Stephen Bannon, Sebastian Gorka, and Stephen Miller. There are probably more lurking in the shadows. Milo isn't a neo-nazi. He's an awful human but he's basically a professional troll. He's found a way to make a good living for free. His entire income is from donations from his fans. He's also gay, and not white.

Milo is a walking contradiction but you're right -- it boils down to him being a troll. Any other logic doesn't really matter. It's sad how far trolling gets you in 2017 America.

Dude, is this really a hill you want to die on?

You are correct, its just a word.

However, I have known many women that dont mind being called names, bitch or whatever. But I have never met one that is ok with cunt. Not sure they really have an explanation either. It is what it is.

I knew you didnt have an answer

Agree

The reality is that democrats didn't turn out to vote for Hillary. If you look at the graph, Trump got less republican votes than the previous two elections. Blame is on Hillary and the democrats. Even her own party didn't want her elected. And this is why there is a Trump in the WH and it has nothing to do with the fear you are talking about. But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of your racist view.

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/11/...rats-vote.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/omribens.../#1e7ceb9540a1

i understand that hillary was a terrible candidate.

but you are fucking kidding me if you think race doesn't play a role with trump and a god damn huge role.

people like to hide from it and i always wonder what they do for a living? where do they go? because daily i see people saying horrific racist shit.

It's more sad that the Republican party has turned politics into a my-team-versus-your-team type of sporting event. They now support a vulgar, Russian agent conman as POTUS. The latest reports I've read state that Trump was recruited by the Russians way back in 1986. Putin recently had Trump's recruiter killed. They're trying to get rid of the ties to his treason. I'm no Reagan fan, but he must be spinning in his grave right now, if corpses could spin.

Are the Democrats any less guilty of that divide, though? Believe me, I personally think GOP obstructionism is a huge reason we find ourselves in many of the sinkholes we do now (AKA the butchering of Obamacare from its original form).

But during Hillary's campaign, it was still, more or less, "us versus the deplorables". Now, Hillary had a little more ground to stand on there because a lot of the Trump groundswell was literally Russian trolls hiding being anonymous social media accounts, stoking fires and generating buzz around their candidate so as to most sully (through memes, of all things) Hillary's name, while keeping Trump hypervisible.

It was still presented as the good guys vs the bad guys though.

I feel contradictory talking/typing about Trump/this political environment, because I really do believe this election is such an outlier in American history. Whereas I never believed in a "wrong" candidate in past elections, I really do believe Trump was the wrong guy elected for the wrong reasons in this one.

It sounds contradictory, I know, but I still feel that while trying to be mindful of partisan divide and realizing the only way to really maximize what America can be is to get everyone to agree that A) we need to be better working together on many things and B) we probably shouldn't elect self-serving, incompetent, ratings/election results-obsessed lunatics to office and expect a better America.

If you don't see the difference between calling a woman the c-word, and calling a guy a dick, I can't help you. And if you can't see why it's problematic that angry white men are out there calling Clinton a c-word above all else, with no real substance to stand on besides their own hate and misogyny, I really can't help you.

Instead of using the term "deplorables", Hillary should have just called them "white supremacists and neo-nazis". Call them what they are. He'll, we fought a world war against their type of thinking before. Their platform has already been ruled unacceptable, and they simply aren't deserving of equal time. There would be fewer idiots on twitter if they had to post under 'NeonaziMike' instead of 'DeplorableMike' etc.

It was interesting that once trump's campaign started gaining traction it became "ok" to start spouting racist or borderline-racist commentary. They are out there, this was their opportunity to start being more vocal.

For the most part, I have decided that I need to stay out of any political topic on this board. However, I was reading an article today and I felt like the below quotes were pretty dead on:
Keep it classy, Freaks. Even though I don't agree with some of you, I still want to talk Colts will all of you.

Cheers,

Yes, it is a shame when politics dominate a Colts board ...
Like him or not he is what he is... I say give him a chance ... If he ends up a total screw up he will be gone in a tad less than 4 years... :cool:

Now back to bashing the Pats and the rest of the AFC South... :cool:

Heh. I was giving a briefing today and the IT guy was having an issue bringing up my PowerPoint slides so I was trying to keep things light and make conservation.

I asked how many of the 40 odd folks in the room were happy about the Pats winning the SB and only one person raised their hand. Born in Boston, of course.

But, afterwards, I had like six folks come up and indicate that they really hated the Pats.

Anyway, I don't think there are as many Pats fans as would justify their massive presence on all sports related talk shows.

Cheers,

Why do you think it's only angry WHITE men doing this? Again define cunt for me so I can see if I find real substance to stand behind my thinking...

It's funny I'm not even talking politics.... I just want GBB to admit he is being ridiculously judgemental deciding what I or anyone else can think in deciding what we see as the difference between a Saint and a cunt.

If cunt is so bad should this be the ONLY banned word on this board?

You are really bad at this

She shouldn't have called them anything, she shouldn't have mentioned them at all. What purpose could possibly be served by insulting Americans? "Oh, Hillary Clinton hates me, maybe I should vote for her..."

Trump more or less handed Hillary the high ground and dared her to walk on it. She didn't do it and she failed.

There's a scenario in my head where Trump has an epic meltdown and falls flat on his face, and the disaster that follows is what ends the completely illogical polarization that is killing this country.

I know I'm late to this thread, but it's important to see all the details... Trump is a magician, he wants us to look at something so we dont see something else. For instance, he wants liberals to focus on travel bans that look like he hates muslims, or deportation orders that everyone knows are logistically impossible.

Meanwhile, an executive order rescinds the stream rules that called for:

1. no coal mines within 100 feet of a stream (just over three first downs)
2. any coal mines that have polluted a stream have to clean it up
3. streams near coal mines must be tested before, during and after mining operations

The coal mining industry gave $13.5 million dollars to conservative candidates last year, including $70,000 to Paul Ryan himself.

Nothing to see here folks, nothing to see here....

I'm not going to argue with any of that. You're right. The Democrats once again pulled defeat from the jaws of victory. Trump is a distraction from what is going on in the background, but he's still a dangerous cult of personality. My biggest fear is for the country/republic/democracy itself. I'm afraid that the political divide is too big and too bitter to ever be bridged. More than half of the electorate doesn't bother, and the remaining people are split in half and hate each other. It's a perfect recipe for disaster and I think it's coming. I'm hoping for the best but... Yikes.

It's really hard to be optimistic. I've been blowing up Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnel's twitter feeds. They are both cowards, happily smiling as we exhume Joseph McCarthy.

Sean Spicer held his daily briefing in-formally in his office (called a gaggle) today. The WH picked the news outlets allowed in when the pool was expanded. They blocked CNN, NY Times, LA Times.

Suppression of a free press is not right.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/24/medi...gle/index.html

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017...ing-event.html

a complete and utter shit show

the dude is a man baby and has no desire to do things by the constitution

But hey, emails. Benghazi. Obamacare. Something something.

He doesn't give a shit about the constitution. He considers himself 'leader' now. And his followers do, too. If something isn't done, and soon, our period as a democratic republic will be over.

Obamacare does not belong in that list

Not looping it with the others as comparable. Saying it's one of three things most Trump supporters couldn't stop talking about, failing to see the bigger picture of anything.

Of course the Obamacare discussion is a whole 'nother can of worms.

So Spicer has intimated that the Feds will crack down on the legal weed laws in the states that legalized weed recreationally.

This seems like an odd political move to me. For one, the GOP and conservatives profess to be for state's rights. This seems to be opposite to that position. For two, Trump himself said this was a state's rights issue when he was campaigning. He would come across as a liar if he let this happened. For three, the latest polls for the past 2-3 years (yes, I know, in TrumpLand all polls are fake, but anyways) have shown that the majority of this country agrees with legalization in general, and a larger majority shows that even if people don't agree with legalization they believe it's a state's rights issue (which would be consistent with the conservative position).

So I'm just missing the boat here on why he'd do this. Politically it seems like a stupid move to me. I guess the only way it sorta makes sense is that other than Alaska all the states that have recreational weed voted against him, so perhaps he is that petty.

Because the man has zero consistency to his logic (where there is any logic). He's making abortion and transgender bathroom laws states rights issues, with weed having federal oversight. And guns ... heh.

It still remains the most insane to me that there are Conservatives who feel A) Trump is representative of them/their values and B) Trump is really something they want to tie their careers (GOP politicians) or country's future (GOP base) to.

big pharma is getting to him.

you really think politicians stand for anything other than what their big corporate backers want?

and i always find it hilarious when trump supporters say he has a bunch of money and can't be bought.

do you know what rich people love more than anything? more money.

This jumped out to me too. I just read something about 150,000 jobs being created in this niche.

I took my wife to Denver last November (I live in Atlanta). Honestly, My jaw hit the ground when I watched people walk in and out of those recreational dispensaries like it was a liquor store. I watched one guy walk down the street with a brown paper bag full of trees, or cookies, or whatever - and it's no problem. If the same guy is walking with the same bag here in Atlanta - his life might be fucked if APD stops him.

It was fascinating for me personally because I had never experienced something like this before. My family moved from Indianapolis when I was 14, and I've spent close to the last 13 years here in Atlanta. Outside of your basic deep south race relations stuff, Indiana and Georgia aren't that much different when it comes to every day people and every day life. But Colorado, and Denver specifically, gave me a feeling like I was in an entirely different country. People in Colorado are doing this shit for fun, and people where I'm from are doing it in fear (even the parents that have to illegally go out of state to obtain medicinal forms of cannabis for their children because Georgia will only allow absurdly weak (potency) forms.).

These people in Colorado had liberties (even over their own bodies) that I am not afforded in my home. And they voted for these liberties and decided as a state this is how they wanted to operate. Friction was probably inevitable because Sessions has always made it clear how he felt about Marijuana, but Trump said he felt it should be up to the states.

Does the white house actually intend to go out here and start hitting these legal spots? And for the conservatives out there that perceive Marijuana to be a non issue, what happened to your respect for state rights? I can understand someone saying they don't agree with Marijuana legalization; I can't understand the hypocrisy of suggesting a state doesn't have the right to choose how they operate here.

i wouldn't go that far. he is donald trump. he won't end the country. i don't give him that much credit

of course the government (republicans) want to go after weed. big pharma wants them to. they pay good money. weed is fucking with their profit margins.

good post dude. i just have to ask though. how the fuck can you live in atlanta? that place is so overpopulated i don't see how people do it.

o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66OV_DkPBFQ&t=7s

o

Pretty clear where I stand on Hillary so I won't beat that horse again. The federal government is overstepping it's constitutional power. Weed, public education and several other areas should be dictated by each state. Big pharma is just as guilty for insurance cost as any other factor. I understand developing new drugs cost money, but how can they justify selling cancer drugs that cost more than people make in a month for years on end? How long does it really take to recoup their money? I'll bet not nearly as long as they bend us over chairs and dry hump the shit out of you. It's why they have such strong lobbying factions @ the capitol. They don't want their golden hen taken away by something so simple people can grow it in their backyard.

Contrary to what some of you think, not that I truly give a shit. I am not a republican and I am not anti-democrat. I am anti big government party be damned. You're entitled to absolutely nothing that you can't provide for yourself. I will never waiver from that belief. Our forefathers gave us this beautiful new country, and in 241 short years the mentality of tribal political party system broke it.

I dont think you do understand. My wife works for a big pharma company. She busted her ass to get a PhD so she could make medicines to help people. It takes on average 12-20 years do get a drug to market (depending on the complexity of the drug). There are hundreds to thousands of people that work to get that done and can cost billions (current average is $2.56B). A drug patent only last 20 years then other companies can make knock off generics, capitalizing on the work of others. So a company that invested a huge sum of money only has 20 years of exclusive rights to recoup that cost, after that their income from that drug plummets.

Also, hospitals administering the cancer medications are who is really charging you the money. They have to pay their doctors, nurses, staff etc. When someone gets cancer treatment they are paying into the medical infrastructure, not just for the drug.

Lastly remember that these companies and hospitals are not doing this out of the kindness of their hearts. These are for profit entities in our capitalist society. They provide a product or service that requires highly specialized professionals from the basic research that starts off creating these drugs through the medical staff that administer them. If companies can't recoup their cost (and make a profit) they will go out of business. Who will make the next set of drugs that people need? Go over to some shit run state medical program if you have cancer and see if you are happier with their system (who by the way often use US created medication).

BTW, my wife has had cancer twice so not only is she working on developing these drugs, she has been on the receiving end of the whole process as well.

Well said.

I have family members who work for Lilly in Indy in various parts of the company.

The one in research told me this past Christmas that they had almost 600 drugs in the developmental pipeline and their projections indicate that, perhaps, 30 will end up making it to market. Of those 30, no more than 5 will be high sellers with the potential to "pay" for the other 595 drugs that did not make it to market or that do not sell well.

Look at drug research in Europe right now, it is basically dead. Socialized medicine has taken the profit motivation out of the equation and companies cannot take the risk required to manufacture new drugs because their success rate is so small. Most of the "new' drugs coming out of European drug companies are derivatives of already researched and successful drugs that can be modified for a specific purpose way, way cheaper than new drugs can be developed.

But, hey, folks are just going to keep blaming "someone" for whatever they don't like in the world. It always has to be someone else's fault.

Good post, rcubed. Well played.

Cheers,

I appreciate that insight. I have no idea how the drug development works. I was painting with a very broad brush of speculation shaded with greed. However, why not approve a plant that has shown remarkable capabilities on the disease that people can literally grow in their yard? It doesn't make any sense that the government will throw you in jail for possession of it for years, but get drunk and kill someone and you're out in 6 months. The point being alcohol is way worse for you than weed. Now the kicker, I am defending a drug I don't use. The rewards far outweigh risk. But hey, it's the government they know whats best for us. Them in charge of everything, what could possibly go wrong?

It's interesting what happens when people start "painting with a broad brush of speculation." Leads to all sorts of things, often wrong and not good.

I agree with you on the pot laws.

IMO, the issue with pot laws are the same with alcohol laws. Both impair your ability to make good decisions in rapid situations (i.e. driving) and both need to be regulated in order to try and prevent harm from that situation. You often just don't harm yourself in those situations.

The biggest issue? It is fairly hard for anyone besides a hard core alcoholic to mask the signs of alcohol impairment. However, with MJ acting in much more subdued ways physically, it is easier to mask the impairment when under its influence.

And, unfortunately, people under the influence of either rarely have the ability to decide when they are impaired so as to use it responsibly so then tragedy can happen.

I think the glue is out of the bottle and that MJ will be legalized across the nation within a decade. But, with states now wanting to get into the tax revenue of it, there is no going backwards.

I have never wanted to smoke it (due to having a security clearance since I was 21 years old and in junior ROTC / college ROTC for the 8 years prior to that) but I don't really have an issue with anyone else doing so AS LONG AS IT IS RESPONSIBLE AND LEGAL.

Cheers,