TakeYouToTasker

Inconvenience isn't an excuse for murder.

No one has the right to end another person's life.

If the allegations are true, then the Bible won't defend them.

[/Ozimandius He's not a Natural Born Jew

Henry Kissinger (though ineligible)

Big Matty Ice fan since his time at Boston College, and living just 30 minutes from Gillette Stadium, this is a no brainer. GO FALCONS!!!

They, in general, don't much care for Jews.

He's the GOAT. Asked and answered.

I'm still waiting for your list of Hillary's accomplishments. Please note that "positions held" are not accomplishments.

People here waited until President Obama had actually done something before criticizing his actions; and didn't criticize his Presidency until he had established a body of work.

Then I'll put it to you to define "wisdom" in this situation. I'll also offer that I'm not conflating or confusing wisdom and morality. My position is that "wisdom" as relates to politics and leadership depends on what your goals are. And if you wish to continue to assert that wisdom is in "the center", I'll ask you to explain how you, or anyone else, can claim a centrist (read wise) position without first reporting to your own biases, and staking yourself to them, without immediately becoming polemic yourself.

Again, this is why you aren't worth discussing anything with. You aren't looking for discussion, you're looking for a soap box. You ask others to concede your assumptions, rather then enter into dialogue. That approach is mostly useless, and won't win others to your position.

You aren't worth discussing anything with then, because you deem anyone who disagrees with your stances as partisan. Your own assumptions about others invalidates any argument you might make, and you lack the intellectual honesty or courage to prove your assertions when asked to provide any examples of political issues where the man standing in the center holds moral authority or wisdom, outside of political expediency. To wit: you're exactly what you accuse everyone else of being, having staked yourself to your own pole, assuming it moral and just. The only difference being, you haven't attempted to defend your stances. Hell you haven't even articulated them, instead refusing to answer questions which attempt to map where you stand. Idiot. In a Machiavellian sense only, and even then only when trying to control a populace. What you are describing as "wisdom" is not wise if it is not moral. The center is rarely moral.

I asked you for examples, in our current political divide, of where the middle is a place of virtue. Please provide them. I'll allowing you the platform to prove your stance. I suggest that you use it.

@ Meathead: How is this the most dangerous political situation of your life, outside of the fact, of course, that an authoritarian executive, forged as a weapon to punish conservatives and libertarians, has been handed to a non-Democrat? A few facts you'll need to reconcile: - Donald Trump is a RINO. He will get resistance from his own party, as was demonstrated in the build up to this election. - The Obama administration enjoyed both a House and Senate majority, and President Obama was a demagogue. - America did not "intend to split control of the government". America has been, in wide swaths, rejecting Democratic policies in the last three election cycles. In addition to federal elections, the Democrats have hemorrhaged so many state level governments that if they desired, Republicans could call a convention and actually begin the process to amend the Constitution. And given how many Democratic vs. Republican seats are up for grabs in the next election cycle, and considering the nomination of up to four SCOTUS seats over the next eight years Republicans are now in position to control policy for the next 20-30 years. America has rejected, whole sale, at every level of government, the agenda of the left. - Hillary Clinton was not in any way qualified for the office of President. She has no accomplishments of note in any of her positions of service. In fact, she proved herself to be dangerously incompetent and corrupt, as well as ineffective, during her time in office. The level of her corruption can most easily be summed up by simply pointing out that the Clinton Global Initiative was shut down by the Clintons after she lost the election.

There was nothing impressive about Clinton's resume. She has the type of CV that gets thrown in the trash. All it lists is roles held, but not a single noteworthy accomplishment. In fact, she performed very poorly in each role she held.

Unless you are talking specifically about political expediency then this is incorrect. Quite often there is an objective right and an objective wrong. There is an objective moral and immoral. An argument for the center is an argument for incrementalism towards the immoral and the wrong. Or, if I am misunderstanding you, which I leave open as a possibility, perhaps you could give me a few examples of this "Center or Wisdom" as relates to the major issues of our time.

I suggest reading a book entitled, The Road to Serfdom. The issue is that statists on the right and left have long desired an authoritarian executive, and those on the left who most recently held power had convinced themselves, with their identity politics and changing national demographics, that they would never have to cede their power to a non-Democrat again. So, they strengthened and stretched the authority of the executive; and when forced to hand over the weapon they had forged to Donald Trump, they **** their pants. The problem for the left you see, is that they wanted a tool which they could use to punish and dictate to those whom would dare to disagree them. The lesson here should be that if a President terrifies you with the prospects of what he might do, than you have vested the Office with too much power, and stripped away too many checks and balances which historically have constrained the men who have held the Office. However I have no disillusions that the left will be introspective enough to embrace this, as their agenda depends on the Pen and Phone.

This is a hollow statement which assumes that neither side of an argument can be correct, and that doing counterproductive or immoral things in moderation is a path to prosperity.

It was reported on the local news where I live, which is about a 30 minute drive from Gillette.

The left doesn't report to logic. The left subscribes to a victim hierarchy in which Muslims are higher up on the list of oppressed than women are. If ever a transgendered, gay, disabled, black, Hispanic, female, Muslim, refugee were to emerge they would be named God-king.

As a single issue "kitty grabbing" voter, this won me over.

Your position hinges on unprovable assertions you ask us to breathe into the world as facts: - that Russia hacked the DNC and then provided the documents to Wikileaks. - that the documents were not leaked to Wikileaks by a DNC staffer - that the Russians hacked Trump and the RNC and chose not to release the information. - that hacked RNC and Trump emails would have revealed the same level of corruption as was present in those of Hillary and the DNC - that there is a consensus amongst our intelligence community - that our intelligence community is politically neutral - that the CIA is trustworthy This is an absurd ask. Just admit that your party is corrupt, and it's nominee was so unpalatable that the electorate rejected her in favor of Donald Trump.

Victim blaming? Hillary Clinton and Democrats are victims? Of what? Their own corruption? You're really going with handwavium here, trying to magic away the corruption exposed? Had the leaks uncovered that the Clinton Foundation actually not only donated 100% of it's receipts to actual charitable endeavors, and that the DNC actually deeply cared for it's constituent and the democratic process, you'd be dancing in the streets. THE PROBLEM IS WHAT WAS EXPOSED, NOT THAT IS WAS EXPOSED. And again, it's far more likely that the Wikileaks documents were turned over by a DNC staffer. Your party is in shambles because of what your party is. I'll be thrilled if you don't look inward, because that will continue your party's marginalization for decades. Enjoy that.

I agree 100%.