TakeYouToTasker

You aren't "naturally opposed to it". You've chosen to be opposed to it because you've chosen to subscribe to a set of economic theories which have directly led to the extermination and starvation of millions of people over the last century; while at the same time ignoring the fact that the standard of living of the poorest Americans was drastically lower during the time when CEOs made 30 times what laborers made. 85% of the cuts went to the top 1% because that's who pays all the taxes. The top 1% pays more than 40% of all taxes, and more than the bottom 95% of tax payers combined. Relief naturally goes to the emburdened. Where else could it go? And the results? Consumer confidence at an 18 year high Record low black unemployment US jobless rate at an 18 year low.[/I] US "real" unemployment rate at a 17 year low, and falling faster than the official rate. The falling away of pre-employment drug testing as employers struggle to find enough qualified candidates. The DOW stabilizing near a record high. 401k savings at a record high.

Which completely invalidates your opinion. You're incapable of being objective on the topic, and are substituting emotion for reason. In a fog of irony so thick you couldn't navigate it with radar, there's a poster here who might say you're "acting like a woman".

Can you speak to this "disastrous corporate giveaway"? I hope what you come up with is better than your emotional, and unreasoned screed after being provided with ample and sourced evidence of our Southern Border policy being tied directly to eliminating a robust modern slave trade.

I agree with you, though I make room for the possibility that the server was used as a "dead drop" for the things that she was selling.

If I'm remembering correctly, Greg alleges that the purpose of the private server was to allow free and unfettered access of state secrets to rival nations. So, under that theory, you couldn't possibly be more accurate.

@The_Dude War should be an absolute last resort once all other avenues, save capitulation, have been exhausted. Then, once you go to war, you go to total war. Boots on the ground, eradication of the people, every man, woman, and child, and you sweep them into the sea leaving no one behind to have future grievances. You do this until they figuratively prostrate themselves on the ground crying mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa; at which point you colonize them, and make them Americans. You make an absolute example of them for other nations as to why you do not, under any circumstances, make war against America. But you do this as an absolute last resort. Prior to this you give other nations, and other cultures, every opportunity to demonstrate that they can live in the world with you. This is the only set of moral actions which exists.

To be fair, he's never threatened to kill me, just to pistol whip me and to eat me. It's like Shady McCoy started staring in Austin Powers movies.

I don't think it's a invalid criticism. I'm aware that I can come off that way, especially in this medium. I'll point out that someone's pompousness doesn't impact the correctness of their argument, however, which leaves it as an empty critique in this situation.

However he had been hospitalized for mental illness and been prescribed anti-psychotic medication within the last month.

Powerful and convincing argument. Maybe, just maybe, if you focused on the eventualities and logical outcomes of the things you advocate for you might be able to get to this point in a conversation and not be sitting there with egg on your face, reduced to calling people "twats" in place of a well reasoned argument. I'm not holding out hope, but maybe. It's something for you to strive for anyway.

Fair point.

Yes it is: https://www.forbes.com/sites/charleswallace1/2018/08/27/trump-secures-a-trade-deal-with-mexico/#6d566fc97806

You didn't imply it, you outright stated it, so I guess we can add at least one more thing you're wrong about. The truth, Dude, is that you don't handle scrutiny of your positions very well, because often times when those positions come under scrutiny, it demonstrates either what a poor job you've done reasoning through your position, or how morally bankrupt it is. This is one of those times.

Hardly. It's more than valid, especially given your penchant for war mongering and open disdain for peace.

What are your thoughts on the Jefferson Bible, which works to extract the morality of Jesus, without relying on the divine? Also, the Bible beyond being an accounting of the life of Jesus, even if you choose not to believe in His divinity, it a historical record of the major political events on the time. You don't have to believe Jesus was the Son of God to understand that He was a central and massively important figure to the peoples of that region, and the accounting of the story of His life matters at least in that context. As such, the Bible has intrinsic value towards understanding history.

What, exactly, do you believe the EU to be? What is it's purpose, and how was it organized? Further, how do you reconcile your dismissal with the realities of current EU immigration policies, and the effect they've had on the nation states, and the citizens, of European member states?

The EU isn't much more than a banking cabal who desperately seek to destroy the concept of the European nation state, and the individual cultures they protect. To those ends their long term strategy has been to flood Europe with refugees from the Middle East, Northern Africa, and Asia to break down the understanding of what it means to be German, Spanish, Italian, etc. as a people lacking a true national identity are more easily swayed into accepting a single government covering all of Europe. An oppressive theocratic regime in Iran, and the instability they cause in the region is central to those policy goals, so of course the EU was trying to salvage the deal.

They were not abiding by it, and it was a terrible agreement which propped up the mullahs, and thereby Hezbollah, and made Iran a threat to the entire region while they brutally oppressed their people. Now, Iran is collapsing, the mullah's, government is failing, and the army has joined the Iranian people who desire a government and a nation similar to one they had pre-revolution. The world is becoming a better place. Why are you opposed?

Why in the world would you advocate for the expense of American lives and treasure, especially under conditions where the current President's policies are working perfectly towards the collapse of the mullahs and the empowerment of the People, who now have the army on their side?

Not at all. To understand the passage you need to understand the history of Roman currency, which leads directly to why Jesus asked the question he did in the manner of a rabbinical approach to teaching. I made a lengthy post about it on the old board, and am afraid it might be lost.

That's how it would read if Jesus had been a socialist.

It's been a deservedly bad year for the Red Pope.

Here's what I would like to see happen to the offensive line tomorrow:

This, although there are mitigating circumstances which makes it not cut and dry. For instance, situations involving serious medical conditions which require near 24 hour care, like Alzheimer's.