Grumps

If we are hitting three's we can play with them. This game is huge for us as long as we are not completely flat.

I completely agree with your above post. I just think this is a separate issue. It is possible for wealthy people to be forced to live by the same rules as everyone else. I'm not worried about having power if if I have enough wealth to support my family.

This caravan? https://www.npr.org/2018/11/19/669193788/shouting-mexico-first-hundreds-in-tijuana-march-against-migrant-caravan It sounds like the Mexicans aren't thrilled with thousands of people illegally entering their country.

It may just be because I am too simple to understand it, but I still don't understand why "income equality" matters at all. If my salary stays the same and the cost of living stays the same, then what difference should it make to me if everyone else gets their salaries doubled or tripled? I still think that "income inequality" is the focus because it creates a "bad guy," the wealthy. We could focus on reducing poverty and everyone would be willing to work together.

War Eagle!!!!!!!!!!

It is my understanding that most of the members of the caravan entered Mexico illegally from Honduras and Guatemala and El Salvador. That makes them seem illegal to me. I think that it is silly to believe that most of the members of the caravan legitimately consider themselves as asylum seekers, but I may be wrong about that also. I personally wish that both sides of congress would work to fix the parts of our immigration law that EVERYONE thinks are broken.

Speaking of "Contradiction," you do realize that there is an elephant on the bottle, right? Surely there are enough bourbons out there for you to avoid bottles containing elephants!

Great win! War Eagle!

Seriously, you type the sentence I have bolded for you and in the next sentence say that I am seeing something that didn't happen? When did she run? Where did she touch him? I think that you are exaggerating AGAIN. Do you REALLY think that the woman whose job was to give the microphone to the reporters was in the wrong? My first post agreed with you that the White House should not have used a video that left out the 3 frames that justifies your claim that the video is doctored. YOU WIN THAT POINT. The people's microphone. HAHAHAHA! Why don't you do try to take it and see if the secret service agrees with you! Acosta was lecturing the POTUS despite having been given an opportunity to ask questions. He was a guest in the briefing room and despite being asked to stop talking, he persisted.

What do you think Nick Saban would do if a reporter questioned him as follows: "I want to challenge you on one of the statements that you made about the fourth quarter of last week's game." There is a big difference in saying "I want to challenge you" and "I want to challenge your assertion." Do you agree? Next, there is a clear difference in setting up a question with a statement and lecturing to the person you are questioning. I think that Acosta was lecturing when he said, "They're hundreds of miles away, though. They're hundreds and hundreds of miles away. That's not an invasion." It would be different if he had said, "Does the fact that the caravan is still hundreds of miles away in any way negate your assertion that the caravan is an invasion?"

Don't get me wrong, I ABSOLUTELY think that the R's were using the caravan to try to help them win their midterm elections. I also think that the D's were doing the same thing. My point is that it is possible that the coverage of the caravan has decreased because the size of the caravans has decreased. Further, it is possible that the size of the caravans has decreased because of the rhetoric from the White House.

Are we all also nationalists as well?

If you are going to exaggerate then it is hard to have a serious discussion (I don't think you can corroborate your claim that Trump admitted groping women by their genitals, but that is for another discussion). Whose microphone was it? Who handed the microphone to Acosta? Whose job was it to give the microphone to other reporters? Did she try to "snatch" the microphone from Acosta or did she try to perform her job and take it from him? Did he push her arm away or not? Does Acosta have a right to hold the microphone? He was a guest at the briefing and did not act appropriately as determined by the White House. Who should determine appropriate behavior?

Exactly. The question is why would they wait to report the votes?

I don't think there was criminal activity, just gross incompetence. Ha they officially completed the FIRST COUNT of the votes? If not, should they have?