TakeYouToTasker

It's tough to say, but they can't ignore the growing pressures being placed on them by the rogue state. As much as China doesn't want a pro-western democracy on their border, which was the purpose of propping up the DPRK in the first place, it can't abide a situation where it has an openly hostile nuclear state run by a lunatic wielding absolute power who is antagonizing other world powers on it's border either. China will deal with the situation they've created, or if they abrogate that responsibility, the United States, S. Korea, and Japan will, and the outcome will not be pro-China. So China can choose a pro-China solution, or a pro-West solution. Either way, they'll be forced to choose.

Terrible idea to bring your toddlers to a game. Terrible. They are toddlers, and while they are adorable to you, and maybe even the centerpiece of your life, no one else at the stadium gives a flying !@#$ about them, and came to see a Bills game. They paid a good deal of money, and won't be interested in altering their experience to accommodate someone who brought a pair of two year olds to the game. It's an incredibly inconsiderate thing to do.

Annnnnnd.... There it is.

What, no *spoilers* tags?

A precedent set by the last President in his 2010 State of the Union Address, and then re-affirmed in 2012 when he chastised the Court as "a group of unelected people," asserting that it “would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step” for the court to overturn “a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.”

That's just stupid. There's only a single person in the whole world who has any legitimate reason that they could use justify saying that, and that person is President Obama.

And Ivanka.

I've often wondered lately why, if there are no real differences between men and women, it matters even a little bit how someone identifies.

One of the hallmarks of conservatism is the belief, based on evidence, that government isn't very good at doing most things; which is a practical reason that the government never should have involved itself in the first place. You want them to fix it. You're insisting that they fix it. But the truth is they don't believe that the government is capable of a fix. They know that government can't repeal the laws of supply and demand, and they know that an American's expectation of "universal care" means the same level of care they received under the prior system, only cheaper, and more abundant. They know they can't provide that fix, because unicorns don't exist. They know that what you're asking is for the impossible. How do they supply you with the impossible?

Again, I'll refresh your memory. The perspective you gave was that it didn't matter how President Trump handles himself in regards to Mueller because Mueller doesn't care, in that professional setting, how President Trump treats him. You offered no perspective on why it was important that President Trump was treating Mueller with civility in communications through lawyers. Which is what would make it "news worthy".

No, no. You chose to link something you posted as "breaking news". Tell me why Trump's lawyers making civil overtures to Mueller is important.

Don't avoid the meat. I asked you why you believe the link you posted was important. And yes, you do.

No, no, I read the link. It's just that you often need to have the things you link explained to you, so when I asked you "So?" I was asking you to explain why you think that's important, or why you think it matters.

You're seeing it in finance as well, given the massive technology and research departments of the larger firms. There is a steady drumbeat of social justice related internal memos and linked-in manifestos published for consumption on the internal news-reel where I currently work.

So?

This is fair. I'm currently hoping he pops back in to respond that my statement is contradictory because he's a moron.

What about my statement is contradictory?

Do you ever say anything that isn't incredibly stupid? Kaepernick, much in the same vein as Tim Tebow, isn't on a team right now because he isn't good enough to off-set the media circus and the distractions that follow him around. If he weren't a distraction, and instead silently went about his job as a backup quarterback and a team guy, he'd be rostered right now. The Google employee who wrote his memo finds himself in a similar boat. Do I disagree with his opinion? No, I don't; but he caused problems for his employer.

Perhaps a "Go Fund Me" campaign to launch her into the Sun to grant her infinite wisdom is in order.

Well, yeah, but for different reasons. Flake has a libertarian bent, where as McCain is an establishment big government Republican.

The company card pays for that. Other than business related occasions I don't spend time in bars.

$0

Why do you think that is? We know that governments are not efficient, and that monopolies do not lower prices, so what else could it be? We also know that those healthcare systems are collapsing. Look at Britain.

The Trump administration does have one silver bullet that would propel massive amounts of liquidity into the economy regardless of Fed policy, and that is the trillions of dollars sitting abroad in off-shored corporate assets. A tax holiday for the patriation of those assets would bring them into our domestic economy.

Half Targaryen? All Targaryens are half Targaryen. They aren't Lannisters.