union.

[KJ Duke]

If only it was that easy.

None of it easy, it's all very difficult given how we allow gov't to operate. Politicians manipulate public opinion and do deals behind closed doors to support their benefactors. Nothing gov't supported can possibly be executed efficiently so long as we let that happen.

I do agree that healthcare costs are out of hand, but privatization would be even worse.

Privatization creates competition. Competition lowers cost, expands options. If you need an example of the contrary look at the runaway inflation caused by Obama's plan. Single-payor ▬ Hilary's rumored next-step plan ▬ would be the single-highest cost, lowest option plan. Indisputable, basic economic fact. Flat-out dangerous to our well-being.

Arguing that the government is the problem here has been proven false over and over.

... aaannndd we have a new leader for most outrageous statement. I could go industry by industry detailing one failure after another. Or you could just read about one of 300,000 books on the subject. No clue what you mean, but bad gov't can be traced to virtually every major economic and social problem.

Private education has already proven to be a disaster. Arguing that the private sector does the better is simply false.

I'd say the public sector and govt funding of the private sector has been the disaster. I'll presume you're referring to the for-profit sector as the "disaster", as that is a favorite target of liberals since it presents competition to many liberal-leaning groups in education who don't want competition. I analyzed the for-profit sector several years ago when considering investment in the public cos; went thru many of the misleading stats/stories/accusations that were thrown around publicly, spoke to both CEOs and critics, and found the negative industry broad-brush was highly biased and inaccurate ... that is what special interests do to protect themselves, they spin misleading stories and people who bite on media output are led to phony realities. There were/are some bad cos in the for-profits as well, but that can be said for public sector education and any other business sector.

John Oliver did a hatchet segment on the for-profits a few years ago ▬ funny as always, but highly inaccurate as it relied on incomplete and out of context data. Detailed analysis is painstaking, generally boring for most and can be hard to piece together so it's just much easier to believe a comedian, or reporter, that's accomplished in spinning a good story. And such is the age of relying on the media and their biases and the diminishment of good analysis.

[devilznj]

Wow...this is one scary board.

Anyone who votes for Hillary Clinton is voting for a proven liar and criminal.

Now proven that she paid homeless people cash to go to Trump rallies and incite violence.

It is proven she violated the Espionage Act by using an unsecured private server to transmit classified documents.

Possibly the only man in government who had any credibility - James Comey - is now covered in Clinton slime and has lost the respect of the American people for his ridiculous "explanation" why they didn't throw the book at this felon. And when you have the President, the Department of Justice and the FBI all lining up to protect a criminal and screw the people THAT IS A PROBLEM.

Hillary Clinton is for open borders....65 million people in this country can't speak English already thanks to Obama's open borders policy. Think your child or your grandchild is going to get a decent education when school budgets are being blown out of the water on English as a Second Language curriculum costs?

The Democrats just need a permanent underclass that they can bus to the voting booths every year to keep them in power. They don't give a crap about these illegal immigrants and they think even less of you.

Clinton is bought and paid for by George Soros...the king of open borders. Ask Germany how that is working out as women there fear going out as sexual attacks are now the norm there.

So you're offended by what Donald Trump has supposedly done to women?

Well thanks to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama who left Iraq unprotected leading to the birth and massive growth of ISIS there are now 10, 11, and 12 year old girls held prisoner in ISIS rape rooms where their day consists of waking up and getting raped multiple times and never seeing the light of day.

THAT offends me.

SHE offends me.

[Gekko]

Clinton ~ Felon and more of the same nation-degrading policies
Trump ~ Waffler and huge question mark when it comes to just about everything

Sad that this is what is being offered up as the choices. Enjoy what is left of America as we knew it.

[Edwards Kings]

Wow...this is one scary board.

This is a great board. Most of this discussion has been informative and generally tempered with respect. One wonders what would happen in Congress if similar discourse occurred. My guess is we would all be better off.

[headhunters]

kj- thanks. I don't disagree. devilzny. couldn't agree more. the only thing on Clinton- I think you meant to say what she did "should be" illegal. I just think the way the law is written the "knowingly" parts are going to be difficult to prove and that is why she wasn't indicted. could be wrong on that though. couple of funny things on the dems and Hilary; for years john john was made fun of for not being smart enough to pass the ny bar. given that dems always make fun of people by saying they are "the smart party' how is it that someone that graduated at the top of her class at yale law couldn't pass the bar in dc? went to Arkansas. I mean how ironic is that. you can't find a liberal that doesn't make fun of the south on intelligence and education. one other point on the republicans. somewhere in all these posts someone wrote about the blue states and lumped Illinois in with new York and California. just fyi to that person: Illinois has a republican governor. if the national republican party insists on their ridiculous platforms - then he is right- no repubs for president. but rauner (our governor) basically won by campaigning TOTALLY on fiscal issues. abortion, gay marriage, immigration etc. was no comment or not my job. that is of course the libertarian view. if the repubs did that- they would get a lot of votes. but they won't. in fact in Illinois you see the same commercial run by the dnc showing rauner saying " I will support the republican candidate" -before it became trump. I know this is the real reason that all these repubs are distancing themselves from trump. because that might cost them and guys like rauner their elections next time. trump- the guy that won the republican election in a LANDSLIDE. way more than McCain or Romney or bush. a LANDSLIDE

[Edwards Kings]

somewhere in all these posts someone wrote about the blue states and lumped Illinois in with new York and California. just fyi to that person: Illinois has a republican governor.

From 1992 to 2012, 19 States have voted for every Democratic candidate for President (six national elections in a row).

California
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Hawaii
Illinois
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
New Jersey
New York
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
Vermont
Washington
Wisconsin

Red or Blue. You be the judge.

[DOUGHBOYS]

This election is like Anj and Barn having to eat Aunt Bee's pickles.
The pickles being the rancid candidates shoved down our throats.
We, Andy and Barney, enduring.

[COZ]

My fellow Patriots, there has been some incredible internet stuff going down on the internet today that you need to check out. Briefly, Julian Assange, a true patriot & warrior for freedom, has been in exile at the Ecuadorian Embassy to avoid extradition to Sweden to face some BS rape charges & also in the past month was accused of "online sexual molestation," while on a website called ToddandClare.com You can read more about the BS charges here: http://www.inquisitr.com/3609216/julian ... -old-girl/

Well, through some incredible sleuthing, someone was able to tie this BS ToddandClare website to the Center for American Progress (founded by guess who? John Podesta & now funded by George Soros himself). You can read about how the connection unravels here: https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comm ... h=252a0c70

Here is a quick visual of the connection: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvIZuIrVMAAa0jg.jpg:large

Wikileaks Twitter feed actually retweeted this Reddit thread giving it some credibility. In a nutshell, if true, it shows Hillary's people (I.e. John Podesta's Center for American Progress) are behind the fabricated BS charges against Assange. Which leads to the question, if true, if they are willing to go to these lengths to set up Assange, what are they not capable of doing? Scary stuff.

More here :http://yournewswire.com/reddit-clinton- ... ange-pedo/
And here: http://emptylighthouse.com/what-todd-cl ... -203501400

Wake up Sheeple!

[devilznj]

That's what I fear the most...Hillary Clinton plus Democrat Senate, Democrat House (which is a long shot) and new Supreme Court appointees could mean the creation of the new Gestapo. Laugh if you must, but we are not that far away from that scenario.

Pay attention folks and stop listening to the main stream media!