GG

I can argue that just in this election alone, they're were people who were more qualified. Kasich, for one. But go ahead and repeat what you've been told

If that is the big question you've been asking, you're barking up the wrong tree. I never denied that US and coalition air fighters hit Syrian troops. I'm just laughing at the suggestion that they did it to start WW III. So when all else fails, try the neocon trope. Are you claiming that Obama is a neocon? Or what about that pipeline? Tell us about that agin. Or is the war to help Chevron & Enron? Remember that they had Hillary in their pocket. All they needed was to wait for her coronation, and then one of the CEOs would be named Secretary of State, and the take over would be complete. Oh the horrors. You're in too deep within your own screen play. Take a step back and see how ridiculous you've looked over the last 15 months. Middle East is a mess because it's been a mess throughout the written history of mankind. It didn't help the US that it was led by the most feckless president in a generation and that's the main reason why the situation is so messy. There's no grand conspiracy to why the US is doing what it's doing. Obama screwed things up and then had nothing but bad choices as a result. Sometimes, it's as simple as that.

So you have your panties in a wad because the US bombed Syrians and called it a mistake? It probably wasn't a mistake but retribution over Syrians continuing to shell civilians and aid convoys despite the cease fire attempts. This is a clear case why people are laughing at you. There isn't a single plausible scenario where the US military and coalition forces would be actively supporting ISIS/AQ. Yet you keep insisting on it. What's the end game? You know, what? I'm glad someone in the chain of command decided to pop the Syrian f'kers after what they have done in the region.

So, BB is racist?

Here we go again. You never had a detailed fully fleshed out post. You keep trolling about the Deep State or the Dark State or whatever the flavor of the day is, without any coherent explanation of who exactly is behind it, and most importantly, who wins in your doomsday scenario and what do they get when they win. And, as it's become a routine tradition. Your question to me would be easy to answer, if you actually ask it. So, what's the question?

If not the illuminati, then who? We were treated to 15 months of posts that powers behind the scenes orchestrated the entire election, and Hilary's coronation was the last step. So who are these powers? Simple question.

Then exactly which powers you claimed were set for their coronation of Hillary?

A crackpot financial blog and a Pravda mouthpiece? No thanks. Here's another uninformed piece from the lemming western press.

This is a better read on Putin's Russia. Note the tone of Russia's paranoia, which mirrors the POV of a poster here and consider where most of his news are sourced.

What's another 4 years? Difference is, now you're the one who doesn't like the guy in charge.

OK, let's forget your posting history. Let's forget that you took an eight year hiatus getting over your girl getting trashed by a neophyte 1st term senator with zero experience. Let's forget the behind the scenes machinations that your party had to go through to eliminate the possibility that a 100-year old socialist was going to run away with the nomination. Let's forget that trump turned key districts that voted strongly for Obama just 4 years before. So, go ahead, start a discussion to which there are other answers than calling you an unmitigated idiot.

If only that 60% had bothered enough to vote in November. Actions have consequences.

I think you mean 2008-2016 redux. Or as we've been saying, continuation of a petulant presidency. Funny how you weren't around for that?

Was this the kind of provocation that the women's march was concerned about? Using slave labor of course

I wonder if the decrepit old white men discussed a democratic vs a representative republic when they put pen to paper?

Flavo Flav says hi

Steroids claim another victim

Or the receptionist?

I wonder if it's because your view is getting further removed from reality as more information filters in?

If you care to check history, I was a huge Rex defender, until it became too obvious that he didn't give a damn about the team.

How much more clear does it need to be to see that Rex fully checked out as a head coach this year? He was the top nominal hire in 2015, who immediately mailed it in. He clearly didn't like the job of the head coach, but loved the trappings of the position. Hanging around OBD with the players is not the same thing as getting his team ready to face tough competition. No idea how you can still defend his actions.

Just a question. What's it going to take for you to admit that hiring Rex was a monumental mistake by Pegula? All the little signs and hints over the last two years are certainly coming into focus, and it all points to Rex completely mailing it in. It's almost as bad as Marrone quitting.

Why? He was his QB coach in 2014.

Haven't read the entire thread, but has anyone pointed out that Dennison is the guy who made Brock friggin Osweiler look like a passable NFL QB and earned him a $70 million contract? Isn't that a better assessment than comparing his offenses to the ones when Peyton was still healthy?

That will be the big question. The informal feedback I've been getting from the C-suites is generally positive, and that usually translates well to the rank and file. I've insisted that a big part of Obama's problem is that he didn't realize how much negativity infected his term. Employees pick up their cues when they see their bosses bitching and worrying about the bad business environment, and any confidence goes into the crapper. The attitude about Trump is that most think he's a clown, but a smart clown who should know when to step out of the way when it comes to driving economic growth.