Ten oz

The U.S. create Nuclear Weapons yet still actively pursue disarmament amongst nuclear powers and actively work to prevent countries from having nuclear weapons. A nation or party creating something 60yrs ago and being that things best advocate today isn't automatic. John F. Kennedy said "a raising tide lifts all boats" when selling tax cuts. A line Republicans use today. Since Kennedy was a Democrat does that mean Democrats are the party of tax cuts in 2017? You are strip issues and history of all context.

I think this confuses the evolution of technology and lifestyle with biological evolution. Computers (electrical processing) didn't exist a hundred years ago and do exist now. That isn't an example of human evolution. Just human putting accumulated knowledge to use. A child from a hundred years ago, or ten thousand years ago for that matter, could be taught how to use a computer no different that children today.

He refused to specific what he wanted done so no one here can really say what he meant. In the simplest terms middle ground can be described as mid field between two end zones. By refusing to specify what policies he does or does support tar won't reveal the location of his end zone. It is unfortunate. Waitforufo is doing the same. Answering specific policy questions with broad rhetoric about the wonders of trickle down economics is a nonstarter as trickle down is an economic theory and not a specific set of laws or policies. I find it extremely intellectual cowardly to dance around specifics at a time when Congress is hammer out the specifics: tax cut bills, next year's budget, another go at the ACA mandate repeal, etc. How can middle ground even be pursued with people refusing to even address what is happening?

Kim Jong Un's latest ballistic missile test flew 10 times higher than the International Space Station and twice as high as any satellite in low-earth orbit, according to South Korea's military. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/north-korea/amp/north-korea-missile-went-10-times-higher-space-station-n824821#ampshare=https://www.nbcnews.com/news/north-korea/north-korea-missile-went-10-times-higher-space-station-n824821

Politicians run for office and upon being elected are paid to work on legislation and advocate for policy. People to not paid to board planes of do so with expectation of being sexually harassed. This is a false equivalent.

We aren't starting from scratch. Can you please explain the policy changes required for the "structure"? Thank you! Finally an actual purposed policy idea you acknowledge. I do my taxes at the end of the year on "thoughts". I do them based on laws. You need to get a lot more specific.

Replace it with what? How? How? Who will pay for this; if us should there be additional taxes or spending cuts to offset that cut?

You failed to even address policy nevermind write it. We elect Representative to govern and it is their responsibility to formally write legislation but who holds them accountable; us (the people). To hold them accountable we must understand what they are doing. So avoiding the nuts and bolts of which policies are being considered is an irresponsible position in my opinion. You advocated that our government encourage other countries to change their laws so that U.S. beef can be more easily sold in their country. You listed it as something you'd like to see included in our trade policy. It is that position I addressed. If you want to purchase land and raise cows no one in stopping you. It is legal for you to do so.

You failed to address a single policy or change currently being considered. What some the corporate tax rate be should there be any caveats to that rate? Should every tax cut be covered by a spending cut to ensure the deficit isn't increased; if so what do we cut? Should we reduction or eliminate the ability for individuals to deduct their local and state taxes? What should be the income tax rate and how should be tier by income or should it? To find middle ground policy must be addressed. It simple isn't enough vaguely say you want to see "simplified" or "reasonable" changes. Those words are relative and mean little outside of your own mind. Put your big boy pants on an plant some goal post indicating what the fields size is and what constitutes a score. Again, not one single piece of policy addressed. There can be no middle ground between if you lack the insight or honesty to just say specifically what it is you want. Should the ACA mandate be repealed? Should be eliminate medicare or reduce subsidizes for it? Should any employers be required to provide insurance and if so what are the caveats? Should hospitals be able to turn away those with out insurance? How should bankruptcy with regard to medical bill debt be structured? Trump has mentioned a 20% tariff on all products from Mexico do you agree or not? Should we (U.S. govt) provide tax cuts and other incentives to keep business from leaving the country and or bring back jobs; If so how does that square with you position on taxes and what would the caveats be for keeping and or bring back a job? Is Trump currently re-negotiating NAFTA or just saying at some point he'd like to? If he is re-negotiating can you explain a single specific part of what he is looking to eliminate or change? Beef is the least efficient major source of protein which exists. It requires significantly more land, water, and energy to produce a calorie of beef than it does to produce a calorie of pork or chicken. That is easy to see on display in the "free market" where the average cost of a pound of beef is double that of chicken or pork even with Beef being the most heavily govt subsidized form of protein( BTW, how do those subsidizes fit into your tax policy ideas? ). Of course using more land, water, and energy to produce also means a greater carbon foot print and overall environmental impact, assuming that matters to you at all which it might not. Considering the inefficiency of beef I don't think my government should be wasting time and money trying to force other countries to change their laws so we can sell them beef. We can get more out or land and resources stateside with other agriculture products than an expansion in the beef industry. The below link show the math for the efficiency of Beef, Pork ,Poultry, eggs, milk, and etc. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/10/105002 In the U.S. all or even most Republicans are NOT Nazi's, White Nationalists, or etc. That said most Nazi's, White Nationalists, and etc in the U.S. vote Republican and identify as conservatives. That is a fact and one I think too many self identifying Republicans and conservatives are overly dismissive of.

This is why facts matters. Some people attempt to create false equivalences between BLM, kneeling football players, and White Supremacists but free speech and murder aren't equivalent.

Jobs? Rgr that, jobs! You're welcome. Oh, it isn't jobs anymore?Huh, it is GDP now? Okay, which agencies official numbers shall we use?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[1]" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Can any Military service member say whatever they want or does the UCMJ takes presidents? Can anyone with a top secret security clearance exercise their "first Amendment" rights? I am not familiar with any definition for Dictator which restricts the title to someone who override or eliminated a govt branch.

Unemployment at the end of Obama's tenure was good as Reagan's or Bush 41's. So by this your standard Obama (Democrat) delivered the same economic conditions as Reagan or Bush 41? https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

So you are aren't willing to answer the question? GDP is a measured thing we can look at, as if unemployment, inflation, average wage, graduation rate, home ownership percentage, and etc. You aren't answering the question. Rather you are just saying you felt things were better then.

How are you quantifying prosperity: GDP, unemployment, inflation, average wage, or what? This is the 3rd time I am asking.

You reference Bill Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky (definition of is) and then Ted Kennedy (Mary Jo Kopechne) before claiming Sexual predators blah blah blah. Both situations you reference were consensual ones. You are making a false equivalence. Additionally due diligence was done in both situations. Ken Star ran a thorough independent investigation in the Clinton Lewinksy affair and a grand jury invested the Chappaquiddick incident.

When was this 20yrs of prosperity and how are you quantifying it: GDP, unemployment, inflation, average wage, or what?

A lot of people believe positive thinking can transform reality. From Oprah to Trump many famous people have comment on the power of positive thinking. Like with anything though application and moderation is critical. Positive thinking in terms of confidence and aggressive pursuit of one's own beliefs can successfully help an individual to attain wealth. That is a uniquely individual goal (personal wealth) however and positive thoughts only anecdotally work. There are a lot of wealthy negative Nancy's out there. Ultimately more than confidence is required to solve problems.

Then there is the false equivalents where child molesters like Roy Moore who committed sexual acts on girls young as 14yrs old are Al Franken are discussed as equals. Ultimately all the Democrats can do is their own honest due diligence and hope enough people see the difference. I don't want to see a "if you can't beat them join them" attitude unfold.

Franken's Political career is rightfully in peril. Rather than being a black eye to Democrats I actually think it is something to celebrate. It shows a level of accountability which isn't present on the other side. Democrats are taking prompt action with regards to Rep. Convey and Sen. Franken; Conyers has stepped aside from the Judiciary Committee and Franken publicly acknowledging embarrassment. Stark contrast to a President who continues counter attack his own sexual harassment victims while endorsing a pedophile who is also a Republican. Some might attempt to fudge the context here an claim all this proves both sides are the same but that would be inaccurate. Clearly the Democratic party is holding their own members to a higher standard. I hope people are able to identify the distinction.

rangerx made statement of fact. Both WI's voting infrastructure and citizens were targeted. Do you have something to add or are you just trolling? "This afternoon, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security notified the Wisconsin Elections Commission for the first time that “Russian government cyber actors” unsuccessfully targeted the state’s voter registration system in 2016. WEC Administrator Michael Haas has informed WEC Chair Mark Thomsen, who directed Commission staff to investigate why election officials were not notified earlier and report to the Commission at its meeting Tuesday." http://elections.wi.gov/node/5253 A number of Russian-linked Facebook ads specifically targeted Michigan and Wisconsin, two states crucial to Donald Trump's victory last November, according to four sources with direct knowledge of the situation. http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/politics/russian-facebook-ads-michigan-wisconsin/index.html When was this and how can you quantify it? Unemployment numbers and GDP is the way I generally have seen health of the U.S. economy measured. What can you empirically tell us about this prosperous time you are referencing?

@ tar I asked you specific policy questions in a post above which you seem to have chosen to ignore. Instead you just continue to post about your feelings. If there is common ground to be had at some point we need to discuss actual policy. After all Trump and Congress are attempting to change policy: taxes, healthcare, NAFTA,TPP, and etc. Other than carrying on about supporting your president what actual policies do you support. What do you believe will be in the tax cut package coming out of the Senate?

I believe both the U.S. and Russia will eventually get rid their nuclear arsenals. I think the arsenals are redundant at this point. Without Nuclear weapons would Russia suddenly become an easy nation to invade; of course not. The U.S. can turn any nation on the planet into Swiss Cheese with nuclear weapons. Our (U.S.) stealth bombers can fly from domestically located bases and precision strike any targets anywhere on the planet; autonomously even. Having nuclear weapons isn't keeping the U.S. or Russia save in 2017. As for North Korea I also think they can be persuaded to give up nuclear weapons. As with the U.S. and Russia it isn't nuclear weapons keeping Kim in power. It is his massive artillery along the border and 6 million man military keeping Kim in power. The main reason the U.S. hasn't gone in and removed the nuclear material is that the size of North Korea's military insures a protracted war which would absolutely spill over into South Korea and Japan. I see the current state of nuclear weapons as analogous to having cable TV. When I was a kid having cable TV and to what extent (premium channels) said something about the economic status of your family. It was understood those with HBO had more than those without. As a result many people got it in their heads, as a status symbol and matter of culture) , that cable TV was a must. Today I don't have cable. I have Netflix and the internet but no cable. When discussing TV shows, sports, and what not with people younger than myself the fact that I do not have cable isn't an issue. When I am around people my own age or above the fact that I don't have cable is made an issue of. I have been called cheap, had family members ask if my finances were okay, and etc. To those that have it in their minds that cable is a must; it is a must. Just as people above the age of 60yrs old mostly all still have land lines in their homes. The generation raised during the cold war had it drummed into their heads that having nuclear weapons makes a country powerful and safe. That adversaries fear nuclear weapons so just having them is a necessary deterrent. That generation will never think it is a good idea to give up nuclear weapons just as my wife's 92yr old grandmother will never give her land line and cable TV. Future generations will feel differently. Those raise during a the war of terror where adversaries are nation less and fear of terrorist getting their hands on existing nuclear material is a greater concern than having nuclear weapons as a deterrent.

The problem is that no one knows what Trump thinks about most issues. It is impossible to find middle ground when wants and goals are mysterious. Trump campaigned that the govt would pay for healthcare and that everyone would be covered. Once elected he asked Republicans in Congress to figure something out; he didn't have a plan of his own. Congress repeatedly fail to come up with any that didn't raise costs while also causing millions to lose coverage. Trump's position became to just let the whole healthcare system fail and figure something out from there (his actual words). It is currently unclear if subsidies will be paid or which parts of the ACA are on the chopping block. Where is the middle ground; none of us even know what is happening. tar, you have been in this thread defending the current push for tax cuts but what can you definitively tell us about it: will it include changes to taxes for 401k's, will it include repeal of mandate for health insurance, will it limit state tax deductions, will it lower capital gains tax across the board, will it change or illuminate the estate tax, what will the corporate tax rat be, and as a resident of NJ do you believe you'll be paying more or less overall (local & federal) if passed?? What about Pay-As-You-Go Act (PayGo) will Congress include a waiver for it or allow the automatic cuts to things like medicare kick in? How can you and I find middle ground if neither of us know what is happening? You are complimenting the Presidents achievements based crowd reaction to a speech in China meanwhile Trump hasn't even passed a budget yet! We are still on continuation from Obama's last budget. Stop with the "everyone hates on my President" nonsense and start listing some facts and real policy. Start specifically explaining what Trump has done or is in the process of doing. You like how he has handled China, great,explain to me what Trump plans to do about the islands in the South China sea, negotiating a new trans-pacific partnership, labeling China a currency manipulator, and etc. What about NAFTA: is Trump re-negotiating it, pulling out, or is nothing changed? You like how Trump has handle Syria; is Assad an friend now or is it still the position of the U.S. that Assad goes? I bet between you and I there is tremendous middle ground on most issues. The problem is you have chosen to make defending Trump a priority over all else. You defend Trump despite having no clear understand of what his plans are. It is a nonstarter position if middle ground is desired. Arguing that what the President thinks doesn't matter and that it all comes down to what people do reads good but doesn't make any sense. Our government is us; we the people. Our government creates and manages the policies/laws that governs our lives. What our representatives think,what their intentions are, are paramount.