Leaderboard

Historical sidebar, but your 3 examples are totally wrong. Lincoln- soldier/lawyer. Jefferson- plantation owner/ lawyer. Reagan- actor. None of the examples you gave were career politicians; all had successful careers before and outside politics. As Reagan said “The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.”

Far from a “follow the left, the world is all rainbows & unicorns”. To add some stance on some hot topics: I had zero ethical problems with building a border wall, just doubt it will work (they’ll just cut holes in it or tunnel under it). I don’t think anybody has the right to restrict a law abiding citizen from owning an AR-15. Tragic mass shooting deaths, are currently insignificant compared to the number of people getting taken out by drugs, alcohol, car accidents/texting & suicide. Are we gunna ban cellphones too? Yet it’s all CNN wants to talk about. And FOX news, with its “windmills kill birds, green energy is bad lets burn coal until we’re back in the stone ages”…please, GTFO of here. Whether its Fox or CNN I can smell horse sh*t 3 miles out. I am interested in understanding the divide more than anything else, especially on a forum where at least everybody is genuinely concerned about the country’s future. Does the disagreement really come down to just deciding between…do you take someone who is morally deficient but going to do good things policy wise (at least in w.e your respective opinion is) vs. someone who is a good dude at heart but may stumble policy wise? My logic: there is the system and there are policies the system makes. The policies change with the current political tide and can be undone just as easily as they can be done, depending on what the people want. But damage to the system itself is not easily undone. And as history shows, people who enjoy power…they usually want to grab more and more of it. Putin seems to be in love with it, as does Kim Jong-un. I don’t see Americans running to live in either of those places. Disregarding any policy, IMO when you objectively look at Trump…he exhibits the same attributes as somebody who would be at risk for abusing power. The glitz, the glamour, the ego, the compensating personality & bully persona. Hypothetically, you could have a King/dictator who is great at making policy. But as history shows, long term….rarely do those situations end well for the people in those places. If Trump isn’t that guy…he did a hell of a job making it look like he might be. Rile up the working class who are scraping by on groceries from Walmart while you gallivant around in a gold plated 757 = does not compute. So I stand to reason that Trump lost the election for himself. He either chose not to be professional, genuine, & presentable, or he is actually a D-bag and a threat to the system. And judging by how he reacted to his loss, it’s the latter. While any good competitor would be disappointed at a loss, successful & confident people don’t let losses slow them down in life and start whining. Those disappointed at his loss, should blame Trump himself for giving the election to a pretty weak democratic candidate (Biden, whose cheese may be sliding off his cracker). I for one think we should just starting throwing darts at a board of random people who graduate from idk the military academies, med schools,engineering schools or something, somewhere where people have proven they are intelligent, committed to helping others and are problem solvers. “Hey Tommy, real sorry man. The dart hit your name on the board. dean wants you in his office, your president for the next 4 years. Pack your shit”. “Only those who do not seek power are qualified to hold it”-Plato

Oh...well, usually when you quote someone and respond to their post, it has something to do with their post. But I guess doing the complete opposite would also make sense.

Allegations against Republicans are apparently enough to completely stop the press and focus on a story for days, weeks, or months at a time...

Pfizer #2 yesterday. No side effect other than a sore arm like #1 gave me. The 5G reception has improved though.

Hmm. Only one Tornado was lost on a JP233 mission and that was actually on the egress and several miles from the runway. IIRC, only two others were lost at low level - neither of which flew down any runway. A balanced view of the performance of the Tornado in ODS is that it did well. It certainly held its own against other strikers in theater, including F-15E, F-111, F-16, Jaguar, A-6, A-7 etc.

Joe represented a return to a pre-Trump world. Politically moderate and not addicting to twitter bombs. What people didn't foresee, including myself, is that Joe would become *more* rather than less progressive after the primary. Usually it's the other way around. Personally, I believe that's due to a combination of two things: heavily relying on ex-Obama staffers, and his own cognitive decline reducing his ability to steer the agenda.

F-15EX Named the Eagle II Chappy would be proud!

Since I separated I haven't logged in here much, so I'm a bit late to answer your questions but I'll give it a shot. 1. AFRC doesn't quite know what to do with us from a deployment standpoint because of the iron availability issue. For TACC taskings, it's no different than if we had tails. That may not technically be accurate based on crew ratios/etc, but from a line flyer perspective it's the same. 2. Standard AFRC deployment cycles. 3. It depends. Married? Spouse have a job? Where? Do you have a job? Are you commuting to an airline gig? PM me if you want to discuss in more detail.

Here, I quoted the report because you either: A. Can't Read B. Are Stupid C. Both (I assume C) Sorta hard to push impeachment for collusion with Russia, as it should be, when an independent commission found that Trump did not collude/coordinate with the Russian Government to interfere with the 2016 election.

And yet, you said this: So who exactly is “stupid”? And didn’t you recently report someone for a “personal attack”? Edited: And I was wrong about the report...that was Homestar. My apologies for the mixup.

You do realize that impeachment isn’t a legal process, right? Can you show me where I said Trump was impeached for colluding with Russia? Recently report? No, I have a DD-214, so I don’t really care. I was banned by a mod, without notice, for showing data where he was wrong and apparently that got his panties in a twist.

You literally were responding to Lloyd’s post regarding Russian collusion...and your response was about Trump not being able to be indicted but that can and was impeached, which you said is like an indictment. And now you’re trying to backtrack and suggest that your post had nothing to do with Russian collusion? Let me guess...you’re drinking more than usual tonight. Everything ok?

You said Trump was impeached when responding to Lloyd’s post about Russian collusion, did you not?

I’m not backtracking anything. Trump was alleged to have colluded with Russia, an independent counsel investigated the allegation and did not substantiate it, however even if they had, the DOJ couldn’t refer charges for an indictment. Why? Because that was the OLC’s policy on sitting presidents. Had Mueller opined that Trump had colluded with Russia, it would’ve most likely been another article of impeachment. An impeach is like an indictment since the House is acting like a grand jury, then the Senate acting like a trial jury.