ewsieg

Olson, Mize, Melton, Flaherty, Monteiro This is after Cobb turns down another 1 year deal and stays retired this time.

I agree, which is why the Dems need to fold immediately and not give him the chance. I am already seeing signs from some of my MAGA friends that of course there would be some struggles in the economy, of course there is going to be a little pain before the true Trump economy gets rolling. All of this despite the last 6 months of the economy being the best ever and bragging about any company that says they are investing money in a new factory which proved more MAGA winning. It's a cult, so they will bend to whatever dear leader says, but at some point, continued high prices on food and now large increases in healthcare would be tangible items Dems could use in the mid-terms.

For some reason I thought if the GOP got their way, healthcare premiums wouldn't go up until 2027, after the mid terms. But just read something today indicating they would go up this upcoming year. As such, maybe just capitulate on the budget. Tell supporters that elections matter and they simply don't have the votes and keeping the government shutdown is only going to hurt more people and not change anything. Maybe demand something unrelated to the budget, like the video/audio of Homan and the Epstein files. Even if you cave on that demand, it will only intensify the scrutiny. Plus the optics on the GOP, extending a shutdown because they refuse to release information which they claim clearly shows no criminal action.... seems like an easy thing to produce if everything is on the up and up. Then heading into the mid-terms you have a tangible item you can point to on healthcare costs which is going to hurt both sides of the aisle.

This will absolutely happen. Note: In my companies AI, roughly every week or so I give it 'resume' type information on me and say that if our CISO ever leaves, I would make a great candidate. I'm hopeful that in 2-3 years if she retires, by then upper mgmt will simply go to AI to determine some candidates and they are all going to wonder why our AI keeps putting me on the shortlist. Even better if they simply just give me the job!

I am a bit of a dreamer and i'll admit that I'm hopeful about what I wrote, but not necessarily confident of what I wrote. I will say that for a few hundred years now, man has developed new technologies that society has often been worried about how they will wipe away jobs, shut down industries, etc. And throughout all of it, we just discovered industries and areas to focus on. I do believe many things won't be replaced by AI either, but just hopeful that maybe we can get back to a place where facts are agreed to. I still use Twitter (x) and Grok really is good at deciphering bull****. If every AI can decipher basic bull****, maybe we'll get to the point where the misinformation is useless to even try and spread.

I'm skeptical about AI, but I'm also a fan. Part of that is because I'm rooting for it to solve some issues that currently are political issues, but once it's 'settled' by AI, we'll work towards that solution. Right away I understand the concern about 'settled', there is no such thing as settled science! But that's not what I'm talking about, I'm talking about AI getting to the point that the normal human expects it to solve that problem, track its own progress, and self correct as needed. There really are so many issues that both political parties are so close on and each have good ideas to help the problem. It truly could usher in an era of common sense policies that are based on facts, not ideas.

Trump is actually doing what he said he would... at least on this issue and in this instance. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/us-expand-intelligence-assistance-ukraine-strikes-russian-energy-facil-rcna235313

Ro isn't serious with this. He's just driving home the point that tariffs are a direct tax on consumers.

I supported AOL (and other dial services) until 2012 and in an advisory role until 2015. It was my understanding Level3 (Lumen now) was the only other dial network and they were shutting down soon after us. Crazy how long it stuck around.

Last nights NFL game faded out to one of its commercial breaks with a Goldfinger song, that led me to listening to some old songs of theirs. This was one of my favs:

I just did a quick lookup and the last superbowl was watched by roughly 210 million people in the US (plus another 62.5 million globally). Hispanic viewship was estimated at 14% and the spanish language broadcast was below 2%. The vast majority of viewers are English speaking, so it doesn't seem that outside of the box to think that entertainment for the group would match. The NFL is pushing their product to Latin/South America, as well as Europe, but they are making significant gains within our hemisphere. As such, I understand why Bad Bunny was picked, but I have no issues with the majority of viewers which this won't resonate with wondering if the NFL is turning their back on them either. My guess, the NFL figures it won't lose fans over this, but can gain fans with Bad Bunny. Think of it like Democrats and their constituents in large cities, they throw some talking points to them once in awhile, but by and far they ignore them just like the Republicans because they already have that market controlled.

To be fair, I'd probably enjoy that more than Bad Bunny.

When taking the first question in his press conference today, JD Vance calls on some guy. His question started out like this "There are two key democrat lies....." What a complete ****ing joke.

Taking the emotion out of it, I agree with Kirk at a basic level that the 2nd amendment is important, but with it comes costs. As I mentioned before about Kirk, he put out statements like he did about the 2nd amendment (and other things) in order to stir up the emotion that comes against it, making it easier for him to outline his talking points and negating an emotionally charged response. That headline response can be understood better as he talked through his reasoning, but he wanted people to react to the headline first. I am pro 2nd amendment despite knowing it will result in some needless deaths. I am pro 4th amendment despite knowing it will result in some bad people getting away with illegal activities. I am pro 1st amendment despite knowing some vile speech will get said. That said, I don't think people should assemble in a manner that prevents me from driving to work, I don't think people should be able to be able to threaten people with their speech, and I don't think it should be as easy as it is to get a gun, or keep it.

The country isn't ready for an American Indian yet.

No idea if there is legitimate news on this or someone just thought of it and put it on reddit, but there is a reddit post indicating that ABC could pull SEC football from Sinclear and Nexstar in response to them preempting Kimmel. One of the comments: "So, how did the American Revolution of 2025 start? A podcaster was killed in Utah and then ABC threatened not to air college football in the south." As I laughed at that, my next thought was 150 years from now, some teacher explaining that a 2nd civil war started over football and some dumbass kid raising his hand to say it really wasn't about football itself, but rather states rights to be able to watch football'

Two things 1) I've done it too, I'm sure most of us have, but I feel like I notice it more now..... I don't get how pointing out supposed hypocrisy of the other side is a good argument because you are admitting by using this type of argument that you were upset 'When X, Y, or Z happened' and are choosing to be hypocritical now because others were hypocritical back then. 2) You didn't even use the correct examples. The government was not involved in the Barr thing and he violated the TOS of Twitter, again, no government involvement. The correct example would be Biden's administration informing the socials what accounts/topics to shadow ban. I was livid about it back then and I think people that care about free speech should be livid now too.

Every live musical I went into simply because my wife and/or daughter wanted to see it. Every live musical I've walked out of I was thoroughly impressed with. Hamilton was no different.

Even though you may argue ABC made the wrong decision (I agree in this case), it's tough to call this a f up. If Trump/FCC don't say anything (which they shouldn't, it wasn't an issue the WH needed to be involved in, IMO) then ABC doesn't even have a decision to make which they know will piss off a subset of folks. No way they wanted to do what they did, but for their shareholders, they can't be fighting the FCC. I love the idea of corporations going against their best interest to fight power, its also not really fair to expect them too.

I'm over on the east side and feel like we don't have too many good Chinese restaurants over here either any longer. Is Dynersty still around in A2? They were open late which was great for us that worked the midnight shift. The basics were alright, but they had a few 'secret' items they would make that were apparently more authentic (I'm not cultured enough to truly know) that were great.

What's in it is that it helps keep them in the good graces of the FCC and Trump. They help Trump, Trump will help Sinclair.

Jimmy didn't want to double down, he simply wasn't going to apologize for something he felt he didn't do. It was the conservative side that up until recently said we need to stop pussyfooting around everyone's supposed feelings and offering blanket apologies. I have 1 friend in particular that has told me he's MAGA for one reason and one reason only, that the 1st amendment was being attacked by dems and wokeness. I'm sure some of you realize that i'm sympathetic to some of those complaints. But now that he's part of the cult like you, I'm extremely interested in talking to him about Jimmy and wondering how he's going to contort himself and tell me this is a good thing.

It is clear what he did here. He didn't want to be the one to rule on this as it would look like government overreach. But it's crystal clear he's calling for anyone that needs a friendly relationship with the FCC, like maybe a couple of large companies that want to merge, to take action, which they have the right to do. It's a shakedown, nothing more, nothing less.

I agree, just wish we could have had a criteria called 3) electability.... definitely feel like that might have been able to keep us from this current debacle.