tvc184

Mental illness.

Yes we should listen as that is the law. They are not quite the same though and not just being different facts. OJ was a popular and rich celebrity. Zimmerman, not so much. The one juror that spoke after the Zimmerman verdict said that the jury "wanted to" convict him of murder but the evidence simply was not there. I think the jury in the Simpson trial had the exact opposite take and it was a case of jury nullification. If they "wanted to" convict him, they would have. Both certainly reach the same legal standing and they are both not guilty. There is a huge difference in the way the cases were handled and the popularity of the suspects however.

I am not going to use the excuse “but your guy did it” but it is what it is and that is politics. Politicians know there is a mic on no matter who is in the audience. One of the most despicable things that I have ever seen a politician do in front of an audience was when Obama spoke at the memorial for the five officers gunned down in the mass murder in Dallas. They were there to honor the lives of police officers were killed for doing the job. It should have been left at that, shouldn’t it? But no, in his “memorial” to officers killed in the line of duty, he brings up slavery and Jim Crow laws. While I know that Trump was using the Boy Scouts as a platform to make yet another political speech, doesn’t the other side do exactly the same thing? It is mighty selective to point out a political speech on one side when it is not really called for when the previous guy in the same position did exactly the same thing. Trump does not get a pass because Obama did. It is not tit-for-tat. Sometimes we need to look in the mirror when we call people pathetic.

I think the RNC is fed up with the Republicans that are fed up with Trump.

They might be trying to make 2+2=7. I saw a study one time (and I do not dispute the results) that people watch more than 4 hours of television a day were significantly more likely to have a heart attack at a younger age. So, does the television cause heart attacks or it just more likely that people that sit around and watch television all day don’t get any exercise? If a guy watches 6 hours a day on the tube but then jogs 3 miles a day, is he as likely to have that cardiac problem as the guy who watches only 4 hours but never gets into any activity?

I loved what she looked like when she was on FNC. I still love her look.

Let’s see, 320 million people in this country and we now have the opinion of one of them. Maybe we need about 500 million new threads in this forum so we can varying opinions from one person on, let’s say, the last five presidents.

Only if he was Russian. Since he is Hungarian, it is okay.

We have had some long living presidents lately. Reagan died at 93, GHW Bush is 93 and Carter is 92.

It likely won't matter. There will probably be a 7-2 conservative split by then so the course will be set for the next two decades anyway.

Out of his 10 big accomplishments in life, only one had to do with his presidency. He did help broker the deal with Israel and Egypt which was a huge accomplishment. Nothing in the article, which lists lifelong major accomplishments, lists a single thing that he did for this country as its president.. Go figure. A great humanitarian and a lousy president.

Hahaha!!! BUSTED .... lying about the police in order to sensationalize. Imagine that.

A quote (almost) of Alexis de Tocqueville goes like: “Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.” I believe this, as explained by a frenchman over 150 years ago, is foretelling the current state of liberal\proggressive\socialist politics. Let’s drag everyone down to the lowest common denominator so we can all say that we are equal instead of aspiring for individual excellence or achievement.

Because if you are too lazy to move ahead in life or your only response to poor performance is to blame someone else, then the only way to be equal is to drag everyone else down to your level.

Probably start a war. Then you will be asking why he did something. Trump has been in office less than 6 months and you want solutions from many years of bungling.

Actually federal/local task forces probably go back to Prohibition.

The concept was developed more than 30 years ago. I have been attached to or worked with 3 federal task forces and was a federal agent for one of them (as a US Customs agent before it was ICE). They might argue who decided to impliment it in Chicago or who might actually get the ball rolling for a current task force. I am fairly certain that like most other areas, Chicago has had and does have the feds working with locals on various projects. This might be yet another that targets violent crime specifically.

Much like with Hillary, the Dems attached their wagon to a falling star but for appearances can’t back out. Both have drug their party down and fortunately for the Republicans, the Dems don’t want to be seen as not inclusive or kicking a minority to the curb. They will ride the Titanic to the ocean floor rather than admit their lunacy.

You're kidding right? Nah, probably not.

No, I wouldn't. I think the Republicans knew exactly what they were doing, so did the Democrats and it wasn't panic but reality. The Dems have always had more party loyal, I don't care who is running, voters. The term "Yellow Dog Democrat" is meant for a well known reason. The non-thinking, party voting... I would vote for an old yellow dog before I would vote Republican.

Here is what I read into it and what you ignored. Let's say that you don't think the Republicans in Jefferson County are the same as the Republicans in the rest of the state. Why, I have no clue... but okay. The record votes were, 45 Nay votes in the House. Of those, 38 were Democrats. In the Senate voting against this bill were 11 Democrats and no Republicans. If the straight ticket voting is so stacked for the Republicans, why did they overwhelmingly vote to end it? If it so hurts the Democrats, why did they vote overwhelmingly to keep it in place and in the Senate in a lockstep vote? The truth is that it is just the opposite no matter any rationale trying to explain it away.

It is interesting that you believe that straight ticket voting is a problem for Democrats if I read you correctly. From the data that I have seen it is the Democrats that benefit from the practice. I haven’t checked it in a few years but the last time I did, about 70% of the Democratic voters in Jefferson County were straight ticket and only about 30% of Republicans. Just from my man on the street dealings, the Dems have a lot less knowledge of names on the ballot and only know the capital letter next to the name. But let’s forget about opinions for now. The Republican dominated Texas legislature just passed a bill (HB25) that outlaws straight ticket voting in 2020. It was signed by the governor on June 1st. I realize that you likely believe that the Texas GOP agrees with you and is sacrificing their future for the betterment of the state. I suspect that like me, the Texas Republicans believe that the Dems are the big beneficiary of straight ticket voting and this law backs that up. My anectdotal evidence is an opinion but the new law banning straight ticket voting is a fact.

A blind man could see this one and likely the ruling on it in the next session. What constitutional rights does a person have that is not from this country and has never been to this country? Going around immigration laws set by Congress, the Ninth Circuit has yet again set its own rules out of their perceived feelings and not the law. The liberals and progressives loved it when the SCOTUS overruled Arizona’s immigrant trespassing law by saying only the US Congress could make immigration laws. I have not looked it up yet but I believe that US law, passed by Congress, gives the US President the authority to stop people from entering from any other country. I guess they are finding that you cannot have it both ways.

Wow, I think you are onto something here... Obama Health and Human Service Secretary, Sylvia Mathews Burwell. Degree in political science. Graduate degree in politics, economics and philosophy. So how did she get to be the secretary over all health issues with degrees in politics and philosophy? Oh, she was already in the Obama cabinet nominated..... as deputy of the Office of Management and Budget. Yep, that sounds real medicine like. But wait, she was in the Clinton White House also (no, not as an aide with a blue dress) as an OMB member. Who did Burwell replace in this important health position. Well Kathleen Sebelius. What is her link to health and the medical field? Why she was the governor of Kansas and with a degree in (get this) POLITICS!! Two very qualified healthcare professionals. Then we have Anthony Foxx who was the Secretary of Transportation. He is well qualified after his college degree in ... history? Wait, he also got a law degree. As a lawyer and with a degree in history, he is the best we could find. I guess the young lawyers must have taken a lot of public transportation so he is qualified. Called one of the top four most important cabinet members, the Secretary of the Treasury, Jack Lew, was highly qualified under Obama. His degree was in economics. No wait, that was someone else. The head of the treasury was a lawyer. Let's not worry about those people that may just happen not to be in their chosen field, let's focus on the good picks, such as Secretary Janet Napolitano. With a degree to be a lawyer and sometimes mentioned as a nominee to the US Supreme Court, she was highly qualified when Obama named her as his choice for Homeland Security. Yep, the head person to protect our country was a lawyer with no experience that I could find that has had anything to do with security or the military. She did have some government experience however. Where you might ask? Well in that place that prepares you for security and military positions, she was on the Senate Committee on the Budget. Obama's Secretary of Agriculture? Surely it is a farmer or rancher.... or at least something to do with agriculture. Nope, Tom Vilsack was another lawyer. But hey, he was the governor of Iowa and they grow corn and soybeans. I can see where Obama had this long list of highly qualified secretaries in fields where they have college degree and specialties.

I look at it this way. The Republicans in 2016 probably put up the second worst candidate in the history of American presidential elections. Fortunately, the Democrats put up the worst candidate in history.