nfreeman

I object to the first paragraph. We can't possibly know this after 20ish NFL starts. What we do know is: - he took a terrible franchise to 8-8 in his first year -- which would've been 9-7 if EJ hadn't pooped the bed vs Jax. - he'll probably get them to 9-7 this year without his best WR for most of the year and with a bunch of injuries to his other WRs (who comprise a pretty mediocre group anyway). - he'll also have lost his best player on O in McCoy for a chunk of the season, plus his RT. - he's had quite a few stretches of terrific play, including on MNF against a very good team in Seattle. - he doesn't turn it over or get sacked. - speaking of which: he doesn't get sacked because he's impossible to sack BECAUSE HE RUNS LIKE MICHAEL FREAKING VICK. I don't want anyone else.

TT's TD run yesterday was fantastic. Just give him a bit more experience and some NFL-quality receivers who aren't in and out with injuries all the time and he will deliver. He's the guy.

I'm just glad to be reminded that we have Pu in our pipeline.

Completely agree. Do you think the public school system works well?

I think it's important to remember that charter schools (which are public schools) and private schools are almost always nonprofit organizations. The key difference is that the teachers and administrators are generally not unionized or part of the public education bureaucracy. I agree that charter schools are not a panacea. But clearly the current system is deeply flawed. Something new is needed.

Well, do you not think the public education system in this country is in dire need of reform?

Animal House and the first Matrix are absolutely required.

ZFG.

But can he dangle?

Won't moving Okposo to D impair the Sabres' ability to reach their historic 1 goal per game average offensive output?

I don't want the Sabres to trade Kane unless they get a really good offensive player coming back. Good to see ya Rickshaw and nice post!

I thought those were just rumors about Sotomayor. Learn something new every day!

Not fair! Everyone else gets to make the blueprint joke!

#blueprint.

Since people seem to be so sure he's a racist -- and one poster was sure he was a "self-professed" racist, I would expect to find writings or speech by him demonstrating racism. Do you have links for the bolded items?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2016/11/10/im-a-muslim-a-woman-and-an-immigrant-i-voted-for-trump/?postshare=411479140337679&tid=ss_fb

Well, he could propose this, but Congress would have to pass the actual legislation.

If this is all there is, then there isn't anything.

Hank -- you keep asking this question. To me, the obvious answer is that dirtbags shouldn't be in the president's inner circle. That group should be made up of men and women with honorable character. Do you have any facts about Bannon? If you do, please post them. I'm not interested in getting into a back-and-forth about Hillary right now, but suffice it to say that there is a mountain of factual evidence against her that dwarfs the evidence against OJ.

As to the bolded: again -- where are the facts? The fact that I've asked several times now and no one has produced anything is indicating, with increasing strength, that there are no facts. As to why some white supremacists are supporting him -- anything I could say about this would be sheer conjecture -- just like anything you could say about it. The point is that Bannon, like everyone else in this country, should be evaluated based on HIS actions -- not those of some random dirtbags blasting out various tweets.

Those articles simply describe certain dirtbags as being happy with Bannon -- they do not describe any facts supporting the accusations of racism against Bannon. As for "self-professed white supremacist and racist" -- I ask again: do you have any links showing any facts behind these accusations? Anything where he professes white supremacist or racist views? Here is what he has said: That is a far cry from professing racism. This election has triggered (heh) a large amount of accusations of bigotry and other name-calling. These accusations need to be based on facts. Otherwise it's just the boy who cried wolf.

No -- I find Breitbart aggressively anti-P.C. but not racist.

That USA Today article is simply a summary of various reactions to Bannon's appointment -- there is no discussion of the facts (if any) underlying the accusations against him.

Any supporting facts on these (serious) accusations? I tried to find some and was unsuccessful -- I was only able to find (i) hysterical accusations similar to these in lefty opinion pieces and (ii) an allegation from his ex-wife, made in the middle of a divorce/custody suit, that he made anti-semitic comments to her.

I understand the math -- my point is that corporate tax rates and personal tax rates are apples and oranges. Corporations pay taxes on their profits, and what is left over either stays in the company or is distributed to the shareholders (at which point it is taxed again). Individuals pay taxes on their own incomes. Well, I'm not sure what to say about this, although I agree with your dissatisfaction with the tax code. The bottom line is that corporate taxes and personal taxes are 2 entirely different animals, and cutting corporate taxes helps all shareholders (including pension funds, who make up a huge portion of the invested capital in this country) equally. Conservatives have been calling for a simplification of the tax code forever. Let's hope it happens this time around. Those would be freaking fantastic.