Yeah, and with his age, he is definitely suffering age-related stat degeneration. But according to 2e, as you age, stats like strength, dex and con go down, while you gain int and wis. Obviously... not in all cases!
Again, like you said, if it doesn't work, no loss!
To be totally honest, I have little belief in faith-healers so it was more a ploy than a real idea.
Given level considerations? The Belt Collecting Ogre. At the time you take him on, you are generally low level and he is a lot bigger and stronger than your party. Not to mention has a ton more hit points.
The six siblings of Republican Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ 4) made a new television advertisement where they tell voters to vote for the Democrat that is running against their brother.
Wow! Sorry, I actually find this kind of disturbing. A new low in politics. Let's now go seek out family members to stick a knife in the back of the person we're running against. If your dad doesn't agree with your politics lets get him to make a statement. Don't get along with your sister, lets get her to make an ad. Better not run for office unless your whole family is on board. Pathetic...
Calling someone pathetic for exercising the right to free speech?
The six siblings of Republican Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ 4) made a new television advertisement where they tell voters to vote for the Democrat that is running against their brother.
Wow! Sorry, I actually find this kind of disturbing. A new low in politics. Let's now go seek out family members to stick a knife in the back of the person we're running against. If your dad doesn't agree with your politics lets get him to make a statement. Don't get along with your sister, lets get her to make an ad. Better not run for office unless your whole family is on board. Pathetic...
Calling someone pathetic for exercising the right to free speech?
Maybe petty might be the better word, but yeah. Just because you have the right doesn't mean you have to exercise that right.
Edit: None of those people sound like they'll ever be hurting for money their entire lives. They're all rich assholes who think their beliefs are all that. I wouldn't screw my family members over because I might actually need their help and support at some point in my life. They're rich douchebags who think they'll never need help from him ever and think that their shit don't stink. I couldn't care less what they think. I also don't give a crap what rich Hollywood assholes think. Sorry...
I think I need to explain myself a bit. I'm stuck with the Republicans because of the American idiotic two party system. I'm not a Trump fan but I voted for him. I'm not a Republican, I'm a fiscal conservative who believes in limited government. Trump has helped my 401k but I think he's an idiot on social issues. I also think he's not really an idiot because the social issues are what propelled him to victory. He's the lesser of two evils to me and that's it. I think he's a troll but I still might vote for him again depending on who he's running against.
I'm a realist, not an idealist.
Edit: If my 401k goes up 5% I make thousands of dollars. A millionaire makes 10's of thousands and a billionaire makes millions. I still made money though so I don't care. The fact that somebody else makes more doesn't change the fact that I'm better off. Guess what, when companies make money they don't just laugh and cash their checks at the bank, they wonder how they can make even more money. That usually involves hiring more people and making more product. If they're thinking about the future, they want to invest in research to discover more products that they can sell for even more money. Their investors love the fact that they can sustain their profits for many years by thinking forward and risk more of their investment dollars on them. The company finds it's difficult competing with other companies to recruit the best employees so they have to increase their benefits and salary offers to stay competitive so they up the ante. This is exactly what I've seen in my field in the last 20 years. It's not the 40's, 50"s or even 60's anymore people. Trump is an asshole, but he isn't wrong about everything!
I think I need to explain myself a bit. I'm stuck with the Republicans because of the American idiotic two party system. I'm not a Trump fan but I voted for him. I'm not a Republican, I'm a fiscal conservative who believes in limited government. Trump has helped my 401k but I think he's an idiot on social issues. I also think he's not really an idiot because the social issues are what propelled him to victory. He's the lesser of two evils to me and that's it. I think he's a troll but I still might vote for him again depending on who he's running against.
I'm a realist, not an idealist.
Still think he's the lesser of two weevils?
I'm pretty sure Hillary wouldn't have been the global laughingstock and thin skinned wannabe dictator that Trump is.
Maybe your 401k would be slightly less but is it worth all this noise and buffoonery? All these corrupt officials, the firings, the scandals, the loss of freedoms. We'd not be in a trade with China.
There would not have been Charlottesville which happened because they were emboldened by Ttump.
There would be none of this "the press is the enemy of the people" wannabe facist nonsense.
We'd still be in the Paris Climate Accord. We wouldn't be fighting with CANADA. We'd still have net neutrality.
Well, I'm an independent. Because I make up my mind for individual candidates as opposed to parties. But lately I have been voting a straight democratic ticket. Not that this makes me a Democrat, either. I have just preferred their stances on issues that mattered to me. By the bye, I am actually a Registered Independent.
I think I need to explain myself a bit. I'm stuck with the Republicans because of the American idiotic two party system. I'm not a Trump fan but I voted for him. I'm not a Republican, I'm a fiscal conservative who believes in limited government. Trump has helped my 401k but I think he's an idiot on social issues. I also think he's not really an idiot because the social issues are what propelled him to victory. He's the lesser of two evils to me and that's it. I think he's a troll but I still might vote for him again depending on who he's running against.
I'm a realist, not an idealist.
Still think he's the lesser of two weevils?
I'm pretty sure Hillary wouldn't have been the global laughingstock and thin skinned wannabe dictator that Trump is.
Maybe your 401k would be slightly less but is it worth all this noise and buffoonery? All these corrupt officials, the firings, the scandals, the loss of freedoms. We'd not be in a trade with China.
There would not have been Charlottesville which happened because they were emboldened by Ttump.
There would be none of this "the press is the enemy of the people" wannabe facist nonsense.
We'd still be in the Paris Climate Accord. We wouldn't be fighting with CANADA. We'd still have net neutrality.
Read the edit to my last post. I'm curious as to your thoughts. I really like hearing from you and @jjstraka34. My experience from corporate America hasn't been the same as yours. Since the 90's I've seen a huge change in how workers are treated but maybe it's only been in my particular industry.
Well, I'm an independent. Because I make up my mind for individual candidates as opposed to parties. But lately I have been voting a straight democratic ticket. Not that this makes me a Democrat, either. I have just preferred their stances on issues that mattered to me. By the bye, I am actually a Registered Independent.
You're not the only one switching. I have friends that say they're switching from Trump to Democrat also. I say from Trump, not Republican. Trump's play is to cater to the base which is the social issues. To my mind, the economic issues are far more important. When people are working and making a decent living, the social issues become less important. To my mind, poverty is the driving factor for most of those social issues. That's why I can turn a blind eye on abortion, for example, when I personally am against it. When people have money, there is far less of a chance of needing one, so fixing the money problem fixes the abortion issue at the same time. When people are working and contributing to society instead of drawing off of it, a lot of the other problems will go away.
My neither Democrat or Republican view on abortion in a nutshell: reduce it to the minimum as possible without infringing on individual rights. I actually think most people would agree with this if they thought about it logically.
Pretty much liberal Democrat across the board here. I do have disagreements with the Democratic party on certain issues, but those issues tend to be fairly unimportant to me. I'm very big on campaign finance reform (easily my top priority), progressive taxes, strong labor unions, strong public programs, a single-payer healthcare system, strict regulation of the finance industry, and prison reform, all of which are pretty popular in the Democratic party (the last one is becoming a little more popular in the Republican party, which is nice).
I don't favor foreign interventions without specific and limited goals with strong planning behind them, and I'm okay with modest adjustments to promote renewable energy sources and nuclear power (though the Democrats are unfortunately very skeptical of nuclear energy). I have mixed feelings on affirmative action, I consider immigration to be a minor issue these days (immigration, legal and illegal, has been low for many years), and I think police accountability is good for everyone. Gerrymandering is indefensible and the electoral college should be abolished.
I have little concern for certain social issues which I think are mostly rhetoric or involve no concrete policy. I disagree strongly with the "white privilege" concept, but that has no connection to public policy, so it doesn't bother me much. The #MeToo movement is very important, but that's related more to enforcement of existing laws than any new legislation (we've always had laws against sexual assault, but reporting it and acting upon reports has been unacceptably rare until fairly recently).
Vague slogans and empty buzzwords like political correctness have zero meaning to me, and I find partisan bickering to be a pointless distraction. I know I've said this many times, but it's more important to focus on what is right rather than who is right, because the latter just feeds factionalism and low standards. We waste a lot of time trying to prove that "we're the good guys and they're the bad guys."
I place little importance on conventional military power because we already enjoy conventional supremacy and the only nation that's doing anything to challenge it in even an extremely limited way is China. For virtually every other geopolitical threat on the world stage, our enemies are using guerilla warfare, terrorism, and cyber warfare instead. I think we need to spend considerably less money building fighter jets we never use and considerably more money strengthening our cyber defenses and intelligence gathering. Blood and steel aren't advancing our interests like they used to; control over and access to information is much more important in the post-Cold War era.
The Republican party doesn't share many of my ideas. The only constant, as far as I can tell, is that the GOP will implement tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the wealthiest individuals and the most powerful corporations, money which could be better spent in any number of ways--or at least distributed equally among taxpayers, if you're going to throw away government revenue. I profoundly disagree with other practices common to some members of the GOP: gerrymandering, manipulating the makeup of the courts, shutting down the government, shutting down voting booths in districts populated by the other party, obstructing federal investigators, and openly encouraging America's enemies to use technology to deceive us and incite violence among our people.
I think I need to explain myself a bit. I'm stuck with the Republicans because of the American idiotic two party system. I'm not a Trump fan but I voted for him. I'm not a Republican, I'm a fiscal conservative who believes in limited government. Trump has helped my 401k but I think he's an idiot on social issues. I also think he's not really an idiot because the social issues are what propelled him to victory. He's the lesser of two evils to me and that's it. I think he's a troll but I still might vote for him again depending on who he's running against.
I'm a realist, not an idealist.
Still think he's the lesser of two weevils?
I'm pretty sure Hillary wouldn't have been the global laughingstock and thin skinned wannabe dictator that Trump is.
Maybe your 401k would be slightly less but is it worth all this noise and buffoonery? All these corrupt officials, the firings, the scandals, the loss of freedoms. We'd not be in a trade with China.
There would not have been Charlottesville which happened because they were emboldened by Ttump.
There would be none of this "the press is the enemy of the people" wannabe facist nonsense.
We'd still be in the Paris Climate Accord. We wouldn't be fighting with CANADA. We'd still have net neutrality.
Read the edit to my last post. I'm curious as to your thoughts. I really like hearing from you and @jjstraka34. My experience from corporate America hasn't been the same as yours. Since the 90's I've seen a huge change in how workers are treated but maybe it's only been in my particular industry.
I I see your post it's fine to cheer making thousands of dollars in your 401k. But to me it's not worth it - one I might be dead before I enjoy it so what's happening now is more important and B it's not worth the losses in the other areas I mentioned (global respect, freedoms, etc). Finally, ideally social security is always there as a fallback. Even when the stock market fails SS should be able to provide a baseline income to get by in old age.
I'm sick of the GoP playing games like giving huge tax cuts then eying SS and Medicare for cuts or "privatization" which basically means gambling with your and my money.
Trump's trade wars - we are lucky it hasn't yet screwed the market, right. Trump's not some successful business savant he's gone bankrupt 6 times - one or maybe two you can understand but 6?! His recklessness and impulsiveness is going to catch up on things inevitably.
Finally, I see your point that once corporations get more cash then you'd expect them to do xyz (hire people, expand, raises). None of that is what's happening in reality as far as I've seen.
They are overwhelmingly using their benefits for stock buybacks which boosts executive pay because stocks are part of their compensation. A few companies publicly announced one time bonuses. Nobody to my knowledge offered any long term raises, they keep the long term (next quarter lol) benefits to themselves (for stock buybacks). And finally businesses are using their cash to upgrade and purchase additional private jets which are now 100% able to be written off on taxes. A teacher can write off $250 in school supplies but businessman can write off millions for private jets. And they are doing that, believe me.
The Trump Tax Cuts Did One Thing: Give Rich People More Money (NY mag) What else is happening to all that money? Just as critics predicted, corporations are engaging in a massive binge of stock buybacks. Share repurchases rose 50 percent in the first half of 2018. “For the first time in 10 years, buybacks are garnering the largest share of cash spending by S&P 500 firms,” writes Goldman Sachs analyst David Kostin. Are corporations investing more? Yes, but mainly they are using their windfall to increase their own holdings. http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/09/trumps-tax-cuts-did-one-thing-give-rich-people-more-money.html
I want to address this issue that any man can be accused of sexual assault specifically as a political tactic.
Many Democrats hated George W. Bush. Many Republicans hated Barack Obama. Many liberals had just as many ideological reservations about John Roberts, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch being put on the court.
My question is, if false sexual assault allegations are such a great weapon, why were none of these men accused of it?? Because if this theory was true, surely some woman SOMEWHERE could have been found to come forward with a false story. Yet in over 18 years between the 5 of them, none have.
Answer: because they didn't do it. Thus no one said they did.
I'm being 100% serious here. I went to literally hundreds of parties in high school. Hundreds. Not once did I ever write down that I was planning to or did attend a party on a goddamn calendar. Because the first thing you want to do when you are engaging in underage drinking is to surely leave around written documentation for your parents to find about exactly when and where you are going to be getting sloshed. No 17-year old in the history of 17-year olds has ever done this. It's one the stupidest things I've ever heard of.
For that matter, we have thousands of pages of documents the White House won't release, but we are going to get 36 year old calendars?? And again, this idea that a high school student would hear about a party on Thursday afternoon, then immediately go to his calendar and write down "kegger at Alex's House at 10pm" in the box for October 20th (or whatever date you want to pick) is just completely at odds with everything I know and remember about being a teenager. If the defense really is "See?? Kavanaugh didn't write down the party in his calendar, all clear!!", then they really need to go back to the drawing board and try a little harder. This is like OJ Simpson claiming proof that he didn't commit murder because he didn't have a "go kill Nicole" note under a magnet on his fridge. This entire line of thinking is so completely absurd to anyone who has lived a normal American adolescent life that it should cause everyone to question why they are so obviously grasping for such ridiculous straws. Let's get some carbon dating on these calendars Brett Kavanaugh has miraculously kept around since 1982 as well. If you think Professor Ford's story sounds far-fetched, then this should by any measure sound BATSHIT crazy.
Let me paint a hypothetical scenario for you. I'm sitting in my room on a Friday in the fall of 1999. There is a big bash at my friends lake cabin tomorrow night, and I have to come up with some somewhat plausible lie to tell my mother so I can get the $10 I'll need to split a 1.75 of vodka and get myself out of the house for the night. But my plans all fall apart as I'm spinning my yarn for my mother when she turns around, looks at my wall calendar and sees "party at Lake Winnebago" written in bold magic marker. Of course I had to make this up, because that would be INSANE.
Let me paint a hypothetical scenario for you. I'm sitting in my room on a Friday in the fall of 1999. There is a big bash at my friends lake cabin tomorrow night, and I have to come up with some somewhat plausible lie to tell my mother so I can get the $10 I'll need to split a 1.75 of vodka and get myself out of the house for the night. But my plans all fall apart as I'm spinning my yarn for my mother when she turns around, looks at my wall calendar and sees "party at Lake Winnebago" written in bold magic marker. Of course I had to make this up, because that would be INSANE.
Unfortunately - the GOP doesnt appear to be interested in actually figuring out if the rape attempt happened. They're more interested in finding a way to give Kavanaugh's denial as much plausibility as possible en route to confirming him. Lindsey Graham said as much today when he said he doesnt forsee a scenario in which he wouldnt confirm Kavanaugh (Unless there's something truly ground breaking - but he knows full well that wont happen. Turns out the Senate wont subpoena Mark Judge. The other guy in the room).
Actually let me repeat that. The Senate isnt going to subpoena the only other direct witness to the crime. The guy who is already denying it (so you'd THINK he would be useful for the GOP). Yeah. This isnt a sham... /eyeroll
He's going to be pulled as the nominee by Wednesday, and then the GOP and their media apparatus will spend the next month propping him up as a martyr, which is what they do best anyway.
This article (again, Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer), seems to imply that McConnell and the GOP knew about the second accuser earlier in the week when they were pledging to ram him through anyway. They knew, and that is why they wanted this done last week. Wrap your head around that one:
It would be suicidal for them to put him back before the committee now. I fail to understand why Trump didn't just pull the nomination and put up one of the dozen other Federalist Society automatons who will make the exact same rulings. The only explanation for THAT is that Trump got assurances from Kavanaugh on a very specific hypothetical case that involves executive power. They knew about a second accuser, they were going to push him through anyway, and THEN the country could find out. No wonder they refused to entertain an investigation. Did they honestly think they could hide this?? This is perhaps the absolute height of the Republican clown show. They are positively drunk on power. Trump may push forward with him regardless. He is after all, his kind of guy.
This accusation isn't even half as credible as the last, so no wonder they waited until it was clear the last attempt had failed to try to put together another half assed smear job. No one says they witnessed it. No one says they heard it from her. No evidence at all. But an anonymous person said he is 100% certain he heard it from a friend of a friend!
It's sick and unjust to try to ruin people's lives and forever brand them as the worst sort of person based on the flimsiest evidence imaginable because you lust for power, but it's also predictable at this point.
What power?? Kavanaugh gets removed and someone who will rule exactly how he would have likely gets confirmed in time to seat him before a (still unlikely) Democratic Senate takes control anyway. The power dynamic will NEVER change in this scenario until the Democrats are in a position to steal a seat back. Which, incidentally, I will advocate for until the end of time until it happens.
And, again, we are seeing why I have dubbed any public accusation of sexual assault as being subject to the Cosby rule. 10 more women could come forward and I would be hearing the exact same thing every time. As if there is this cabal of jilted females out there just itching to get death threats and destroy their lives to torpedo a Supreme Court nomination. Again, why didn't this happen to Gorsuch if it is so damn easy and predictable?? Why not Roberts or Alito?? The suggestion seems to be that there is a veritable assembly line of women the Democrats have lined up at any time ready to pounce with fake sexual assault allegations. If so, it's taken them 30 years and 3 nominees to actually use them. What kind of plan is that??
For that matter, has there been a SINGLE man accused of sexual assault in the last two years who HASN'T denied it and said the women are lying?? The message to women is crystal clear. If you want to come out against a public figure, you better have about a dozen other women willing to come forward with you, or you will basically be dismissed.
The six siblings of Republican Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ 4) made a new television advertisement where they tell voters to vote for the Democrat that is running against their brother.
Wow! Sorry, I actually find this kind of disturbing. A new low in politics. Let's now go seek out family members to stick a knife in the back of the person we're running against. If your dad doesn't agree with your politics lets get him to make a statement. Don't get along with your sister, lets get her to make an ad. Better not run for office unless your whole family is on board. Pathetic...
Calling someone pathetic for exercising the right to free speech?
Maybe petty might be the better word, but yeah. Just because you have the right doesn't mean you have to exercise that right.
Edit: None of those people sound like they'll ever be hurting for money their entire lives. They're all rich assholes who think their beliefs are all that. I wouldn't screw my family members over because I might actually need their help and support at some point in my life. They're rich douchebags who think they'll never need help from him ever and think that their shit don't stink. I couldn't care less what they think. I also don't give a crap what rich Hollywood assholes think. Sorry...
The idea that people must be silent when they disagree with a family member because that family member holds elected office (or is running for office) no matter what that person says is antithetical to the concept of freedom of speech.
EDIT: previously -> initially (since the letter to the editor came after the story about the Soros-theory)
While I steadfastly maintain that the talking point making the rounds on the right through all this is that this is "just how teenage boys behave" is complete and utter nonsense, I will make the exception in regards to anything that has to do with frat parties. I went to maybe 3 of them in my two years of college, and then I refused to go to anymore. Because the atmosphere was toxic. You could feel it in the air. I felt like I was surrounded by cavemen. I felt genuinely uncomfortable at them even as a male.
You know I went to a school with tons of teenage boys. I am unaware of them going around en masse and raping anyone. While some of the more dickish ones may have wanted to, I am not aware of any of them actually doing so.
You know I went to a school with tons of teenage boys. I am unaware of them going around en masse and raping anyone. While some of the more dickish ones may have wanted to, I am not aware of any of them actually doing so.
Again, just my experience coming from small town Minnesota, but I saw no behavior like this UNTIL I got to college (where, as I mentioned before, a girl I sat next to in anthropology was raped in the dormitory), at which point, as I mentioned in the above posts, the frat parties to me seemed like a breeding ground for the worst kinds of trouble. But in high school?? No way. And we drank like fish. We were guilty of many irresponsible behaviors, but sexual assault was never even on the radar.
But a bunch of elitist Ivy League frat boys who have been groomed to be masters of the universe their entire lives?? Yeah, I can buy it would have the kind of culture that would think they have a right to gang rape a drunk girl. Absolutely.
Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s fraternity at Yale has long been notorious for disrespecting women including while he was a member. They were recently disbanded I believe in like 2014 or something after shouting/chanting outside a women's sorority "No means yes. Yes means anal."
You know, I'm thinking back here, and didn't EVERYONE universally agree that Harvey Weinstein was guilty as sin?? And didn't his movie empire fall apart within like 48-72 hours afterwards?? Why is that the ONLY incident in which women have pretty much universally been believed?? Even Cosby has his defenders to this day.
And I'll be perfectly frank about my own side. You know who a TON of liberals blame for Al Franken resigning to this day?? Kirsten Gillibrand. For being the first woman Senator to come out in favor of him resigning. She has been written off by a certain section of the left because they think Franken's situation was a smear job. I mean, what the hell are we doing here??
Comments
Edit: None of those people sound like they'll ever be hurting for money their entire lives. They're all rich assholes who think their beliefs are all that. I wouldn't screw my family members over because I might actually need their help and support at some point in my life. They're rich douchebags who think they'll never need help from him ever and think that their shit don't stink. I couldn't care less what they think. I also don't give a crap what rich Hollywood assholes think. Sorry...
I'm a realist, not an idealist.
Edit: If my 401k goes up 5% I make thousands of dollars. A millionaire makes 10's of thousands and a billionaire makes millions. I still made money though so I don't care. The fact that somebody else makes more doesn't change the fact that I'm better off. Guess what, when companies make money they don't just laugh and cash their checks at the bank, they wonder how they can make even more money. That usually involves hiring more people and making more product. If they're thinking about the future, they want to invest in research to discover more products that they can sell for even more money. Their investors love the fact that they can sustain their profits for many years by thinking forward and risk more of their investment dollars on them. The company finds it's difficult competing with other companies to recruit the best employees so they have to increase their benefits and salary offers to stay competitive so they up the ante. This is exactly what I've seen in my field in the last 20 years. It's not the 40's, 50"s or even 60's anymore people. Trump is an asshole, but he isn't wrong about everything!
I'm pretty sure Hillary wouldn't have been the global laughingstock and thin skinned wannabe dictator that Trump is.
Maybe your 401k would be slightly less but is it worth all this noise and buffoonery? All these corrupt officials, the firings, the scandals, the loss of freedoms. We'd not be in a trade with China.
There would not have been Charlottesville which happened because they were emboldened by Ttump.
There would be none of this "the press is the enemy of the people" wannabe facist nonsense.
We'd still be in the Paris Climate Accord. We wouldn't be fighting with CANADA. We'd still have net neutrality.
I don't favor foreign interventions without specific and limited goals with strong planning behind them, and I'm okay with modest adjustments to promote renewable energy sources and nuclear power (though the Democrats are unfortunately very skeptical of nuclear energy). I have mixed feelings on affirmative action, I consider immigration to be a minor issue these days (immigration, legal and illegal, has been low for many years), and I think police accountability is good for everyone. Gerrymandering is indefensible and the electoral college should be abolished.
I have little concern for certain social issues which I think are mostly rhetoric or involve no concrete policy. I disagree strongly with the "white privilege" concept, but that has no connection to public policy, so it doesn't bother me much. The #MeToo movement is very important, but that's related more to enforcement of existing laws than any new legislation (we've always had laws against sexual assault, but reporting it and acting upon reports has been unacceptably rare until fairly recently).
Vague slogans and empty buzzwords like political correctness have zero meaning to me, and I find partisan bickering to be a pointless distraction. I know I've said this many times, but it's more important to focus on what is right rather than who is right, because the latter just feeds factionalism and low standards. We waste a lot of time trying to prove that "we're the good guys and they're the bad guys."
I place little importance on conventional military power because we already enjoy conventional supremacy and the only nation that's doing anything to challenge it in even an extremely limited way is China. For virtually every other geopolitical threat on the world stage, our enemies are using guerilla warfare, terrorism, and cyber warfare instead. I think we need to spend considerably less money building fighter jets we never use and considerably more money strengthening our cyber defenses and intelligence gathering. Blood and steel aren't advancing our interests like they used to; control over and access to information is much more important in the post-Cold War era.
The Republican party doesn't share many of my ideas. The only constant, as far as I can tell, is that the GOP will implement tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the wealthiest individuals and the most powerful corporations, money which could be better spent in any number of ways--or at least distributed equally among taxpayers, if you're going to throw away government revenue. I profoundly disagree with other practices common to some members of the GOP: gerrymandering, manipulating the makeup of the courts, shutting down the government, shutting down voting booths in districts populated by the other party, obstructing federal investigators, and openly encouraging America's enemies to use technology to deceive us and incite violence among our people.
I'm sick of the GoP playing games like giving huge tax cuts then eying SS and Medicare for cuts or "privatization" which basically means gambling with your and my money.
Trump's trade wars - we are lucky it hasn't yet screwed the market, right. Trump's not some successful business savant he's gone bankrupt 6 times - one or maybe two you can understand but 6?! His recklessness and impulsiveness is going to catch up on things inevitably.
Finally, I see your point that once corporations get more cash then you'd expect them to do xyz (hire people, expand, raises). None of that is what's happening in reality as far as I've seen.
They are overwhelmingly using their benefits for stock buybacks which boosts executive pay because stocks are part of their compensation. A few companies publicly announced one time bonuses. Nobody to my knowledge offered any long term raises, they keep the long term (next quarter lol) benefits to themselves (for stock buybacks). And finally businesses are using their cash to upgrade and purchase additional private jets which are now 100% able to be written off on taxes. A teacher can write off $250 in school supplies but businessman can write off millions for private jets. And they are doing that, believe me.
https://money.cnn.com/2018/09/17/investing/stock-buybacks-tax-cuts/index.html
The Trump Tax Cuts Did One Thing: Give Rich People More Money (NY mag)
What else is happening to all that money? Just as critics predicted, corporations are engaging in a massive binge of stock buybacks. Share repurchases rose 50 percent in the first half of 2018. “For the first time in 10 years, buybacks are garnering the largest share of cash spending by S&P 500 firms,” writes Goldman Sachs analyst David Kostin. Are corporations investing more? Yes, but mainly they are using their windfall to increase their own holdings.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/09/trumps-tax-cuts-did-one-thing-give-rich-people-more-money.html
Trump's new tax law means everybody may soon be buying private jets — here are the 7 go-to planes for the super-rich (Business Insider)
https://www.businessinsider.com/private-jet-trump-tax-bill-deduction-for-richest-people-2018-3
Employers Choose Bonuses Over Raises (Wall Street Journal 9/18/2018)
https://www.wsj.com/articles/benefit-gains-exceed-wage-growth-new-labor-data-shows-1537289455
Why many companies are giving bonuses — not raises — after the new tax cuts (Washington Post)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-leadership/wp/2018/01/18/why-many-companies-are-giving-bonuses-not-raises-after-the-new-tax-cuts/?utm_term=.53d514e6f08f
‘We’ve Lost’: GOP’s Poll Shows Americans Hate Trump Tax Bill (National Memo)
http://www.nationalmemo.com/weve-lost-gops-poll-shows-americans-hate-trump-tax-bill/
Many Democrats hated George W. Bush. Many Republicans hated Barack Obama. Many liberals had just as many ideological reservations about John Roberts, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch being put on the court.
My question is, if false sexual assault allegations are such a great weapon, why were none of these men accused of it?? Because if this theory was true, surely some woman SOMEWHERE could have been found to come forward with a false story. Yet in over 18 years between the 5 of them, none have.
Answer: because they didn't do it. Thus no one said they did.
I'm being 100% serious here. I went to literally hundreds of parties in high school. Hundreds. Not once did I ever write down that I was planning to or did attend a party on a goddamn calendar. Because the first thing you want to do when you are engaging in underage drinking is to surely leave around written documentation for your parents to find about exactly when and where you are going to be getting sloshed. No 17-year old in the history of 17-year olds has ever done this. It's one the stupidest things I've ever heard of.
For that matter, we have thousands of pages of documents the White House won't release, but we are going to get 36 year old calendars?? And again, this idea that a high school student would hear about a party on Thursday afternoon, then immediately go to his calendar and write down "kegger at Alex's House at 10pm" in the box for October 20th (or whatever date you want to pick) is just completely at odds with everything I know and remember about being a teenager. If the defense really is "See?? Kavanaugh didn't write down the party in his calendar, all clear!!", then they really need to go back to the drawing board and try a little harder. This is like OJ Simpson claiming proof that he didn't commit murder because he didn't have a "go kill Nicole" note under a magnet on his fridge. This entire line of thinking is so completely absurd to anyone who has lived a normal American adolescent life that it should cause everyone to question why they are so obviously grasping for such ridiculous straws. Let's get some carbon dating on these calendars Brett Kavanaugh has miraculously kept around since 1982 as well. If you think Professor Ford's story sounds far-fetched, then this should by any measure sound BATSHIT crazy.
Let me paint a hypothetical scenario for you. I'm sitting in my room on a Friday in the fall of 1999. There is a big bash at my friends lake cabin tomorrow night, and I have to come up with some somewhat plausible lie to tell my mother so I can get the $10 I'll need to split a 1.75 of vodka and get myself out of the house for the night. But my plans all fall apart as I'm spinning my yarn for my mother when she turns around, looks at my wall calendar and sees "party at Lake Winnebago" written in bold magic marker. Of course I had to make this up, because that would be INSANE.
Actually let me repeat that. The Senate isnt going to subpoena the only other direct witness to the crime. The guy who is already denying it (so you'd THINK he would be useful for the GOP). Yeah. This isnt a sham... /eyeroll
This article (again, Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer), seems to imply that McConnell and the GOP knew about the second accuser earlier in the week when they were pledging to ram him through anyway. They knew, and that is why they wanted this done last week. Wrap your head around that one:
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/senate-democrats-investigate-a-new-allegation-of-sexual-misconduct-from-the-supreme-court-nominee-brett-kavanaughs-college-years-deborah-ramirez
It would be suicidal for them to put him back before the committee now. I fail to understand why Trump didn't just pull the nomination and put up one of the dozen other Federalist Society automatons who will make the exact same rulings. The only explanation for THAT is that Trump got assurances from Kavanaugh on a very specific hypothetical case that involves executive power. They knew about a second accuser, they were going to push him through anyway, and THEN the country could find out. No wonder they refused to entertain an investigation. Did they honestly think they could hide this?? This is perhaps the absolute height of the Republican clown show. They are positively drunk on power. Trump may push forward with him regardless. He is after all, his kind of guy.
It's sick and unjust to try to ruin people's lives and forever brand them as the worst sort of person based on the flimsiest evidence imaginable because you lust for power, but it's also predictable at this point.
And, again, we are seeing why I have dubbed any public accusation of sexual assault as being subject to the Cosby rule. 10 more women could come forward and I would be hearing the exact same thing every time. As if there is this cabal of jilted females out there just itching to get death threats and destroy their lives to torpedo a Supreme Court nomination. Again, why didn't this happen to Gorsuch if it is so damn easy and predictable?? Why not Roberts or Alito?? The suggestion seems to be that there is a veritable assembly line of women the Democrats have lined up at any time ready to pounce with fake sexual assault allegations. If so, it's taken them 30 years and 3 nominees to actually use them. What kind of plan is that??
For that matter, has there been a SINGLE man accused of sexual assault in the last two years who HASN'T denied it and said the women are lying?? The message to women is crystal clear. If you want to come out against a public figure, you better have about a dozen other women willing to come forward with you, or you will basically be dismissed.
The idea that people must be silent when they disagree with a family member because that family member holds elected office (or is running for office) no matter what that person says is antithetical to the concept of freedom of speech.
EDIT: previously -> initially (since the letter to the editor came after the story about the Soros-theory)
Avennetti has evidence that Kavanaugh involved in gang rape allegedly.
But a bunch of elitist Ivy League frat boys who have been groomed to be masters of the universe their entire lives?? Yeah, I can buy it would have the kind of culture that would think they have a right to gang rape a drunk girl. Absolutely.
And I'll be perfectly frank about my own side. You know who a TON of liberals blame for Al Franken resigning to this day?? Kirsten Gillibrand. For being the first woman Senator to come out in favor of him resigning. She has been written off by a certain section of the left because they think Franken's situation was a smear job. I mean, what the hell are we doing here??