caulfield12

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 08:19 PM) At what point are people going to wake up and realize that Trump wasn't "easy mode" If he were easy mode, why didn't any other GOP candidate beat him? He tapped into something that nobody realized was there besides Michael f***ing Moore. See third paragraph. Bill Clinton saw it coming a mile away. But Mook would never listen to him. You would think all of his political experience would have been an asset. Look where that speech was given, and when. Said Clinton: "It's a devastating thing for a person to get up and look in the mirror every morning and think every tomorrow is going to be like yesterday. I can tell just by looking in your faces you know that just by being here, you can make your tomorrows different if you choose. That's what we've got to do for all Americans so we can all rise together." (That's why she lost, they thought Trump would change things!) Minnesota Sen. Al Franken was also on hand to address the audience. Clinton said Franken's endorsement — and others — shows that Hillary Clinton is popular outside the political establishment, even as he touted endorsements from lobby groups. "You really think Al Franken is part of the political establishment? Planned Parenthood, the Human Rights Campaign, the League of Conservation Voters? All the Latino organizations, the American Nurses Association, the Congressional Black Caucus?" he said. Clinton also spoke about his wife's plan for student loan refinancing and making tuition aid more accessible to those in need if they are willing to work for it. (Too little, too late...Sanders already owned that issue.) http://www.wpr.org/bill-clinton-campaigns-hillary-appleton

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 08:15 PM) You don't know how much your opinion means to me as resident hard-line GOPer and Reddy fan favorite. Reddy, why did she want to be President, other than to be the first woman? It was never crystal clear. I don't even remember her campaign tagline, but we all know Trump's and Obama's. They tried 2-3 different ones but nothing stuck. I also find it pretty telling that a lot of Clinton Foundation initiatives are being wound down now that they're seemingly permanently out of power...that indicates to that me their motivations for helping people were more calculated and political than altruistic and philanthropic. Helping people is a lifetime calling to service that doesn't just stop when you lose an election.

Here's the problem. What are the odds that he global/foreign policy in 2-4 years from now is even more muddled? It's not anything specifically about Warren, Booker or even Sanders. Other than Bernie, pragmatism is sometimes necessary. Internal conflicts are often resolved on the side of holding onto power. Profiles in Courage...or Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, just not reality anymore. At some point, you have to stake a position and hold it. Obama did that on being against the war from the very beginning, and it became part of his brand. It could just as easily turned against him. It certainly was one of many decisions Hillary Clinton regretted. Yeah, you have to pick your battles, your moments. But it's easy to score points on price gouging in big pharma or criticize big banks. Nobody likes banks...not even most bankers. The one thing that's obvious is that a Democrat with keen insight on the military and foreign policy is going to be increasingly critical. Obama didn't have it, and it turned out to be largely hit and miss. Nobody will be perfect, and you can argue Hillary had all the experience in the world in this area, but she never could articulate her successes and why her policies were best for the country. She never developed a new vision or strategy for world affairs, and the Benghazi debacle cancelled out any of the good she might have accomplished. Hope/change candidates almost always win in the face of the establishment unless the country is at war.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/201...-defense-214500 So much for the idea of Mattis being a stabilizing presence...was wrong on that one. And it's telling that the Secretary of Defense with his record couldn't even convince Trump that "enhanced interrogation" was the wrong move. Just like the infighting with Conway, Bannon, Kushner and Priebus is going to tear one part of the White House up, the conflicts between JCS, Flynn and Mattis are going to be even more dangerous for the country. And Trump's already making idiotic statements about taking the oil from Iran/Iraq...why? It feels like Trump's ego requires a military conflict so he can (in his own mind at least) further burnish his credentials as a patriotic hero and leader in war. Of course, our best presidents with prior military service knew this was the last thing the country should go looking for unless there was absolutely no other option and "moral rightness" was on their side.

Probably the millions the Russians put out there, but the majority of those came after the Billy Bush/Access Hollywood tape release. In theory, attacks from your own party should only make you a better candidate. She didn't learn as much as she needed to in 2008. Her husband lost the governorship in Arkansas after one term but never lot again. It seems she and her staff completely ignored him on the need to contest states like Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin until it was too late in the game...spending more time on North Carolina, for example. http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/bern...nterview-215179 Those are just three key issues she flip flopped on when it became politically expedient. At any rate, the following story makes a lot of sense...as well. There are 100+ reasons she lost, obviously. Unlike many politicians, for whom loyalty is a one-way street, Clinton is loyal in return. And one of the lessons of her catastrophic defeat is the potential downside of loyalty. Clinton stuck by her husband through years of humiliating sexual scandals. She is sticking by him still, although a case could be made that his decision to stroll across the Phoenix airport for a chat with Attorney General Loretta Lynch effectively cost his wife the election, not only by reinforcing the public perception of the Clintons as inveterate string-pullers and corner-cutters, but by setting in motion the chain of events that led to FBI Director James Comey’s intervention in the campaign. And through the series of scandals involving Abedin’s husband, touched off by his habit of sending sexually suggestive pictures to strange women, Clinton stuck by her aide. In retrospect it was all too predictable that this association would blow up eventually, as it did when the FBI examined a laptop used by both Abedin and her husband, Anthony Weiner, and discovered a trove of emails to and from Clinton. If anyone on her campaign staff foresaw the potential for this kind of disaster, they evidently didn’t bring it up to Clinton, or if they did, she didn’t act on it. Cutting ties with Abedin in the midst of that ghastly embarrassment would have been emotionally wrenching for Clinton, who has described Abedin as like a second daughter. It would have been cruel to Abedin, and it would have been, above all, disloyal. But it might have saved the election. Clinton’s insistence on loyalty and discretion was shaped, no doubt, by her early experience in politics, in the 1970s and ’80s, when she was a lightning rod for her husband’s opponents, frequently on the defensive about imaginary scandals and invented conspiracy theories. The lesson of those years is that you minimize trouble by surrounding yourself with people who know how to keep their mouths shut. But that’s not how the world works now. You can build a wall around your headquarters, and hackers will penetrate it with ease; you can pen journalists inside a rope corral, but anyone with a smartphone can tweet a photo out to the world in seconds. You can’t control the news cycle any longer, so your best hope is to use all the tools of social and electronic media in a 24-hour race to get ahead of it. For all its vaunted expertise, the Clinton campaign never seemed to grasp that. And for all its internal chaos, the Trump team — or Trump himself — evidently did. https://www.yahoo.com/news/clinton-trump-an...-174941337.html

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 11:03 AM) It was more than that. The 2nd order expanded the initial DREAMERS order. Regardless, even though I was in favor of the move itself (allowing certain illegals that are already here to file for quick status if they passed certain criteria), I still argued against it being done unilaterally by the President. What's the point of having a legislature passing laws if the laws can be ignored per the directives of the President? Yes in an ideal world, you have to go through Congress, the President and get the okay from the SCOTUS about constitutionality. But who or what is the check on Trump now, other than the 2018 mid-terms? If the GOP showed any inclination to work together or compromise just once, Obama wouldn't had to keep circumventing them. And Trump is wiping out most of them anyway. Surely a Dem would do the opposite in 4 years, 25% of his/her campaign would be based on promising that.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 10:54 AM) LOL. You don't speak for me re: Booker and Warren. That type of attitude is why we have Trump. The reason we have Trump is the Clintons soaked up all the air in the room and leadership from the next generation (after the Baby Boomers) is lacking and/or never developed. Martin O'Malley was really the only other option? It would be one thing if Clinton had the same gravitas as 2008, but she already been fatally exposed, it's just that nobody had the cojones to stand up to the Clintons other than Sanders. Certainly not the DNC. By the way, that Clinton intimidation factor never got in the way of Obama. Maybe Michelle will say enough's enough and decide to run. And Biden could have won but his moment is past. He had the ability to speak directly to those middle class laborers Hillary never seemed to be able to connect with. Mattis/Sanders 2020, haha

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 10:43 AM) Those who were fine with Obama enacting an order to stop enforcement of immigration laws now see a problem with Trump enacting an order limiting immigration. Reap what you sow. Obama was in the wrong. But, Congress also had a responsibility to work together with the president and reach a compromise. They never even tried, not really. They just punted the problem down the line. And you're realistically going to gather up 11-12 million people, and evict them all...especially all the kids under 18 who grew up here? Even for the GOP, few have positions that extreme, and yet that would be technically carrying out the law. Well, that makes no sense after the money for education has already been invested in them. Quite a few of the kids don't even speak much more than barely passable Spanish. And a lot of those undocumented workers were already contributing to the economy by paying sales tax, rent or property tax (which was then paid by landlord/owner), etc. Obama, fwiw, has deported 2.5 million already, and there are 800-900,000 remaining with criminal backgrounds who also should becsent back, with more extreme penalties for trying to come back again if they had committed felonies.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 10:31 AM) Now we are seeing why the slow expansion of powers in the Presidency over the years is such a dangerous thing. We have watched each subsequent President take things a little bit further, until when we got a true lunatic in office, he is taking full advantage of all of these things without any sort of Presidential type of respect for this level of power. Trump has literally cut out Congress and is ruling by decree now. This why the Executive Order has always been dangerous and IMO should have been unconstitutional all along. Not to mention the Democrats made rules while in power that have completely neutered themselves in the Senate...in terms of the filibuster, specifically. Munchin, Price, DeVos, Carson, Sessions, Ross, Tillerson...no way they all get through at any other time in recent history. Daschle got stopped by a mere $15,000 in unpaid taxes, and he'd been majority leader. Fwiw, if the Pacific Trade agreement went to Congress, Trump would surely lose, so they should consider themselves fortunate that they don't have to cross him so early. Or completely compromise their core beliefs. By the way, us liberals are done with Warren and Booker. Bernie Sanders is the only one to remain consistent in his beliefs.

Iranian American families average $72,345 in yearly household income. White families average $59,968. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethni...ousehold_income Brilliant. Helpful for the economy, STEM areas in higher ed, high tech industry, physics, etc. How many terrorists attacks have there been in the US or abroad committed by Iranian-Americans? Maybe we should ban Russians because the 2 Boston bombers were from an area near Chechnya while we're at it.

Lopez doesn't qualify? 44 innings means he's still technically a rookie.

Not to mention Obana started out at 80 and GW Bush was at least 66% in 2001 if I can recall correctly. http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/25/politics/nei...ourt/index.html Well, at least now it's abundantly clear why Trump and the GOP want/ed Gorsuch for SCOTUS.

Not to mention that Tatis will probably end up at 3B, where we desperately need a player in the future. The contract was bad enough...but that was one of the biggest swindles off a false positive start the last 12 months, other than the Shelby Miller deal. Meanwhile, Adolfo is stuck in Low A ball. The one guy we identify correctly gets traded away. Props to Preller for being an expert on Latin American prospects...would be interesting to see the other names SD targeted.

QUOTE (brett05 @ Jan 25, 2017 -> 06:40 AM) Just the opposite. His approval has gone from 38 on election day to 45 on Jan 23 with 10 percent undecided. Still 20 net points behind Obama, 45/45 vs. 58+/38-. Maybe if they didn't shoot themselves in the foot everyday with nonsense and alternative facts the country would see him as fulfilling many of his campaign promises...but there's also no simple way to quantify the damage done to the trustworthiness of the administration with the rest of the world. Other than Israel, Russia and the Philippines, that measure of approval from the typical European country would only be around 15-25%...

Meanwhile, the Dutch government has said it will set up an international fund to counter the effects of Mr Trump's ban on US funding for abortions in developing countries. The Dutch development minister, Lilianne Ploumen, said withdrawing funding would not result in fewer abortions, but would increase dangerous abortion practices and cause more maternal deaths. Bbc.com

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trum...senators-234102 Two favorites have emerged for the Supreme Court nomination President Donald Trump has narrowed his first Supreme Court nomination to three finalists, with 10th Circuit judge Neil Gorsuch and 3rd Circuit judge Thomas Hardimanemerging as front-runners while 11th Circuit Judge Bill Pryor remains in the running but is fading, according to people familiar with the search process. As Gorsuch’s fortunes have risen, Pryor’s have dimmed. A 2006 George W. Bush appointee, Pryor is currently the subject of raging debate on an off-the-record group email list that includes many in the conservative legal and political communities, including many Republican Senate staffers, thanks to his decision to join the majority in Glenn v. Brumby, a 2011 opinion that protected transgender people from workplace discrimination. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Gorsuch Pretty impressive background, at least from a superficial glance. Only 49. http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/real-ti...-shortlist.html Story on Hardiman, also relatively young at 51. Kind of a Horatio Alger life. The Third Circuit is based in Philadelphia, but Hardiman, 51, spends most of his time in Pittsburgh, where he lives with his wife, Lori, who is a lawyer, and their three children. Among his fellow jurists on the Third Circuit is Trump’s sister, Maryanne Trump Barry. Hardiman, a graduate of Notre Dame University and the Georgetown University Law Center, came from humble beginnings. He is originally from Massachusetts. His father was a cabdriver, and Hardiman also drove a cab to help pay for law school. He was the first person in his family to attend college. Paul Titus, a Pittsburgh-based lawyer for Schnader Harrison, longtime friend of Hardiman’s, and a former colleague, said Hardiman did substantial amounts of pro bono work while he was in private practice. “If you look among circuit judges who are Republican in their 40s and 50s, it’s not surprising that his name would come up,” Titus said. "He is a very intelligent, careful and thoughtful lawyer. A very decent person." Hardiman is fluent in Spanish and was nominated to the U.S. District Court in Pittsburgh by President George W. Bush in 2003.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 24, 2017 -> 04:16 PM) so Warren's come out and said that she'll vote for Carson for HUD lol at me for thinking Democrats could make even token efforts in opposition. I'll take a Mattis/Sanders presidency at this point...still really miss Paul Wellstone. https://www.yahoo.com/news/state-senator-sh...-180422705.html George Orwell's estate must be elated...copies of 1984 are flying off the bookshelves. How long before the Trump administration bans it and Animal Farm (for offending the Russians)? Still, the weekend’s events did not arrive in a vacuum. There was the report last week in The Washington Post that the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History, known for high standards of accuracy, was selling a commemorative book about Mr. Trump riddled with questionable notions, such as that Hillary Clinton deserved more blame than Mr. Trump did for the so-called birther campaign questioning Mr. Obama’s citizenship. (After that report, the museum said it was removing the book pending an investigation into whether it met standards for accuracy. Nytimes

https://www.yahoo.com/news/state-senator-sh...-180422705.html The not so clever "someone hijacked my FB, cover your ass" explanation from Indiana State Senator for an idiotic tweet about the Women's March. Do Republicans actually brainstorm dumb things that they can say to make national news so they can then turn around and deny it and call it fake news when the story gets picked up?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 24, 2017 -> 06:29 PM) Based on the numbers I can find, Target Field played as a top 10 hitters park in the league last year. http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor http://www.espn.com/mlb/player/splits/_/id...09/brian-dozier Those splits should answer any question about his performance last season.

I can't believe they're going to protect DeVos from another hearing...when she doesn't know the difference between growth and proficiency or that schools have to comply with IDEA. And still confirm her regardless. Or Ben Carson. Perry. The new EPA head. Sessions...c'mon. That will unite the country? Not a single Hispanic-American out of 22 positions when they comprise 14-15% of the US population now? Take me back to that moment with Betsy DeVos, when it became very clear that she didn't know the difference between growth and proficiency. What was going through your mind when you realized what was happening? Al Franken When I had my courtesy meeting with her, it became very apparent very quickly that she did not know much of anything about education policy and that her whole experience with education was from her [vantage] point of advocacy of vouchers. If you're going to be taking money from the public school system, and giving it to kids to go to private schools and private religious schools, you have to be accountable for what kind of results they're getting. And a big part of the way that we hold schools accountable is making assessments. So I naturally wanted to know what her philosophy was on assessments. This is something that, as you can imagine, is very central in all the debate on educational policy, and absolutely essential and central to this debate. And so I figured I'd ask her about it. I thought from talking to her, the first day I talked to her, that there was some chance that she wouldn't know this. But this is like asking a prospective football coach how many yards are there in a first down. You really wouldn't want to hire a coach who was unaware that there are 10 yards to get a first down. [laughs] And she didn't know that. And she didn't know that you had four tries to get it.

Not to mention Duffy becomes hugely valuable with his newly-signed hometown discount contract...in wake of the Ventura loss, Dayton Moore is going to have to seriously consider whether or not they can realistically compete when payroll is already stretched to the breaking point for that market. Undoubtedly, they'll at least wait until July. But they now have an out in terms of at least approaching Duffy in light of the new circumstances and asking him if he still wants to go through a protracted rebuild movement. He's already had TJS, so the risk factor is seemingly higher.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/exclusive-trump-...-001530555.html Trump expected to suspend all immigration from six Muslim majority countries in the Middle East, including Syria, Iran and Iraq. Of course, Irani-Americans typically have economic outcomes 40-80% better than the average white families. But they're all going to be collectively lumped in together as potential jihadists.

Who has seen LION?

It's getting impossible to discuss anything because 1/3rd or 1/4th of the people calling in to CSPAN are accusing them of all news organizations of being biased against Trump...claiming they will cut their cable bills or figure out some way to defund those Washington elites like Brian Lamb in the news business. Forget even discussing things using the NY Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal...so what does that leave, if Time and Newsweek and US News and World Report are being lumped in together with liberal globalist Ted Turner's CNN? The Christian Science Monitor? BBC or The Guardian? Well, foreigners all want to prevent America from being great again, so they can't be trusted either. Al Jazeera? No, that's Obama's Muslim caliphate/permanent jihad against the Christian world and American Exceptionalism propaganda arm. I would love to hear anyone leaning to the right or conservative list news organizations that are trustworthy. Please don't mention Fox News, let's try to be real for a minute. And maybe if the Republican Party apologized for their treatment of Obama for eight years...which he consistently handled with dignity other than a few public outbursts of frustration or more accurately irritation...the left side of the political spectrum wouldn't be so annoyed. But now their lecturing about how we should be gracious to the new president after what we've witnessed the last eight years (hate/racism/deliberate obstructionism) is beyond the pale.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Jan 24, 2017 -> 10:58 AM) Source? Because I have some really good real world evidence that says the contrary. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/06/science/...ng-success.html That's just fake news. Only trust the Family Research Council on this matter.