DrunkBomber

QUOTE (Ezio Auditore @ May 19, 2016 -> 11:02 PM) Nah, they already wanted to do this, what are they gonna do, like super duper extra wanna do it? Just because they wanted to do it doesnt mean they would always be willing to take the risks involved in actually doing it. This gives them an added incentive.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 19, 2016 -> 03:57 PM) I would have felt better about Bergdahl had they not paraded him home as a hero. They still shold have done what it takes to bring him home (as they do with other americans who break laws in foreign countries by and are disappeared) The most recent season of the Serial Podcast was all about Bergdahl and thats what REALLY soured me on the whole trade. It seems like there was so much shady back door stuff going on to be able to get this trade to go through including bypassing the mandatory vetting that is conducted by numerous government agencies to determine if a gitmo prisoner is released if they will be a threat down the road. According to the podcast it sounded like whoever was running this show knew the 5 guys wouldnt be cleared so they just skipped the whole process and pushed the deal through. I also think it sets a bad precedent. Youd think any Americans over seas could be more appealing to capture knowing that we will do unbalanced prisoner exchanges.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 19, 2016 -> 10:07 AM) Just wanted to point out, I read this. I have had the times where I've sat down to write down my thoughts for this board. I enjoyed this and appreciated it, but that Elizabeth Warren thing is not an accurate representation of Hillary Clinton. When that bill was sent to Bill Clinton it was done so with a republican majority congress. He pocket vetoed it. Then Hillary Clinton was elected to the senate as part of a +4 pickup of the dems. The senate makeup was then 50/50 split, with a Republican president. The house was majority republican. At the time, democrats did not run the senate as it is today with requiring 60 votes, so the bankruptcy bill would have been reintroduced and signed. Clinton then used her influence to say she would sign the bill to make it bi-partisan, and watered down the bill to still allow single mothers to collect cihld payments evn after the father declares bankruptcy (seriously, this would have been part of the Republican bill). So yes, this is an example of how clinton rules. She saw a fight coming that would hurt people, and engaged in the fight to make it hurt as little as possible. I'm sure Sanders probably abstained and can keep his purity. But a whole of people are better off because she took this fight. Clinton's remarks on the floor: Senator Clinton: I rise today in support of final passage of S. 420, the Bankruptcy Reform Act. Many of my colleagues may remember that I was a strong critic of the bill that passed out of the 106th Congress. While we have yet to achieve the kind of bankruptcy reform I believe is possible, I have worked with a number of people to make improvements that bring us closer to our goals, particularly when it comes to child support. Women can now be assured that they can continue to collect child support payments after the child’s father has declared bankruptcy. The legislation makes child support the first priority during bankruptcy proceedings. This year, we have made more progress. The Senate agreed to include a revised version of Senator Schumer’s amendment to ensure that any debts resulting from any act of violence, intimidation, or threat would be nondischargeable. Earlier today, this body agreed to include a cap on the homestead exemption to ensure that wealthy debtors could not shield their wealth by purchasing a mansion in a state with no cap on homestead exemption. In addition, I was concerned about competing nondischargeable debt so I worked hard with Senator Boxer to ensure that more credit card debt can be erased so that women who use their credit cards for food, clothing and medical expenses in the 90 days before bankruptcy do not have to litigate each and every one of these expenses for the first $750. Let me be very clear—I will not vote for final passage of this bill if it comes back from conference if these kind of reforms are missing. I am voting for this legislation because it is a work in progress, and it is making progress towards reform. QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 19, 2016 -> 02:39 PM) I'll try to explain it the best I can, but the "individual mandate" isn't about "finding people who can't afford insurance." It's an disincentive/stick for people who would otherwise choose to not have insurance; now, in practice, there's going to be a healthy mix of people who 'choose' not to have health insurance because they can't afford it or could only marginally afford it and choose to spend that money on something else, and then there's a lot of younger, generally healthy people who would just otherwise choose to go without insurance and hope for the best. When you are going to institute regulatory requirements like guaranteed issue that mean you can get insurance regardless of any current or previous illnesses, there's a big economic incentive to not carry insurance until you need it and then purchase it when you do. The problem is that this creates a death spiral in the insurance market place since insurance companies are left without a large pool of insurance premiums being paid by people who don't necessarily need to draw on their insurance. What the law attempts to do is to eliminate or minimize the people who would fall into "can't afford insurance and would be fined" category a few of ways. The first is the massive expansion of Medicaid, which was unfortunately gutted by Roberts in the 2012 Obamacare ruling over the individual mandate. Several million more people who are marginally above the poverty line would have Medicaid coverage today instead of needing to pay for private insurance or pay the fine. The second way to was require parental policies to cover children to the age of 26--this keeps lots of young adults who would be the most likely to voluntarily forego insurance on more affordable employer-sponsored family plans. The third way is through the subsidies available through the federal and state exchanges. This provides an incentive/carrot for people to choose insurance over the fine, even if the insurance is a little more expensive. I'm sure there are better write-ups out there, but that's the basic logic behind the individual mandate. Without that but with the other regulatory improvements, the private insurance market would collapse. I really appreciate both of you guys taking the time to try and explain some of this stuff. Its great when we can have civil conversations about things we disagree on since there are a lot of very smart people on this forum. I have such huge concerns with all of the candidates on both sides. There are 2 other things Ive seen online that kind of blew my mind about both Sanders and Clinton but since it never picked up traction in the media I assumed it had to be fake to some degree. First for Hillary, another thing I read was that the Clinton Foundation pays female execs much lower than they pay men. I know that source is trash but it links to their IRS forms so who knows. Could that really be true? If it is it looks pretty bad imo. Then my issue with Bernie is I read he only paid 13.5% federal income taxes. I want to reiterate Im not claiming either of these as facts. Im just curious if someone who knows a little more about this stuff can shed some light on it. If either is true it really exposes hypocrisy in both of the core foundations of their campaigns. Trump has enough detractors but I did getting a kick out of hearing him say something along the lines of "You know I have the best math, people always tell me how great my math is." Great Presidential quote imo.

Ive never been fond of Obama's politics but I have always found him likable, and thought he did an amazing job at getting people who have felt alienated by Washington inspired again. I think it was important to finally have a President who wasnt an old white guy as well. A couple things that bothered me about Obama's presidency were the Iran deal and the prisoner exchange for Bergdahl. I know he had a hostile congress and that made things difficult at times. I want everyone to get health care as much as the next person but I really dont like some aspects of Obamacare, particularly that they fine people who cant afford to pay for health care. Dont get me wrong, I think its great that people who were previously uninsurable are guaranteed coverage. I just genuinely dont understand the logic of fining people who cant afford insurance. Hillary is a different story for me. Id rather have Obama be the President for the rest of my life than have her as President for a single day. She is the most untrustworthy candidate I can think of in my lifetime. She has been a part of so much corruption for so long. Id honestly prefer Trump to be President than her (Im shuttering just typing that) That video that greg posted a few pages back of Elizabeth Warren telling a story of a personal experience she had with Hillary where Hillary convinced Bill to veto a bill sponsored by credit card companies about bankruptcy and then when the bill came up again when Hillary was a senator and she voted for the bill. Warren says that Hillary was bought by the credit card companies and the financial influence was too much. Thats exactly what Bernie brings up at all of the debates and she laughs it off and claims shes never swayed by money. Bernie is another guy who I REALLY dont like his politics but he comes across as the most honest politician and I believe the things that he says. This election really makes me sad for the future of our country. I cant believe there isnt a candidate on either side that I can even get a little excited about. Edit-Forgot to mention. Obama's Press correspondence dinners (or whatever theyre called) where he roasts people are hilarious. I was really surprised how funny he can be and keep a straight face.

QUOTE (Ezio Auditore @ May 17, 2016 -> 09:31 AM) I don't remember the name of the sports app but if you've ever streamed a NBA or NFL game off firstrowsports.eu or some similar site, it's basically that. They're so-so, and I haven't been able to figure out how to get HD. I'm probably doing something wrong. I haven't used Navi-X but I don't really imagine it would be that different for Exodus. All it really does, far as I can tell, is find websites that stream the movie. Only complaint I have so far is they're all with 2.0 codecs but if I cared that much I'd just get the Blu-Ray. Also I kept having problems watching Creed, where it kept stopping to buffer, but I think that was the site doing that. It's not my internet connection, I have plenty of bandwidth, and no other apps do that. Ya I like exodus too, it just seems navi-x has waaaaay more of an HD selection. I even saw a good amount of movies that were either still in theaters or just out of theaters that were in HD, werent cams and had no subtitles, not sure how that happened but it was pretty nice. Navi-x almost has a peer 2 peer feel to it. There are just tons of channels made by users who put their movie and tv collections online for others to stream, (most of them post their paypal for donations but its all free, obv) Im not sure if youre familiar with YIFY torrents, but theres a channel on there with pretty much all of that stuff available to stream. I doubt Ill use it for sports unless its a ppv UFC or boxing if all the sports apps are similar to what you described (which is also what Ive noticed so far)

QUOTE (Ezio Auditore @ May 17, 2016 -> 07:55 AM) Get an Amazon fire stick and put Kodi on it, and then load Exodus onto Kodi. You can watch literally anything. Its crazy this is the last post in here. I just got a fire stick with kodi on it yesterday and was going to come on here and see if anyone else was familiar with kodi to get some app recommendations. So far Navi-X seems by far the best for movies. Im skeptical that any live sports will stream that well but who knows.

BernieBots are an epidemic

Apparently the Bernie Bros at the Nevada Democratic Convention were doing some more of what they do best.

Everyday I wake up and hope that there are still people on Soxtalk willing to dedicate multiple paragraph responses to things greg says. It makes me feel like anything is still possible. Good dude.

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ May 13, 2016 -> 12:48 PM) I'm still in utter disbelief that Trump is the Republican nominee. Does the GOP even f***ing care about their brand anymore? The GOP seemingly did just about anything you can to prevent it. What more could they have done?

Anyone else think that Richard fell on purpose at the end of Silicon Valley because they wanted them to see the skunkworks plans? Maybe its part of their plan or something, but its hard to believe Richard would do something that ridiculously stupid if it wasnt part of the plan.

QUOTE (bmags @ Apr 29, 2016 -> 08:29 AM) Strange definition of "admit". As if he sending this out on his own He was asked flat out by a reporter if he took money and he said yes.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Apr 25, 2016 -> 08:37 PM) and given that truism, isn't Hillary the most capable leader of the current field if we take the "trustworthiness" as an even across the board? This is the funniest thing Ive seen someone say on the internet in weeks.

omg, that whole sequence from Kane was unreal.

Kasich needs to be better at victim blaming, maybe take a page out of the Clintons playbook.

apartments.com, trulija, padmapper

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 12, 2016 -> 06:55 AM) Greg, lay off Hillary. She knew her husband was screwing dozens of other women and stayed married to him anyway. She's a model that all married women should strive to follow. Dont forget all the sexual assaults.

You almost have to wonder why tax payers have to foot the bill for these primaries and caucuses when they apparently mean absolutely nothing. How much do they spend on all of this and then not use?

Ya I got Quantum Break without knowing anything about it and was kind of taken back by the long video clips. I lost patience during the first one after about 10 minutes in, the game play has been fun so far though.

QUOTE (farmteam @ Apr 4, 2016 -> 07:34 PM) I'm interested in the numbers too. But I think Balta has a point re: your statement that it would be the most damning thing. The guy has called to ban an entire class of people from this country and has advocated for war crimes, not to mention wanting to punish women who get abortions. I don't think these numbers would make any sort of dent at all. Even if you come at it from the angle that the people voting for him may love to bomb the families of terrorists, but not if he gets gobs of money from the government...I just think they simply won't care. But seriously, I want to know what those numbers would be as well. They must be massive. I completely disagree with Trumps politics regarding abortions, but the people who keep trying to push the narrative that Trump said he wants to punish all women who get abortions are ridiculous. He was asked "If abortions were illegal?" It was just a gotcha question by Anderson Cooper so the masses of people who get their news from Gawker have something to tell their friends.

QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 29, 2016 -> 02:26 PM) "Eye in the Sky" will be one of the best films I'll see this year. Where did you see it?

We just got rid of one child in the clubhouse, we dont need to add another.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Mar 25, 2016 -> 03:28 PM) Except it wasn't his PAC, it was Rubio's PAC before he dropped out, and they hate trump. It still benefited Ted Cruz and said to vote for him on it. I dont really care either way, the mud slinging is beyond ridiculous at this point, but Ted Cruz is no victim.

So what hes saying is that if his superpac attacks Trumps wife that isnt his responsibility or fault. But if the National Enquirer publishes something about him than its Trumps fault.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Mar 24, 2016 -> 05:35 PM) Stupid too...I can't stand Cruz either. Evidently I'm not a republican and given the most recent RAND poll, its becoming more evident that my values no longer are consistent with the party. That parties priorities are not fiscal policy anymore, they are backwards ass social issues and religious issues. Just as the democrats pander to certain demographics (unions, etc) the republicans have gone bat s*** pandering to other demographics (religious right). Here I am who, mr millenial, socially liberal, actually open to thinks like health care, etc (and no I'm not anti religion, but I don't see how gay marriages hurt anyone and how anyone could lose sleep because they had to "marry a gay" or "bake a cake for a gay"), but who is fiscally conservative. If one thing can come out of this process, maybe we'll truly end with a third party, which can at least get some candidates who fit into my group, otherwise I'm going to have a hard time voting and end up in a fully independent trench never getting any legislation that I think is meaningful done and we'll spend the next 30 years going through era's with obamacae type policies coming in and than era's where everything done during that wave is repealed only to go back in full swing. Hello...can people get over the high hump and bring back some common decency and work together on goals that overall aliane with this country that the majority of the people vote for, vs. making everything and anything partisan? Please...pretty please? I digress though, a vote for Trump is a vote for everything that would make America awful. Its a vote for going back to the "good ole days" and I say that as sarcastically as possible. Ya its a depressing time for a large sect of republicans. I also consider myself very socially liberal but we wont have a socially liberal republican candidate anytime soon because we can see what the GOP establishment does when they dont agree with a candidate. Unless there is some overhaul in campaign finance its likely to remain like this.