TxHoops

Also, 9 out of the 10 poorest states are "red states." Interesting.... [Hidden Content]

Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Kentucky, Texas, etc. There are countless examples in many red states. Smitty, why is it that the states with the worst public education systems are almost all "red states"? How does that effect your "low information voter" theory?

No and no. The public education system in this country is just as bad today as it was 10 and 14 years ago. By the way, as for your disclaimer and a large portion of your other posts on this board, someone is going to start thinking "thou doth protest too much." I know you get fixated on something and have trouble moving past it (as many do), but I'm just saying. You mention race more than anyone of any color on this board (and no, I will not go back and provide examples 😉). (Disclaimer: I personally don't believe you are a racist based on what I know about you independent of this board. Although I don't know you well enough to "know your heart," I would almost be willing to say I "know" you are not racist. Enough to say I would bet a significant amount of money on it if it were something that could be empirically proven. Just a friendly word of counsel because I don't want you to be falsely labeled. You've made your point; I would move on.)

I would argue there were plenty of low info voters who helped elect W. I saw plenty of footage of these types (I won't call them hillbillies or rednecks for fear of being condescending) talking about how great it was to have a "regular guy" or someone they could really relate to as President. Guns, anti-gay marriage, etc. were issues of the utmost importance to them. So in that respect, I guess he got the job done which they sent him to do...

Good for the Rockets. Wayyy too much money for that guy. They need to try and get the rondo deal done. As a celtics fan, I hope they don't but he's the best piece they can add now IMO.

He's gotta start before he can lead. He's in the league now with talent all around. He's already pissing off everyone in the organization before he's taken a snap. Old school guys don't tolerate BS. He's not going to hit the field if he doesn't get that head screwed on straight and fast. He is fast on his way to being a cautionary tale. And it will be very sad if that happens.

Excellent point. I had the great fortune (although I thought I was most unfortunate at the time) to take con law from the late, great Charles Alan Wright. He was/is considered one of the preeminent constitutional scholars in our history. Amazing man.

Completely agree with your frustration and the example given. Cases like that one gives the system a bad name.

In principle, yes. Smitty's "grasp" of the constitution is a different conversation altogether. I didn't mean my surprise to mean I had read anything on this board to suggest you felt otherwise about the legal system. I was pleasantly surprised by your attitude on the subject. See what happens when I ASSuME? Broke my own darn rule!!

Very true.

😂

Hey, I am pleasantly surprised you support their right of redress there! I would agree that's the best venue to handle such issues.

You do know the judicial branch is a part of the "government"? That judges are paid by the "government"?

I refer you to 90 percent of the threads on this board. And again, you may disagree, but volume (at least the volume you have provided) is very, very telling.

There is a pretty good book on the whole Rangers fiasco. I can't remember the name or the author but I believe I have a copy somewhere. I will see if I can find it or find the title at least online. As far as Hicks goes, I suppose he thought he could rescue the franchise. Ultimately, he couldn't but the franchise was sold at a bankruptcy auction for close to $600M as I recall. That price includes the debt which was being assumed by the Nolan Ryan group. The bankruptcy was originally forced when the Rangers defaulted on $525M in debt. I sense that you seem to think any time I bring up "facts" like this, you are skeptical I am making things up. (However, I applaud your skepticism and believe being skeptical is a good thing.) Feel free to double check everything I have stated. Some of what I set forth (numbers) was done from memory but I know I am very close at the very least. I won't comment on your post being primarily a deflection to President Obama because I know that's how the subject of Bush began in the first place. You reference a question I didn't answer but I don't see a question. I think I see what you are asking. Again, I described Bush with an unflattering term. I never said that labeling of him was compassionate; I said I have compassion for him (difference). And I do. You stated that was a vitriolic statement and I responded who has vitriol for the mentally challenged. Now as to the difference between my criticism the hundreds (maybe thousands) of statements you and one or two others make daily about Obama - well, there's your answer. Sometimes mere volume is telling. And the volume here suggests consummation.

Thank you for your patience. I am home later than I expected but, as promised, I will attempt to address your other points. In re-reading your posts, the other two are interrelated anyway and can be combined in my response. Essentially, W. was involved with 3 oil and gas companies prior to his time with the Rangers. None of them were successful. In fact, he dumped his shares in the last one to pay off his $600k loan he took out for his 2% share in the Rangers. Interestingly, those shares were dumped just 3 days before the company was supposed to run completely out of money. An SEC insider trading investigation ensued, but no charges were filed (shocking given his father's position). Now, on to the Rangers, he borrowed $600k for a 2 percent share in the club, and his father's cronies put up the real money. He was given the position of managing partner (or something close to that title) and was the "face" of ownership. His group took over a franchise that was embroiled in a dispute over a publicly funded stadium built on property that was seized by eminent domain. Over a decade of litigation ensued. While there, he gave us a glimpse into how he would perform in Washington (which is what I referenced in one of the posts with which you took issue). Specifically, he managed to get the organization into a mountain of debt, which helped lead the franchise into bankruptcy. However, he did manage to be a part of the sale to Tom Hicks, from which he received $15M. He "repaid" Mr. Hicks by appointing him to one of the highest positions at his beloved University of Texas. So yes, he did finally make money on a business venture with the Rangers. I know you are a sports fan and have been able to follow how sports' franchises are recession proof and have consistently appreciated in value since the inception of pro sports. In fact, there are few areas in the private sector that are comparable. But that is a discussion for another day. Finally, I will address a point you made in the other thread (one of your favorite things to do - take a point from a post that irks you and start a new thread attempting to "call out" that person). I assumed you guys could add 2 and 2 to get 4. That is to say, he ran for governor in a state that was well on its way to becoming solid red. His father, whose name he bore, was and is immensely popular. Do you really give him the credit for his ascent in politics in this state? As for his presidency (for sure his initial election), I already gave my opinion in one of my initial posts. And lighten up, Stevenash. I obviously offended you with my laughter comment. I didn't realize your skin was so thin or I wouldn't have made that joke. I do apologize for being directly offensive. I will try not to repeat that offense.

Too much. Let him go.

I know it is hard to believe for someone who spends countless hours on this board but some of is actually have other things to do with our lives. I was finishing up some work so I can now go to dinner with my family. Some time tonight, I will give you a response to your other posts. I swear when you ask a question you are like a toddler on Christmas Eve.

And I forgot to thank you - we all need more laughter in our lives!

I am actually working. I told you I would respond as soon as I get a chance. Patience Stevie. (And it doesn't matter where you find compassion - I find it easy to have for the mentally challenged.)

I do have time to address the second one. I have absolutely no hatred for W. Despite my best efforts, I still feel sorry for him. He has spent his life trying to measure up to a standard he had no hope of reaching. My compassion won't allow me to hate him...

I will respond as soon as I finish laughing. There is more fail in those three posts than a W run business. Rest assured as soon as I get a moment, I wink enlighten you. You're welcome in advance.

1). His "experience" in running businesses should have forecast how dreadful he would be as president. His experience was a comedy of failures. 2) Are you saving it for later or choosing not to recycle a post you have already used 1794 times on this board?

George W. Bush is borderline retarded and somehow got nominated by the brilliant GOPers and rode the anti-fellatio in the Oval Office wave into the White House. Once there, he found that just as he was short on brain power to run a lemonade stand, he was overwhelmed in leading the country. As such, he relied on men he knew were much smarter than he, and got us in the costliest debacle in the history of our country. A debacle that continued to bury us into the next presidency. Well, for starters...

It doesn't have to be. I think it IS more often than some of you care to admit (to yourselves or others). As for Obama being the worst ever, you guys simply are severely misguided. I use the word misguided because you only have to go back 6 years or so to find the dolt who holds that honor.