Husker Red Til Dead

Except for things such as, like, climate change, evolution, birth control, and stem cell research. Yep, just like that there are more then two genders, GMO's are causing cancer and nuclear power plants will kill everyone... Man, you are way too easy - I was waiting for this response before I ever even posted. Just because one group opposes certain types of science (wrongfully, I might add), doesn't mean that they oppose science to an equal degree as a different group. Your argument is that they're both the exact same because neither party believes in science carte blanche? Good luck with that. I was talking about trusting your own parties rhetoric instead of looking at issues with facts. You brought the argument that conservatives don't trust science, why else would you post the graph. I rebutted with known views the left has that are in fact, anti science. Never once stating both are equal but that it does occur. Facts are facts, no need for luck.

Because facts are anathema to the current GOP party and its ilk. Willful ignorance is what is preferred anymore. Correct ,and the dems are just as guilty. These echo chambers we have put ourselves in are more damaging then "facts" could ever be. Red Til Dead, I understand the basic appeal to balance and equivalency, but at some point it utterly destroys our capability for discernment. Only in a cynical world where everything is equally worthy of contempt and distrust can quackery fly just as proud as anything else. The promoters of such quackery promote precisely this cynicism because their political achievement depends on it. Would you agree that a heard mentality is no better. I feel group think has led to more pain and suffering then a dissent to public opinion

Except for things such as, like, climate change, evolution, birth control, and stem cell research. Yep, just like that there are more then two genders, GMO's are causing cancer and nuclear power plants will kill everyone...

HAHAHA those are great!

Because facts are anathema to the current GOP party and its ilk. Willful ignorance is what is preferred anymore. Correct ,and the dems are just as guilty. These echo chambers we have put ourselves in are more damaging then "facts" could ever be.

How can you possibly think Bork is in any way similar to what is happening now? Reagan nominated another person for the same seat. Heard of Anthony Kennedy? People who argue this crap need to look inwardly and think how they'd feel if the other "side" did it. If the Democrats did it, you'd think it was wrong. Because it's wrong no matter who does it. The dems strongly opposed Bork, used every avenue to do so, didn't have the numbers and lost. Now, while not even having a hearing on Garland, which is extreme imo, the repubs are using the same mechanisms to keep out a nominee they dont want. You do realize that Bork got rejected in committee, the Republicans and Reagan didn't even want to support him post-committee, and that Bork lost by having both Democrats and Republicans vote against him, yes? I guess I didn't spell it out clearly enough ,but yes. The dems demonized him with the ol "he's a racist" claims, it was only 6 or so repubs that voted against Bork. The republicans started doing the D.C. two step ,worried about their own political futures ,rather then the future of the country.

Agreed

How can you possibly think Bork is in any way similar to what is happening now? Reagan nominated another person for the same seat. Heard of Anthony Kennedy? People who argue this crap need to look inwardly and think how they'd feel if the other "side" did it. If the Democrats did it, you'd think it was wrong. Because it's wrong no matter who does it. The dems strongly opposed Bork, used every avenue to do so, didn't have the numbers and lost. Now, while not even having a hearing on Garland, which is extreme imo, the repubs are using the same mechanisms to keep out a nominee they dont want.

Ideally, what a wonderful thought. Democrats have blocked SC nominees before while in control, Bork comes to mind, this is no different

So totally disregarding the wishes of the people that voted you into office for fear of being an obstructionist is how this Republic is to be ran...mmmkay...

As they had a constitutional right to do so, I dont see the problem here?

faith and honor held high,

Coaches be coaching...I like it!

That doesn't work when enough people believe this crap that bad people get elected. I understand you can't legislate this problem away but ignoring it isn't an option either. Most of society has to be led. Through persuasion or coercion, take your pick.

Kinda like fast food, If you're dumb enough to eat it, then you get the consequences. We do not need more laws to protect stupid people. Remove warnings labels and let the problem fix itself.

Sure, there's your list. Mentions of Sept 11. There are others. It adds up. BTN has regular (and many) recruitment ads, the per-game Marines "Leader of the Week" for outstanding play, etc. After awhile it borders on being one long commercial. Exactly. With out a draft you have to recruit people to join the military. Many people who watch football are in the demographic that the military is trying to reach. Not so much with "Dancing with the Stars" or "Golden Girls" reruns. Same with beer commercials True, without a draft you do need to recruit. Some might question how healthy it is for a society to foster and uphold a "warrior class" (for lack of a better name), but that's a whole other can of worms. Hmm...some (you) might question how healthy it is for a society to foster and uphold a "warrior class".... You explain a lot about yourself with this one sentence. You live in an echo chamber. All you hear is from other people who agree with you. I actually applaud you posting on here, probably knowing you're going to get some vehement disagreement. You're moving outside your comfort zone and that's a good start. Since you opened this door, or can of worms, allow me to burst through it. If you, or anyone else, even question our society fostering and upholding a "warrior class" you haven't really seen much of this country or world. You've never seen horror. You've never seen evil. You've never seen a man use his own pregnant wife and mother as a human shield and fire from behind them (this happened). That is evil. That is horror. These things exist. You can't rationally explain why people do some of the things that they do. Like flying planes into buildings full of civilians. This accomplished nothing, except the loss of innocent lives. Suicide bombers targeting schools in Pakistan and India, knife attacks on the elderly in Israel, these are all evil actions that defy logic or reason. We in the United States have mostly been spared from these horrors. It's not something we really fear happening to us on a daily basis. We don't have government sponsored execution squads rounding up and massacring people just because of their religion or because of who their grandparents were. We don't have government or religious sponsored rape or slavery (not anymore, thanks to our warrior class). We don't have those things because we have people here who are willing to step up and put their lives on the line to make sure that sh1t doesn't happen to anyone. If this was some perfect utopia where, in the words of that turd Rodney King, we all got along, we wouldn't need our warrior class. And I can guarantee you, they would be happy to lay down their arms and live peacefully. But we don't live in that idyllic world. This isn't the Age of Aquarius. We live in a world that can be dirty and barbaric and vicious. We live in a world with warlords and dictators that need to be stopped so peaceful men and women can survive and prosper. If we didn't foster our warrior class, we would still be an English colony. We would see the Barbary coast still looting, pillaging and enslaving Christians for the crime of not being a Muslim. We would still have slavery. We would see a world taken over by Germany and Japan, slaughtering innocents and using them for medical testing. We would see a world where rampant hatred and intolerance is allowed to grow unchecked and continue to claim even more lives in the name of Allah. These men and women who stand up against these evils, who you appear to disdain, are what keep the wolves from your door and allow you to be disdainful of what they do. Until that day comes, when there is no more evil, that warrior class has got you covered. Maybe my opinion is colored by my service, colored by the evil I've seen in Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe it is, but I doubt it. I think I can speak for most of us veterans when I say that we don't want a pat on the back or free food or a blow job (Edit: I lied, I'd totally take a blow job). It's not why we do this. But if some people want to take a minute and thank my brothers and sisters for doing what most people won't, do me a favor and shut the f#*k up. [...] Kozz, I was not verbose enough in my above statement and I think that led to a misunderstanding in what I meant by warrior class. huSKer had pointed out that without a draft you need to recruit. My can-o-worms comment questioning how healthy it was to foster and uphold a warrior class was not about the necessity or not about having a standing army, it was instead intended to relate to who we are relying upon to fill the ranks, where those people are coming from, and what are we doing to ensure that current and future defense needs are met. Up through Vietnam, if the nation decided it was to wage war, people were largely simply conscripted and forced to fight it. After Vietnam, this system was replaced with one which relies upon voluntary enlistment, but such voluntary enlistment requires a stepped up marketing and recruitment effort along with a stepped up benefits and pay package to help convince people that they should enlist in the armed services. From the point of view of the DoD, this has worked reasonably well. For the most part, the ranks have been kept full even through the numerous wars and conflicts we have found ourselves in since Vietnam. By relying upon volunteers rather than forced conscripts, moral is higher. Professionalism is higher. Turnover is lower, etc. But there is a question that should be asked: Is this actually better for society? Is it a good thing that wide swathes of people can largely ignore our foreign entanglements because it does not affect them? Is it a good thing that the DoD deliberately markets to kids, with the intention that the messages speaking of honor, valor, and adventure will influence their decision to enlist once they are of age? Are there political ramifications for this marketing down the road as these kids reach adulthood regarding the proper purpose of military and how it should be used in the world, especially if they do not have to worry about such decisions directly affecting them? This voluntary recruitment system has led to the warrior class that I spoke of, one that is largely set apart from the general population, and in some cases is not very representative of the general population (as military service tends to run in families). Is that actually a healthy thing? I tend to think it is not. What are your thoughts on the NFL wearing pink for an entire month...

Hopefully its full of people that can tell Donald no , and back it up.

I just got Forest Whitaker eye because of this post Moiraine! Yeah! Don't talk like that!!

2010 seems like it was eons ago. I hope it ends on a good note for our seniors. They've been through some crap and need a good sunset to ride out on.

It'll be interesting to see where he goes from here. I legit thought he'd have bailed by now. To this day I don't think he wants to be president. If he loses he'll do his spin thing, and he'll try to launch from campaign to other endeavors, all the while trying to enhance the Trump brand. His followers don't think he's done/doing anything wrong so far, despite all evidence to the contrary, so maybe some will stick with him after the election. It'd be interesting to see if the Democrat machine went after Trump the same way the Republicans have gone after Hillary. If he gets elected we'll see the Democrats figure out how to launch a pogrom against him like the Republicans did against Hillary. Forgive my ignorance, but was has he done that would get him impeached? If he has those skeletons in the closet, surely they'd be out by now?

George Will agrees with you. He thinks a close loss would end up in finger pointing. A big loss would purge the party like vomit (my word - George is too refined to use it) of the Trumpism. http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/george-will-gop-better-lose/2016/11/02/id/756718/ I think it's important to clarify exactly who we are talking about when discussing the GOP and who supports Trump. The GOP establishment did NOT support him and strongly considered ways to replace him as the nominee. It's the "conservative" voters in the early primary states that the concern here. THEY are the ones that voted for him and gave him the momentum to ultimately win the nomination. The party didn't want Trump. Trump didn't want the nomination. But...these early voters are what caused this. This concerns me WAY more than if it were a party issue. This tells me there is an underlying movement of people who really do believe this crap and are willing to vote for it and fully 100% support it. I think it's very important for the Republican party to some how completely move away from this Nationalist attitude while still hanging onto a conservative view on issues. That is going to be extremely hard to accomplish. They have supported and fostered groups like the Tea Party and various media outlets that have promoted these ideas way too long to just be able to flip the switch and make a 90 degree turn. I think it was the GOP playing themselves. They didn't want a Rand Paul or a Ted Cruz, so whomever was polling better they backed them(trump) until the unwanted candidate dropped out. Remember early on how a Jeb nomination was basically a done deal, trump started polling better, all support for Jeb vanished. Then trump would say something stupid, and party leaders would retract support. The DC two step would keep occurring until we were left with a few choices and no clear front runner. The media loved that trump was leading ,all of the low info knuckle dragging dolts ate it up, and his stupid red hat. If the mainstream media helps him win the primary ,then they can destroy him in the general, it was an easy gameplan. He's done a nice job of helping them too. The GOP made this bed,not conservatives, now they get to lie in it. I see the DNC doing the same thing. Proof of party corruption to oust Bernie, just like the RNC did to Ron Paul in 08'. Now they have Hillary, that might lose to someone shouldn't even win a city council seat. Trump would be decimated by Obama in a general, hell ,even John Kerry would beat trump. She was the best they could come up with, hedging their bets on the " first woman pres." vote. Either way this next 4 years is gonna be a tumultuous $hitshow. Sorry for the rambling rant, Im so ready for this to be done and over with.

Clinton is Old Boy Network politics and bad for America. She's not the person I would choose to run this country in a million years. She's qualified, and will do an adequate job. Trump is not remotely qualified. He's bad. Scary bad. Like, possibly in the pockets of the Russians and has basically zero interest in running this country bad. I can't imagine why sane, rational adults who purport to love Ronald Reagan and who are, by their own admission, Reagan Republicans, would vote for Donald Trump who loves Vladimir Putin & Russia and has said so openly. Ronald Reagan would roll over in his grave if he knew what his party was offering America as a presidential candidate. It's baffling how we got to this place. The only reason to vote for Hillary Clinton - the only reason, in my opinion - is that she's not Donald Trump. Who's in who's pocket? http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0 http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/clinton-foundation-millions-tied-uranium-report-article-1.2197173 I agree with you on Trump,he's said things that make my head hurt. I know there are people voting for him only because he is not Hillary Clinton. With the Clinton's we see a history of "questionable" cases ,from the whitewater land dealings to mysterious deaths of associates to where we are now. With Trump, maybe we get lucky and he surrounds himself with good people...maybe. With Hillary, its a safe bet that we get more of the same.