Posts Made By: James Brown

David Cotterell quoted:

"First - do you believe it is acceptable that 7 million people die every year from pollution?"

What use is this question in a vacuum? Ask also how many are saved from starvation and/or exposure each year due to the combined effects of fossil-fuel driven industrialization, modern fossil-fuel driven agriculture and fossil fuel-driven infrastructure.

I have no idea if the 7M "dead from pollution" number is correct, but the lives saved because of fossil fuel is obviously vastly greater. (obvious because of the greatly enhanced global population and greatly enhanced global standard of living we've enjoyed since the industrial revolution.)

I'm not trying to argue in favor of pollution, and I don't deny warming. I just don't think semi-hysterical BS from actors helps move the discourse much.

(Google attributes that quote to the Governator. He needs to work on his facts: http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/total_system_power.html

Jim

Sorry I'm late to the party. I've been out polishing my Bentley.

If Trump does get the nod, I'm rationalizing/praying that Hillary will govern as a pro-wall-street, pro-growth, pro-business centrist. I think there is some evidence that this might not be delusional on my part:

1. HRC is obviously bought and paid for by establishment concerns.

2. HRC clearly has no core values and will say whatever it takes to get elected. When she governs, maybe she'll scratch the backs that financed her, and that isn't the campus lefty crowd, no matter what she might say during the campaign.

Sure the graft and corruption will be hard to stomach, but overall, I'll be happy if HRC wins but proves to be a pawn of big business and Wall Street. A DINO maybe? That's what I tell myself anyway.

On the other hand, I'm less pessimistic than Russ with respect to the Donald. His support does seem to me to be concentrated in the "to hell with them all" crowd, and that raises an interesting point: Will the "to hell with them all" contingent control the nominating process? Perhaps the political machine will actually be overwhelmed by the Donald, but strong nationwide poling in January proves nothing. Lets wait for a few primaries and then we'll see.

Jim

Greg Shaffer said:

As astronomers here is a rather interesting thought on whom to vote for President. Most of us have a grasp on the possibility of intelligent life somewhere out there besides here.

When you go to the polls consider this premise. They land in your yard and say "Take me to your leader!" While the scenario is unlikely the question has validity. Whom would you consider out of the choices would you be least worried about introducing them to as our leader? I know I would be embarrassed to take them to Obama lol. I would have concerns over introducing them to Trump's personality. I damn sure wouldn't want to introduce them to Hillary, she would probably offer them a red reset button.

Not all that ridiculous a question is it?

Of course the little green men might land in North Korea, Syria, Iran, Russia, China, etc. When they said "Take me to your leader" we'd really be screwed.

Charles Stevenson said:

Post who you think will win.

Broncos by 4!

As a side note, I'm pleased with the Iowa results. This has to be considered a huge win for Rubio. He way outperformed the RCP average of polls. Donald was shown to be a "loser" (his words). Cruz won Iowa of course, but so did Santorum and Huckabee - more than once I think for Huck. On the D side, Clinton had a terrible showing. Although she will win the nomination, barring a well deserved indictment, she showed just how crummy a candidate she is yesterday, even without the scandals.

Jim

David Cotterell said:

Let's put our honest opinions out there right now.

Which candidate will win the White House in November?

Not who you want to win.
Don't care who they beat or by what margin.
Not why they will win.
No carping at the choices of the other participants...
No name-calling...
Never mind running mates or any side-bets...

Just your gut feeling about what the American voting public will decide that night, based on your experiences, knowledge and inspired guesses.

We can come back here the morning after the election and see who got it right.

And, to start the process, I predict that Hilary will win the Presidency.

Simple poll. Just a name.

Perhaps the denizens of AM Politics might want to make it 'interesting', if you know what I mean....
We ought to be able to work something out in that vein..

We don't have enough FUN here! So let's!

Dave

I have lot's of fun here.

Rubio.

Mel Maki said:

Never a dull moment. Said Trump is the best shot at defeating Clinton. Is he just lining up with the leader? Angling for a job? Grudge against Rubio? Stiffing the establishment GOP?

I'd guess all of the above. I don't think Christie has a bunch of backers that he can deliver to the Donald, so I'm not sure it makes much difference.

Jim

Russ Carroll said:

"Stockholm Syndrome"

At some point, Gov. Christie must have been a proud and confident man. How could he bring himself so low?

Russ Carroll said:

"Stockholm Syndrome"

Also, I'm sure that I'm not the first to draw this connection, but still....

David Cotterell said:

There is precedent enough for Supreme Court Justices never having been judges at any level: http://supreme.findlaw.com/supreme_court/justices/nopriorexp.html?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link

So....

Scenario: 1. Repubs block Obama Supreme appointee(s) until the election. This is entirely possible....
2. Dems win the Presidency in Nov. This, too, is entirely possible.
3. New Dem President nominates Obama to the Court.....

I have seen a number of mentions of Obama being an interesting candidate for the vacancy. The very fact that the above-linked article exists means that the idea exists.

Hmmmmmm.......

Dave

This will never happen. The president and first lady would never forgo the huge, truly princely sums and lifestyle they will enjoy as retired president/first lady. Who can blame them? Would anyone really want to work in one of most intellectually demanding and draining jobs around, until you die on the bench, when the alternative is living in a paid-for mansion in Hawaii, playing golf every day with Hollywood A-listers and NBA stars while bringing in a few million bucks or so a year for a couple of speeches?

Jim

Doug Grebe said:

What are peoples feelings on Apple refusing the court order? I am slightly leaning towards supporting Apple but I would like to hear other peoples opinions.

Doug Grebe

I favor the government on this one. Criminal investigators obtain confidential information all the time under the appropriate warrants. The warrant process is supposed to (and almost always will) protect against abuses by the cops. Without a warrant, I can turn the cops away at my door. With a warrant, they can come in and review every piece of evidence in my home. With a warrant they can compel my doctor, lawyer (in some instances) and accountant to turn over otherwise confidential records. The investigation here is obviously reasonable in nature and scope.

Jim