Big Blue Huddle

Quote from: MightyGiants on May 13, 2021, 06:46:09 AM
JBG and Jim,


I am confused, are you pro or anti polarization?   Seems like the two of you admire that Trump greatly increased the polarization in our country.

Anti polarization!

Trump didn't cause the polarization, the butt-hurt politicians like Pelosi, loathsome conniving politician Adam Schiff, the complicit media, the billionaires club, tech magnates, Hollywood actors, and other inside elitists who spent 4+ years and untold billions spreading negative vibes across the country24-7 in hopes to influence the gullible and ill-informed enough to turn normal people into hate mongers. It worked and THEY are to blame, not the target of their hatred or the little guy who fell for it. Trump rocked the boat of the haves in order to help the have-nots. The haves (who basically own everything) manipulated the have-nots into their snare of deception.

Look, politics has always been a blood sport. The little guy is always the target of manipulation. It goes back, not hundreds of years, but thousands of years. Heck, if you read the Bible you see that King David wrote in the Psalms, "my enemies lay traps for me. Those who wish me harm make plans to ruin me. All day long they plan their treachery." Sounds like it could be written by Trump regarding CNN, MSNBC, Facebook, Twitter, NY Times, Washington Post, etc.

It isn't something new. The polarization we see today (which is worse than anytime in my lifetime) is due to the manipulation of the masses by those who hold all the power and hold the tools to inform or misinform the public. If the little guy takes the bait, the rich and powerful win.

Quote from: jimv on May 13, 2021, 12:28:07 AM
I thoroughly agree with you JBG.  Trump took care of ther country & was excellent at it.  The fact he wasn't a politician combined with the fact that he came from Jamaica meant that he wouldn't take crap from anyone.  He gave as good as he got!  He wasn't suave like a lifetime politician; he just took on everything as it came & was damn good at it.

Yeah, history will show that he accomplished more in 4 years than almost any other politician who spent a lifetime in politics. The worst thing that will be said about him 50 years from now will be a note under his official Presidential picture, "Doesn't Play Nice". Thing is, the ones he wasn't nice to, were mainly career politicians who got where they were because they knew how the game was played and they had figured it out. They didn't like getting pushed out of their comfort zone where the traditional game was no longer being played. Trump was a bull in a china shop the way he refused to "play their game" causing hysteria among the gamers. He only cared about doing what was right for the American people and could care less about his fellow politicians and playing their game. Those career politicians despised the man for not being one of them.

Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 06:02:40 PM
JBG,

It's your right to like or support Donald Trump.  You don't even owe any of us an explanation.   Still you sort of skirted my question.  Do you think it's possible to have legitimate criticism of Donald Trump?   Are all criticism the result of "hatred"?

Sure it's okay to criticize. I often criticized him for tweeting things that I thought were beneath the office of the President. But I loved how hard he worked at getting extremely important things done - things that were said to be impossible (the Abraham Accords, becoming energy independent, bringing manufacturing back, moving the embassy to Jerusalem, getting the cost of gas down the lowest in a couple decades, etc.). Like I have said, I always choose substance over style. I could puke  watching slick politicians use style to get elected. I look for results - positive results. I don't really give a rats ass if the person puts on an air to appear other than just another human. I understand human nature and all those nice speaking, professional sounding pols talk like truckers when they are with their pals and think they'll never be heard. Sometimes it slips and you see the real person...like when DeBlasio made an inside black joke calling being late "CP time" ("colored people time"). I didn't get it, but it bothered me that Hillary knew what he was talking about. I still don't get it, but I guess it's something known to white politicians

People are always going to be people and all have faults. We are not a perfect people! Trump was an unpolished civilian politician who spent his life building great buildings and hadn't spent a second of his life in politics...and in fact, supported Democrats most of his life. He didn't spend his life sucking off the government tit while learning how to massage people with style to get elected term after term after term. He couldn't have been more down to earth and straight forward...and at times, pretty crass (just like Andrew Jackson and LBJ - although LBJ knew how to turn it off when if front of a camera). It shocked people when they saw and heard Trump get feisty when they were used to the boring polished fakeness of typical life long politicians...i.e., the art of screwing a person while making them think they aren't getting screwed and are getting something special. 

In short, criticism of politicians is fair game and it happens to every President since roughly half the population already despise you because they voted for the other guy. Again, human nature. However, the dripping vile and seething hatred I hear spewed about Trump is classless and disturbing to me. It would be the same for me to hear that stuff spewed about any President, regardless of party. I remember a woman who hated GW so much she said she wishes someone would walk up to him and shoot him in the head and blow his brains out. I told her, "you don't really mean that" and she replied, "oh yes I do - I would dance in the street and celebrate". Makes me think the human race is denigrating to a point of no return. The original article I attached to my opening post is pretty spot on (unfortunately) concerning where this country is headed.

I know this is getting off track once Trump was brought up, but did anyone read the article? Did anyone agree with her or have reason to disagree with her? I thought it was well written, but what the hell do I know? 

Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 03:56:10 PM
JBG,

Do you think it's possible (even if it's not actually true) that it's possible to disapprove of how Donald Trump conducted himself as a man and as a man who was President, without being consumed with hatred?  I am not talking about policy disagreement but simply that one doesn't approve of name-calling and other insults.    Maybe they disapprove of Donald's many affairs.   Maybe they were bothered by the "grab them by the p*ssy" comments or how contractors often had to sue to get their payments.

So is it possible that among Trump's 80 or so million critics (just in this country) there was at least one that wasn't swayed by hatred but simply felt that Trump didn't meet their moral and ethical standards?

Like I said in a previous response...I'll take substance over style any day. I'm so sick of sweet talking politicians who have honey dripping off their lips while flattering observers and always trying to be politically correct...and then go back to the office and lead the country in the direction of a cliff while laughing all the way to the bank.

I guarantee if style is that important to you, you would have hated Andrew Jackson, Abe Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and LBJ (the man who used the n word every day in office and sometimes 50 times a day and doing things like pulling out his penis in response to a reporter's question and saying "that's why").

Dems seem to have zero issues with the extreme racist LBJ who openly stated he hated blacks (as did Wilson and FDR before him), throwing the n word around (and proud of it) and was prone to showing off his willie to unsuspecting bystanders or JFK being a drug addict while bedding Hollywood harlots and every pretty women he knew (except Jackie), yet suddenly become so horribly offended by Trump's crudeness that they become extreme hate mongers because this particular President "didn't meet their moral and ethical standards"...LOL (double standard much?)

Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 02:09:33 PM
JBG,

Why do you assume that those who expectations of a certain level of behavior from our President must hate him?   Has it ever occurred to you that by making that assumption you are literally shutting the door on any and all criticism no matter how valid?

If you want to end this polarization, one of the things you need to do is LISTEN to others especially those you don't agree with.   When you decide that anyone who doesn't support Donald Trump is impaired by "sheer hatred" you have eliminated any and all possibilities of any sort of productive discussion.

Okay, I'll bite. Why do you hate him so much? Why does the media and people like Oprah (both sources adored him and fawned over him for decades) have a seething hatred for him? Was it because he put America first? Was it because he made America energy independent for the first time in over 70 years dropping gas prices to historical lows? Was it because he was the first president in 50 years who didn't get us involved in a new war? Was it because he neutralized the constant nemesis responsible for untold death and destruction for 8 years (ISIS)? Was it because he got rid of the world

Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 12:54:34 PM
I also think that you can't have a discussion about the polarization of American without addressing the elephant in the room-  Donald Trump

Look until Donald Trump both sides of the aisle were pretty good at at least paying lip service to unity and certainly both sides of the aisle kept the dignity of our nation's highest office by not engaging in childish name-calling and insult.  This is true of Republicans like Reagan and Bush 1 and 2.  This is true of Democrats like Carter, Clinton, or Obama.   

With Trump, you had a man who actively encouraged polarization both in words and deeds.  His deeds and behavior were factually different than other Presidents, Republican or Democratic, and I think most would agree (even if unwilling to admi) that those unusual actions contributed to the problem we see today. 

Of course, the deeper issue, is why did so many Americans support or endorse that sort of behavior from our President?

The sheer hatred of Trump is an enigma to me. Before running for president, he was adored across the land by both left and right. I remember watching a PBS documentary on the great ones who built this country. It focused on the Roosevelts, Vanderbilts, Edisons, Fords, etc., and they used interviews with Trump and other successful businessmen who offered their opinions on what drove them. There was no mockery when Trump spoke, but a sort of reverence.

I also remember Oprah having Trump on as a guest and she fawned over him. They got into politics a little and she asked him if he ever considered getting into politics and told him he'd make a great mayor of NYC or governor. He told her that he wasn't political, but he thought that if the country was really heading in the wrong direction, he'd think about it. For which she praised him and encouraged him to do so.

Interestingly, the moment Trump announced his candidacy, the same people who fawned over him immediately flipped to hatred that is normally displayed by out of balance people who should seek medical help.

I've always been amazed at how quickly people come out of the shadows and show a hatred that is hard to believe. I'm sure the media didn't help by portraying him in every negative light they could conjure up. I honestly don't know what it is about Trump that brought out such sheer hatred. I've been interested in politics my whole life and was radically against some policies thrown at us from Presidents and other heavy hitting politicians, but I never stooped to hating anyone. As I was taught from birth, "hatred destroys the vessel that contains it" which is so true. I've seen people hate someone and the target of their hatred either 1) doesn't care or 2) laughs about it because of the damage it does to the person who hates. I've never seen hatred hurt anyone other than the person who has it. It makes them irrational and unable to think clearly about things that are actually important. Time spent hating is just erasing quality time from one's life.

Regardless, the hatred of Trump is confounding. I understand that he lacked the typical political demeanor of polished politicians who can speak in circles, say nothing of substance, while making calming and likeable facial expressions that say "trust me" - and people do trust them for some reason that is beyond me. Trump obviously lacked the decorum of people who have spent their lives in politics honing their skills at "style" whilst being careful to say nothing of "substance". To me, I'll always take substance over style, but for politicians seeking love - it's all about style over substance and being able to wordsmith in such a way as to insinuate he or she will be good for you without committing to anything. It's a game that is perfected by snake oil salesmen and politicians. That's where Trump failed gallantly. He came out and said what he thought and meant what he said - even if it wasn't popular (you never had to wonder what he thought). He then attempted to fight for what he promised against a deeply sated political body who doesn't like their cushy little personal world shaken up.

Quote from: MightyGiants on May 12, 2021, 11:34:09 AM
JBG,

It's sort of interesting, that you rightfully are concerned with polarization yet in your talk about polarization you painted colleges and universities as the villains causing the polarization.

Well, to qualify my opinion let me give you my background. I didn't go to college out of high school and instead completed a 5-year tool and die apprenticeship. I didn't like the trade so I decided to go back to school in my 20's to approach life on a different career path. Two years later I graduated from community college in math/statistics (cum laude BTW). I then transferred to SUNY Cortland for three and a half years, the first year as a math major/computer programmer minor before switching to a history major, since that was where my real interests lied. From there I transferred and graduated from Binghamton University (also at the top of my class - for which means little, I know). From there I continued graduate studies at Syracuse University and maintained a 4.0 (again, irrelevant, but just pointing out I took my studies seriously and didn't go to college to have fun). Because my constant transferring to different colleges and changing majors, it took me more than two decades to get the education I sought. The point is, I've spent way too much of my life going to school and have sat at the feet of Marxist Evangelists for over 20 years. I have been scorned by professors for speaking up until I finally just shut up in order to get through the damn classes and get my sheepskin. I can tell you from first hand experience that many professors wear Marxism on their lapels with great pride and they can turn any subject into the wonders of Marxism and the evils of capitalism. The idea that any type of conservatism or Christian ethics came through the lips of a professor is borderline crazy. In my experience, they openly mocked Judaeo-Christianity values and ridiculed their adherents. Hence the reason I was a math and statistics major early on was it was a way to avoid having Marxism driven down my throat hour after hour, day after day. For a kid born in the 50's, raised on a farm and went to church every Sunday, it's a harrowing experience to discover everything you ever believed about hard work, personal responsibility, and love of country to be silly and dead wrong.

QuoteDo you think it's possible that such finger-pointing is part of what is creating the polarization?

I don't think I was "finger pointing" as much as pointing out how polarized this country has become and the increasing hostility I've personally noticed in the past few years. Some of the things I've seen or heard about activists trying to get their own way is vile and absurd. I am not pointing my finger at you or anyone on this board. I just think the polarization is going to lead to an ugly ending and it doesn't bode well for humanity and America in general - that is just my opinion.[/quote]

QuoteAs for the theory you put forth about people's need for religion, what role do you think the Evengicical movement that freely mixes religion and politics might play in this nation's increasing polarization.

Actually, it wasn't my theory, it was that of a woman psychiatrist on the radio who stated that people's innate need for religion have turned to politics as their religion, but that doesn't matter. I don't know what evangelical churches you go to in order to state that they mix religion and politics because that certainly never happens in churches I've attended - and I'm sure you would categorize them as "evangelical" (which I'd kind of like to hear you definition of "evangelical" and your personal experiences at those churches - not regurgitated crap written by anti-Christian activists). The churches I attended never talked about politics, but they did talk about a lot of things that liberals would scorn or simply laugh off: the sanctity of life, the sanctity of marriage, honesty, compassion, personal responsibility, helping others, love of neighbor, etc., which flies in the face of today's modern society and is fodder for jokes at schools of "higher" learning (based on my personal experience). As far as people who attend church and why they also tend to adhere to the messages like I just posted, it is their nature to vote against policies that are polar opposite of their beliefs. I actually asked a pastor one time why he never discussed politics or endorsed a politician and he simply said, "there is no place for politics here". That's been my experience in every church I've ever attended.

The polarization in this country seems to get worse and worse by the day. So much hostility and hatred towards those who don't share their rigid and demanding opinions. Overly sensitive people who fail to grasp a bigger picture are so wrapped up in their points of view that they've shut down open thought and constructive debate. It's worrisome. I listened to a pundit the other day who made a lot of sense. Basically she said there is an intrinsic need for religion in people's lives (even if they don't know it), but because traditional religion has been deteriorating at such a rapid pace, a hole is left in people. Churches are shutting down or attendance so low that chapels are mostly empty on Sunday mornings, etc. Partly to blame because of scandals galore, but also because of a level of comfort to people in this day of technology and easy living. But because there is an innate need in people to have religion, the "hole in their soul" gets filled with a new type of religion to a very large audience: "politics". Those who have shunned traditional religion in favor of the "new" (yet ancient) religion of separating people into groups similar to caste systems of old, have the same fervor as the most religious zealot. Hatred abounds between castes for whatever reason (mostly low IQ IMO, but I digress). Regardless, it seems this once great country is becoming polarized to the point that people utterly despise and hate others simply because they don't share the beliefs of their political group of choice. Political pundits have become "evangelists" and "fire and brimstone preachers". Colleges and Universities have become the new churches of choice and are filled with religious zealots ready to spread the good word and will go to any length to convert "non-believers" including rioting, shaming, and open humiliation. The embers of hatred have been spread across the land and fanned into deadly flames. Welcome to our new America.

Read a great article from a woman (Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a research fellow at Stanford University

Okay, here's my best shot.

Things I agree with that are policies (past and present) of the Democrat party:

1) I am a proponent of food stamps. I believe it is a good cause. Feeds the poor while keeping small farmers from going under and having to fill job voids for which they are typically unqualified. Keep the mom and pop farms going.

2) I loved the policy of Jimmy Carter that has since fallen by the wayside. Carter called for America to switch to the metric system and to do so in phases. It got off to a good start, but then he fell out of favor with the country and no subsequent President bothered to keep it going. There are only three countries in the world that still use the Imperial System of Measurement: the U.S., Liberia and Myanmar (great company we keep with those high tech wonders). The metric system is far, far superior to the imperial system. Everything in the metric system is done using base 10 measures. It's incredibly simple and it's probably one of the biggest reasons other countries beat the pants off the U.S. in math. Instead, the U.S. uses things like "foot" which was some geniuses foot size in the 1500's broken into 12 pieces (probably some guys toe length) using the base 12 mathematics system and then breaking the "inch" into another base 16 system so we have things like 1/64th of an inch. A "rod" was the length of a branch some guy had back in the 1600's. A "mile" was a measurement used by the Romans in 1500 based on the revolution of a wooden wheel on a cart (of course, all wheels were not the same size). I could go on and on...a "gallon" based on ten lbs of water in some shopkeeper's pail...and of course, a "pound" weight originated in Troyes, France as the weight of gold held in a container in a goldsmith's shop, etc., etc. In short, we should have gone to the metric system years ago and Carter had the insight to see just how antiquated the U.S. system is compared to the world - and it holds us back. Now we use both measurements for things we measure mixing imperial with metric and most kids are utterly clueless how to use metric

3) I agree with FDR's social security policy. If not for the implementation of that, millions of elderly people who can no longer work would starve to death or eat cat food or lose their homes, etc. It was a good intention at the time and still is. However, the politicians who believe we should give all the benefits of the social security system to non-residents of this country is insane. It's like begging poor people from other countries to invade the U.S. for those benefits and the way the system is financed, it's going broke as it is. Of course, it didn't help when LBJ in 1968 made a change in the budget process by including Social Security and all other trust funds into a"unified budget." That allowed fiscally reckless politicians to raid the SS funds - which they did, over and over again until it has become just another boondoggle. As much as I despise Al Gore, he was absolutely right that SS funds belonged back in a "lock box", the funds out of the reach of politicians.

4) Speaking of FDR, he was spot on when he systematically opposed any government job to be unionized. He had it right! There is NO competition in government jobs. Regular civilian jobs were contested between worker and owner/management. Both sides had to compromise in order to remain competitive in their market and keep the business alive. Government workers can demand all they want and politicians simply give everything they want to them and consequently, raise taxes on everyone else to pay for it. There is no incentive for politicians to deny government workers outrageous demands. FDR called it "foolishness on its face, and no man with common sense would suggest it". He was right.

Things I disagree with that are policies (past and present) of the Republican party:

1) For years the GOP has been guilty of "crony capitalism", i.e., funding companies that fund their political elections. It's gotten a little better in the past 20 years or so and politicians like Marco Rubio have led the charge in getting the GOP to back off their old strategy. Kudos to him. However, even though the Democrats cried "foul" for years and years, they have taken up the mantel and exploit it themselves even stronger than what the GOP used to do and now have Big Tech, Big Media, Hollywood elitists, and the Billionaires Club in their pockets to join in with their own version of crony capitalism. It all sucks!

2) I disagree with every Republican since Ronald Reagan who promised to move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. In fairness, every single President since Reagan, democrat and republican, made that same campaign promise crystal clear. Trump was the only President in the past 40 years to actually do it for which I say, "Bravo - bout f...n time!"

3) Too many in the Republican party spend like a drunken sailor (I used to say, "drunken democrat", but I'll spare you - LOL). Most republicans are not fiscally conservative other than in words only. They all wave their arm in the air out of a near sleep and in unison say "aye" for their yearly raises and cushy benefit packages including "free lifetime medical insurance" (the Golden Cadillac kinds) and give themselves raises for staff, expenditures, etc., regardless if the country is going through an economic downturn and millions of regular people are hurting across the nation and there is little to no inflation to take into account.

Oh well, that's all I got.

I haven't forgotten you Mighty. I've come up with a couple things I agree with on liberals and disagree with on conservatives. It's been a hellish week and weekend for me. My very old mother fell and broke her hip a couple weeks ago and was sent home from rehab about 5 weeks earlier than she should have. While she was in the hospital and then rehab, I became primary care taker of my 94 yr old father who needs all kinds of help. When my mother was sent home unexpectedly, I now have two very needy people that I have to care for...and it isn't always pretty!

Then Thursday night my daughter called with a family emergency. So I went and picked up two of my grandsons and took them to dinner before bringing them home with me to watch the draft for which they complained because they wanted to watch something else. I bribed them with ice cream and snacks so I could follow the draft. Then I continually fielded calls all night from my daughter with updates. I finally decided to put the kids to bed about 10:30 only to get a call from my daughter saying she was coming home and wanted to pick up the kids so they wouldn't miss school in the morning. I got to sleep about 1:30.

Then Yesterday, my son (who recently moved from Wisconsin to New York) called and needed help desperately - he had three truck loads of stuff to move and his best friend and helper had to be away for the weekend as he's in the reserves. So I helped him move all day and my body absolutely is paying the price.

And of course, I've been up to my eyeballs in the draft since Thursday.

Anyway, I have not forgotten my promise to get back to you. Unfortunately, I have to make a run for my mother to refill prescriptions and pick up some stuff she feels is vital...so I'm off to the city. But I will be back and I will give you an answer

Quote from: MightyGiants on April 29, 2021, 10:40:06 AM
So the answer is, no?  There is nothing to convince you that what the 1300 independent climate change experts from around the world said is true.   Your beliefs in your conspiracy involving "sleazy" left-wingers are that firm and sure.  I am curious, what evidence did you see of this left-wing cabal creating this manmade climate change hoax to further their sinister agenda convinced you to the point where you believe that you are 100% right in your position and that there is zero point zero chance you are wrong?  I mean even the 1300 scientific experts qualified their conclusions with "95% certainty"

Man, you really like to argue don't you..  No problem

I have to take my 90 year old mother to the doctors so I'll be gone for a few hours. As far as answering the above supposition, yes, I think left-wing politicians tend to be sleazy - very sleazy. I think money and power overwhelms their sense of decency and honor. I think they believe that they can do no wrong and if they have to use media manipulation and biased teachers programming (more like poisoning) children's minds and anything else to get their way, they will do it without as much as a light blush. I believe most liberals are so entrenched in their opinions that they are unable to grasp common sense and liberal politicians play their constituents like a fiddle.

As far as 1300 scientific experts go - there is a sizeable list of scientific experts with a polar opposite view. For laymen to argue the point using that method, it's nothing more than confirmation bias.

Have a great day, I'll be back when I have some free time

Quote from: MightyGiants on April 29, 2021, 10:23:12 AM
Since it's clear that you have completely denied these facts on Climate change, in favor of wild right-wing conspiracy theories involving evil left-wing cabals

Let me ask you something, is there anything in the world that could convince you that climate change is real and that man's activity is contributing to it?



https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-for-policymakers.pdf

I believe that climate is changing. I also believe it has always been changing. I believe that having 8+ billion people on the planet has an effect on the general environment - especially in deforesting, strip mining, etc. I also believe that 99%+ of climate change has everything to do with the heliosphere of which mankind has zero control. I believe unethical sleazy politicians see a chance to turn this issue into a "crisis" which in turn gives them opportunity to increase control over people while enriching them beyond belief in the process. I'm a realist

Quote from: MightyGiants on April 29, 2021, 08:14:32 AM
What it feels like is that the Front Porch is becoming FOX News the BBH edition.   We have a climate denial thread, we have a thread claiming conservatives are the victims of a sinister conspiracy to "cancel" them, and now we have a thread contending that White People are being persecuted by our federal government. 

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't remember anyone claiming to deny that climate has changed. The issue has never been that climate doesn't change as science and history prove that climate is anything but static. The big issue is the pinpointing by the left that a specific variable controls the weather and there is a lot of disagreement - among well respected scientists in the field of heliophysics . By targeting CO2 as the ONLY factor, it allows politicians the opportunity to demand enormous amounts of unchecked funds that are loosely (more like "not at all") audited and responsibly controlled and can get bills passed using fear and scaring the masses. There are actually young people who have taken their own lives believing that the world is near the end and it's too late to fix it. Imagine the millions of little brains being taught every day that the world will no longer exist if we don't reduce our carbon footprint - i.e., cut CO2 emissions. It's a shame what politicians, academia, and a left wing media has done to instill fear into the hearts of children...all to have a reason to bilk billions (maybe trillions in the end) out of taxpayers and divert it to themselves and their swamp friends.

Climate will always change because we don't control climate, nor can we ever by spending untold billions of dollars. As far as green energy goes, I'm all for it because I know that fossil fuels have a limited supply that will eventually run out. Probably not until the year 3000, but at some point in the far distant future it will run out (say goodbye to all things made of plastic). I also like the idea of less pollution and cleaner air and water. However, there is a tradeoff when forcing things in too short of a time frame. Switching to as much green energy as possible is something that should be a goal of everyone...it just has to be done using common sense with a planned transition that takes into account that not every person on the planet can afford to drive a 60,000 dollar Tesla in the next few years. Nor does it take into account that solar, wind, and any other source of clean energy cannot support a planet that uses electricity to drive all vehicles, commerce, and controlling home temperatures. We have a long way to go and should understand that before scaring the ever-loving bejeesus out of everyone and fleecing hardworking people of their earnings.

(I'm still working on your other challenge. Having a hell of a time coming up with things I agree on with liberals - really hard!)

I'll get back to you. It will take me all night and probably tomorrow to come up with 3 things I agree on with liberals, LOL. Be patient, I will address. There is a little distraction going on right now called the NFL draft and it kind of owns my brain until Saturday night.