Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Then don't provide one, but don't expect people to take a statement they find dubious as fact when you make really dubious statements. Certainly don't follow that dubious statement with shallow logic and expect me to take you more seriously. I'm going to take you less seriously.
If there really was some kind of damning evidence in Trumps Tax return - How has the Muller investigation or just some crazed democrat working in the IRS not released the information/made a legal case?
Because that's against the law, not even the Joker is crazy enough to take on the IRS, and lots of public servants have a sense of civic duty? IDK. Could be a thousand things. It's all neither here nor there, anyway since you're for some reason insinuating "Trump's tax reforms can't reveal any damning evidence" in response to people claiming he's not as rich and successful as he pretends to be, aka a straw man and a red herring rolled into one and one that still doesn't have anything to do with the dubious assertion that the IRS is stocked in democrats. Why are you basing your entire statement's validity on really basic circular logic dependent on an claim you admit has no evidence to back it up, in response to a claim no one made and that doesn't really have anything to do with what people are currently discussing, and expecting anyone to take you as actually adding to discussion? You might notice no one is listening or bothering to argue against your "argument" because calling it an argument is overly generous. Practically a hand out even.
Further I said you were either a troll or mad to think anyone would take you seriously when you talk like this, and case and point;
You think he hair looks good then...Okay...
You're in here right now making fun of Hillary Clinton's hair two years after she lost the election.
I think it's absurd that someone keeps raising the "but her emails" cliche, but her hair? It's very 90s and kind of hideous but I really can't think of anything more vapid to bring into a discussion than Hillary Clinton's haircut. That's not as low as walking around being happy that McCain died like someone else did recently but it's still pretty low.
And with that I wash my hands.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/27 23:43:24
TBF, "Trump's Hairpiece" has been a punchline for at least a decade.
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
feeder wrote: TBF, "Trump's Hairpiece" has been a punchline for at least a decade.
Several at least, it was a well-worn gag in Drawn Together 15 years ago
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
feeder wrote: TBF, "Trump's Hairpiece" has been a punchline for at least a decade.
TBF, Trump's hairpiece is actually funny because it's so obviously a hair piece and bothers him so much. Just as are jokes about Joe Biden's habit of inserting foot in mouth, and Bill's philandering, and Shia LeBouf's stipid "never my president" flag or whatever that whole flag thing was all about idk there's important gak going on. Some things are just funny, even if they're banal, but at least they're not desperate.
I'm sure I could poke fun at Ted Cruz's haircut too, but you don't see anyone here being so basic in their search for validation that they're resorting to People Magazine levels of political debate.
"Well, you know, frankly, I think that John McCain is partially to blame for that because he is very outspoken," Inhofe told reporters, according to CNN. "He disagreed with the president in certain areas and wasn't too courteous about it."
"I don't know what's going to be said in the next few days about John McCain ... but anybody who in any way tarnishes the reputation of John McCain deserves a whipping, because most of the ones who would do the wrong thing about John McCain didn't have the guts to do the right thing when it was their turn," Isakson said from the Senate floor.
He added that he would convey "to the president or anybody in the world, it's time to pause and say this was a great man. He gave everything for us. We owe him nothing less than the respect that he earned."
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
feeder wrote: The guy managed to feth up selling booze, red meat, gambling and football in the USA. Genius businessman, truly.
I really don't understand this criticism...
Yes, even with those "not so successful endeavors"... he still had successes that made him lots of money. IE, real estates, the 2 (or 3?) pageant, etc...
C'mon ya'll... there are waaaaay better stuff to ding Trump on.
How about his affiliations with organized crime?
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
I'd just like to point out - it's not necessary to announce when you decide to ignore someone. It doesn't score you cool points or anything. Personally I think it kind of makes you look like a jerk.
Then don't provide one, but don't expect people to take a statement they find dubious as fact when you make really dubious statements. Certainly don't follow that dubious statement with shallow logic and expect me to take you more seriously. I'm going to take you less seriously.
If there really was some kind of damning evidence in Trumps Tax return - How has the Muller investigation or just some crazed democrat working in the IRS not released the information/made a legal case?
Because that's against the law, not even the Joker is crazy enough to take on the IRS, and lots of public servants have a sense of civic duty? IDK. Could be a thousand things. It's all neither here nor there, anyway since you're for some reason insinuating "Trump's tax reforms can't reveal any damning evidence" in response to people claiming he's not as rich and successful as he pretends to be, aka a straw man and a red herring rolled into one and one that still doesn't have anything to do with the dubious assertion that the IRS is stocked in democrats. Why are you basing your entire statement's validity on really basic circular logic dependent on an claim you admit has no evidence to back it up, in response to a claim no one made and that doesn't really have anything to do with what people are currently discussing, and expecting anyone to take you as actually adding to discussion? You might notice no one is listening or bothering to argue against your "argument" because calling it an argument is overly generous. Practically a hand out even.
Further I said you were either a troll or mad to think anyone would take you seriously when you talk like this, and case and point;
You think he hair looks good then...Okay...
You're in here right now making fun of Hillary Clinton's hair two years after she lost the election.
I think it's absurd that someone keeps raising the "but her emails" cliche, but her hair? It's very 90s and kind of hideous but I really can't think of anything more vapid to bring into a discussion than Hillary Clinton's haircut. That's not as low as walking around being happy that McCain died like someone else did recently but it's still pretty low.
And with that I wash my hands.
It's totally relevant - no one cares if Trump is not as rich as he claims to be. They only want access to his tax information for 2 reasons. They want to "expose" Trump somehow cheats on his taxes or avoids them through loop holes or they think he is hiding information about Russia. I think it's safe to say - his tax information has been examined to the maximum by the FBI and the IRS and since nothing has come of it in 2 years - there is nothing illegal going on there or we would know about it.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/08/28 01:06:30
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
Prestor Jon wrote: There are criticisms that can be levied against McCain, he certainly wasn't a perfect person or politician but at various times in his life, during his military and political career when he found himself in situations that allowed him to show his character, he showed a level of integrity and courage that we should do a better job of demanding from all of our leaders. The systems we've put in place are too big to be changed by just one person regardless of the office or position they hold but when leaders decide to take a stand and fight the good fight we need to respect it and be willing to hold ourselves to a similar standard.
Is this really as positive as it's being presented as?
"He's an Arab"
"No, he's a decent family man."
It's pretty hard to slice that any other way that Arabs are the opposite of decent.
It could reasonably be taken that way. However, the phrase "he's an Arab" did not mean "he is a man of Arab ethnicity" it meant "he is a supporter of terrorism" and McCain was not in a position where clarifying his response would have any sort of impact. Maybe he did feel that Arabs are inherently indecent but I do not see this incident as conclusive without further backing. In my eyes he was responding to the statement made, not the literal meaning of the words used. It is important to note that language, especially spoken, functions using the subjective meaning of statements.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/08/28 01:23:39
feeder wrote: The guy managed to feth up selling booze, red meat, gambling and football in the USA. Genius businessman, truly.
I really don't understand this criticism...
Yes, even with those "not so successful endeavors"... he still had successes that made him lots of money. IE, real estates, the 2 (or 3?) pageant, etc...
C'mon ya'll... there are waaaaay better stuff to ding Trump on.
How about his affiliations with organized crime?
Of course... he probably had to pay protection money from the mob. Or, maybe he's the doing the racketeering!
Prestor Jon wrote: There are criticisms that can be levied against McCain, he certainly wasn't a perfect person or politician but at various times in his life, during his military and political career when he found himself in situations that allowed him to show his character, he showed a level of integrity and courage that we should do a better job of demanding from all of our leaders. The systems we've put in place are too big to be changed by just one person regardless of the office or position they hold but when leaders decide to take a stand and fight the good fight we need to respect it and be willing to hold ourselves to a similar standard.
Is this really as positive as it's being presented as?
"He's an Arab"
"No, he's a decent family man."
It's pretty hard to slice that any other way that Arabs are the opposite of decent.
It could reasonably be taken that way. However, the phrase "he's an Arab" did not mean "he is a man of Arab ethnicity" it meant "he is a supporter of terrorism" and McCain was not in a position where clarifying his response would have any sort of impact. Maybe he did feel that Arabs are inherently indecent but I do not see this incident as conclusive without further backing. In my eyes he was responding to the statement made, not the literal meaning of the words used. It is important to note that language, especially spoken, functions using the subjective meaning of statements.
Well said, and I agree. It was the Othering of Obama that McCain was challenging in the moment. In hindsight he could have expanded on how wrong her statement was, but how much time did he really have responding to audience questions? He was rightly correcting the woman and reassuring her Obama was American and supported American values. A "decent family man."
I would agree with Ninth's and Taveler. While that statement might seem problematic outside of its context given the nature of McCain's run against Obama and the rhetoric employed against him at the time it really isn't. I'll also echo that I think it took no small amount of courage for McCain to say that in an election where he struggled against his own base more than anything.
I think McCain epitomized a lot of negative traits for US politicians. He flip flopped as the tides flowed, and he generally lacked scruples imo on a number of major issues. At the same time though he never really bent on issues he felt strongly about, at times to his own detriment. It takes more balls to stand in front of a crowd and tell them something they don't want to hear and all that.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/28 02:59:27
Xenomancers wrote: Somehow losing money - gains you money? I see. Is this the kind of stuff they spout on CNN? I will give you that he doesn't have a great ability to judge peoples character even though he claims to. I will give you that he had a lot of failures in his business career. He did in fact obviously have more successful deals than failures though because he is in the green. That is common sense.
Most (or all) projects he got involved in personally went tits over. The ones he just gave his brand and let real managers manage do have a rather better success rate. So obviously he is - sometimes - smart enough to let real experts handle his money, bringing in enough cash to keep him afloat when he once again blunders into, say, a casino or an airline.
So is this the magic lamp to get all of Obama's executive orders back and try to throw some more Ginsbergs on the SC? I wish him luck, and whatever drugs they prescribe for dementia nowadays.
feeder wrote: It takes a powerful dose of cognitive dissonance indeed to look at Trump's record with making deals and imagine that he will be able to craft an international trade deal.
Yeah it's not like he sold a million copies of a book called "The Art of the Deal".
The book written by someone else - who got possibly the best ghostwriting contract ever, just by asking for it? Hardly any indication of Donald Trump's negotiating prowess.
feeder wrote: It takes a powerful dose of cognitive dissonance indeed to look at Trump's record with making deals and imagine that he will be able to craft an international trade deal.
Yeah it's not like he sold a million copies of a book called "The Art of the Deal".
The book written by someone else - who got possibly the best ghostwriting contract ever, just by asking for it? Hardly any indication of Donald Trump's negotiating prowess.
And selling book writen by somebody else doesn't make you good at making deals. Just that you have enough PR value(which being stupid and idiot can give) and that writer is decent. Tells more about writer than subject...
AndrewGPaul wrote: The book written by someone else - who got possibly the best ghostwriting contract ever, just by asking for it? Hardly any indication of Donald Trump's negotiating prowess.
That sure sums up Trump's business record: make some money playing a character and marketing a brand, fail to do much besides allow someone with better skill to use the Trump brand. It's selling an illusion of wealth and success, and sadly people want to buy it.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
It's not just that; this is "news" because the guy who wrote the book got a significantly better deal than most (or all) ghostwriters get. Not only did Trump only contribute his name and photo on the cover, he got taken to the cleaners in the process.
AndrewGPaul wrote: It's not just that; this is "news" because the guy who wrote the book got a significantly better deal than most (or all) ghostwriters get. Not only did Trump only contribute his name and photo on the cover, he got taken to the cleaners in the process.
Maybe the book is showing how to make good deals by doing OPPOSITE of what Trump is doing
AndrewGPaul wrote: It's not just that; this is "news" because the guy who wrote the book got a significantly better deal than most (or all) ghostwriters get. Not only did Trump only contribute his name and photo on the cover, he got taken to the cleaners in the process.
Maybe the book is showing how to make good deals by doing OPPOSITE of what Trump is doing
He'd never know - he hasn't actually read it (the ghost writer read it to him).
Spinner wrote: I hear if you say Hillary Clinton's name three times in a mirror with all the lights off, she appears and tells you to check her website for policy details.
That's just an urban legend.
I know, I've tried it.
Instead some lady showed up and offered me a Bloody Mary.
The Auld Grump
Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.
The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
AndrewGPaul wrote: The book written by someone else - who got possibly the best ghostwriting contract ever, just by asking for it? Hardly any indication of Donald Trump's negotiating prowess.
That sure sums up Trump's business record: make some money playing a character and marketing a brand, fail to do much besides allow someone with better skill to use the Trump brand. It's selling an illusion of wealth and success, and sadly people want to buy it.
That was something I was willing to give Trump credit for doing well, managing a brand and successful marketing of his name. That's a big reason why he claims to be a billionaire, he assigns a ridiculously large value to the Trump name. However, having watched Trump severely damage both the Republican brand domestically and the USA brand globally I feel like I'm wrong on that.
Several Trump hotels around the world are trying to get out of their contracts with the Trump Organisation.
Trump is a hissing and a by-word in Scotland, where he reneged on all the promises he made in order to get permission to build his golf courses, as well as caused serious damage to a site of special scientific interest.
As you say, Trump's continual 5 a.m. Twitting gaking as president has only heaped up more distrust and resentment around the world, except among hard-core Trumpists.
An but you see Predator the USA and Republican brands never mattered. In fact while both these brands have arguably suffered in some ways that probably won’t be fully realized for years the real brand has thrived. The Trump brand is bigger than ever and validated at each turn as Trump pushes forward with his own self-agh aggrandizement and continues to take it in.
Trump is the only brand Trump cares about and it’s doing pretty well in the only way the narcissist behind it cares about. So really the lesson is that as long as you decry detractors as fake while raking in oodles on money and pretending the appraisIng minority is actually the majority then your brand too can take the White House and be the only thing that matters :p
To summarize the report is indicating that spending on teacher benefits has skyrocketed compared to the increase on spending students k-12. It's most likely due to increased costs in medical insurance and existing pension debt that the states are trying to pay.
To summarize the report is indicating that spending on teacher benefits has skyrocketed compared to the increase on spending students k-12. It's most likely due to increased costs in medical insurance and existing pension debt that the states are trying to pay.
It is likely the same problem that is cropping up everywhere: all those baby boomers are retiring.
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
I’d consider that to simply be a continuation of one of educations most persistent problems; being tragically underfunded. If anything the report itself showcases how Americans are happy to ignore the struggle to of the education system except when it can be used for the rousing game of culture wars dodge ball.
To summarize the report is indicating that spending on teacher benefits has skyrocketed compared to the increase on spending students k-12. It's most likely due to increased costs in medical insurance and existing pension debt that the states are trying to pay.
It makes perfect sense to me. . . insurance companies are out to make money and they've been increasing their costs for decades. On the flip side, we haven't in the last couple years, suddenly come up with a new pedagogy that is more expensive than previous models become mandatory. So while insurance companies are gouging all of us, education companies have remained the same.
3500+
3300+
1000
1850
2000 