RochesterRob

Telling Hillary that she lost is risking your life is it not?

Probably all the one time Clinton Foundation donors longing for a return to pay to play.

Glad to live out in the country when I see threads like this. I suppose I pay for it by having to call the cops about trespassing. I have a neighbor that I REALLY NEED to educate about property lines.

Nonsense. Chelsea Clinton will have completed her first term in congress and Hillary will put the word out that the nomination is Chelsea's. Any challenger will be vanquished. In fairness the Obama's will be warned in advance to sit the foreseeable future out.

Yeah. For those versed in Star Trek he was Captain Garth yesterday. Today he is back to being LORD Garth. Time to rush more meds to Elba II.

2020 stands all by itself in terms of poor D candidates. It baffles the mind that people such as Harris and Warren could actually be candidates.

I don't think that the church embraces Pelosi and Andrew Cuomo but maybe they could go to outright denouncing them but then that might invite a heavy counter response that the churches may not survive. The churches are already under serious pressure as it is that threaten their survival.

I never said that automation was the spawn of evil corporations. I agree that it is pushed by inventors among others but they also don't want to deal with the problems that go with employing a large group of people. Does not make them evil by any means but it poses a long term problem as to what these humans will due when there are fewer options to earn a paycheck to make a living. To this point automation has rearranged the job market as human welders are no longer needed on the assembly but become operators and maintenance to the machines that replaced the human laborer. Going into the future the job creation is not going to be one for one. We really don't need a teacher in every classroom and a lawyer to prepare every case based on where AI is going. One could argue that we could already drastically reduce the number of teachers needed in public schools but NEA has been too powerful as an entity in the Democratic Party to allow much change.

That is at present. Human labor has been and is problematic on a large scale with strikes and on a smaller scale with absence and tardiness among other problems. Management in any business or industry strives to automate to eliminate dealing with the worst aspects of human behavior plus to enhance profitability as machines don't need raises and time off. As to fewer blacksmiths I don't know about that as the Amish population keeps growing and they purchase more and more land. They have been slower to infiltrate WNY versus the Finger Lakes but they are showing up in Steuben and Chautauqua Counties along with other areas such as the lands east of Letchworth Park and the Lake Ontario area north of Batavia. However, you don't have to worry about many non-Amish drooling to become an old fashioned blacksmith.

I would imagine that any show appearing on the major networks has a filter applied so no anti-MSM narrative gets through. I'm thinking that some show like Madam Secretary is in line for a story arc where an Epstein-like character dies and is later revealed to be suicide or an attempt to silence that character by a right wing power base. Lead the yokels to a correct line of thought so to speak.

Universal Basic Income (UBI) is coming and a lot of the captains of industry such as Bill Gates have acknowledged a change will be needed in the next 25-50 years. Automation and AI just need to work their way in the upper echelons of society such as medicine and law who have more power in DC than the regular working stiff at present. As more white collar people get pushed to the side they will be in favor of doing it. Not a raving commie on this but recognized that the traditional business and wage structure is changing that there will be great civil unrest if people are left out of the changing economy. The political winds as I see them are not in favor of nation building.

Welp, here goes my leanings. Generally, conservative. Registered Republican mainly to be able to vote in local primaries. I've been eligible to vote for decades and have long practiced the best candidate for the job regardless of party affiliation. There really has not been a POTUS I strongly liked since Reagan and since I have got older I tend to notice more of the warts in that administration. I stalwartly believe in the Second Amendment and a strong national defense. For the stability of our nation I believe that immigrants need to come in legally. Practicing Catholic that does not thump the Bible too hard. I have no issue with birth control but have a major problem with abortion. I don't mind a national economic policy but see the slippery slope with government involvement ala Keynesian economics. I believe in having a Federal Reserve and believe in the government's right to levy tax despite how imperfect that has been. I don't believe in wild eyed economic policy for the most part but believe that this country will never pay its deficits and ultimately will uncouple from the notion of debt whether personal or national. Velocity of money has kept the spinning top of personal income potent but I believe that will ultimately strain out.

You are so broken mentally that the billable hours for a shrink would add up to enough to buy the Bills.

Face the mirror when you say that.

What's Mayor McCheese up to these days?

Yeah, but we are not talking about the Mayberry jail here. There was not a higher profile prisoner in the state of New York at the time but he got all the security protocols that Otis the town drunk got.

I've never heard of a reduction in tuition because somebody donated a million dollars or two. Now if you want to talk about a scholarship to offset tuition that is a different matter but once again is seldom the case. Usually a donation is made with the intention of buying hard assets such as land, buildings, or equipment. It's sad to see people such as yourself to say it is OK to screw over a deserving student in favor of an undeserving student. In a lot of universities there are only so many spots or chairs as they say so you can't assume they will make extra room for the non-privileged student. As far as rarity goes if accomplishments are near equal you can bet the administrator has a wide latitude to work with in terms of doing a quid pro quo so in that respect it happens more than you think. Just because something is not a crime by statute does not make it ethical or moral. Maybe it should be a crime.

Evidently TH3 does not understand sarcasm. No doubt you believe that McDermott is under obligation to divulge all plans the Bills have pertaining to upcoming opponents as well.

The ends justifies the means? A substandard student gains entry and the campus gets a new building so everybody is a winner? More like a deserving student gets the shaft because their family did not win life's lottery. That aside the money virtually never falls in a way where all the students benefit. How does the Elizabethan Poetry major benefit from a new wing added to the law school? It's like you have never been on the campus of a major university to hear all the cross talk on undeserving students. It takes more than money to get an undeserving student into a curriculum without the instructors and other students placing that person on a firing line. The record of the undeserving student would have to be cleaned up (lies) to get instructors to work with this student. Are you saying that fabricating a record does not matter?

This statement is idiotic. You know darn well an investigation is taking place and is under no obligation whatsoever to report to you, me, or anybody else at a regular interval.

Interesting read but I would say that most potential applicants do not have close to the means that Shaw has. I would guess that in most cases the family more or less has a one time shot which means they insist on a quid pro quo. Even then it is not a slam dunk even if the potential applicant's history is white-washed. While admissions is no doubt prone to some leaning on by upper administration faculty often has a considerable say which I saw as a student being accepted into Cornell. Even if the heavy hand of the dean or president prevails the student is very vulnerable once in as he will be in the crosshairs of a number of instructors and fellow students. It would not surprise me that many students who had their family buy their way in wash out after a year. My advisor on his best day was a miserable prick but would not screw anybody over that he though had merit. Somebody that he thought did not deserve a "chair" would receive his undying resentment any way he could dish it out. I give credit to my advisor for finding elective courses that enhanced my GPA.

I was simply going to leave the definition of a focal point at Hillary herself but yeah her ego. Which is amazing that she has kept it in check this long so as not to enter but obviously she has been receptive to the logic to stay out of the light to this point in part due to Epstein, E-mails, hubby, etc.. Cluck Clodd (Chuck Todd) blathering away on NBC News about Bloomberg preparing to jump in the race. Does not stand a chance in my mind but the clown car is starting to look a little empty now.

I think that is the way Hillary would want things to unfold but the party is in free fall at present. There needs to be a focal point soon to rally the troops around.

The ethics are highly questionable if the donation was done solely to get the kid admitted and I thought that point was coming through. More so if a very highly ranking official does so in terms of doctoring a kid's application. I would bet that as part of the "service" an undeserving kid's record is cleaned up so there is not all kinds of resentment by instructors, administrators, and fellow students towards that kid most of the time. Usually the doctoring is done to make the student's background look reasonable if not top notch. Further, I was also making a point that what the women did was plain stupid in terms of trying not to get caught. It's like they were trying to work the bargain bin in terms of payola which does not make sense. I am not saying the second method is not fraudulent but a majority of the time a general donation is pretty much the same thing although quite a bit less risky. If you were the dean of a school or even the president of the university I would think that if you are bright enough to hold either post that if some big shot calls you out of the blue about a meeting it would take a split second to realize they want to place some kid there. The minute you gain access to that kid's files and see issues it will dawn on you that a bribe of some kind is going to be pitched at you. Again, the first approach mentioned in this regard is far less sloppy than the second but no more ethical if the donation was not happening without the admission. After all nobody makes a donation for a million or two on the basis of "if you can."

Being a legacy helps but certainly is not a guarantee for admission. For the most part a legacy gives the edge if test scores are close. But there are certainly exceptions when heavyweights are involved such as politicians, lawyers, captains of industry, etc..