buddha

i said it was insane to think the seventh fleet could respond in a way to stop an invasion of taiwan. the united states is not the world's policeman. we should do what we can to help taiwan - and we do. but go to a hot war with china? i dont think that will happen.

its not a problem for the united states to solve.

it would be equally insane for the us to think the seventh fleet could react in time to stop a chinese invasion or that the us population would be willing to spill blood over taiwan. japan will arm itself with our weapons. japan is a much different animal historically and culturally than taiwan.

well....no one is saying it is the same thing. but taiwan is an island off of china that has historical ties to china. china wants it. china will find a way to get it. the us is not going to war with china for taiwan. just like the us did not go to war with russia for eastern europe or the middle east. if there is conflict with china, it will be of the cold variety.

biden has nominated the most diverse and very liberal set of justices nominated to the lower courts. he's been able to get more of them passed tham trump, a lot more. nary a peep from sinema and manchin. youre wrong on this one.

my mother in law makes a sweet amount of money every year making dresses for baby jesus. i'll have to ask her the important question of what the baby jesus dolls' skin color is the next time i see her.

it will be a gradual takeover, like hong kong. no military invasion. china doesnt want a direct military confrontation any more than we do. the biggest risk is a miscalculation or china accidentally hitting the seventh fleet. and btw, if we went to war with china over taiwan, we would probably lose. but it will backfire on china. next step: rearming japan and moving our supply chains to vietnam.

i dont care about stockton's politics, i do care about isiah putting 44 on stockton's overrated ass.

the us will not to war over taiwan. china will do to taiwan what they did to hong kong. we'll fuss about it and lebron will tell everyone its ok, and at the end of the day china will take over figuratively if not formally. the big thing the us needs to do is uncouple its computer chip reliance from taiwan. start moving those plants to some other country with no environmental laws!

the new judge will be pro abortion, so you wont get romney. but i think you will get collins and maybe murkowski too. and you'll get all the democrats. and since it is replacing a liberal with another liberal, you wont get much pushback from republicans.

i do think biden will appoint a liberal black woman in his place. whomever jim clyborne recommends. he owes him.

i'm guessing. same as everyone else.

manchin and sinema wont do that. btw, about damn time breyer. retire before november elections!

i agree with your concerns. i would also say that the current system ALSO rewards some kids while screwing others, usually by how much money their parents make. there are other changes we can make to the way we fund public schools that would help, but ultimately they may be impossible politically (like stopping using property taxes to fund local schools and instead using one big fund to fund them all equally). vouchers works politically for republicans because it does help people and has the added benefit of hurting teacher's unions.

why is that important in a voucher debate? vouchers help kids get into better schools and furthers their "religion, morality, and knowledge".

yes. i dont think vouchers are a perfect idea, but they are a way to let ambitious parents move their kids to schools they couldnt before. it also rewards higher performing schools. it also does help those kids by getting them into better schools. there is a trade off as you have mentioned, but its not an idea without ANY real world merit. i think you can do that without vouchers. chicago has a system whereby you can apply to send your kids to other chicago public schools outside your neighborhood.

i assume the vouchers will come with instructions on how to apply, but i agree that they will end up taking away the best students from struggling schools. now, the question is why should those students be forced to go to school in a bad school because of where they live, while other wealthier students can afford to go to better private schools? no amount of funding will save those bad public schools. schools are as good as the parents and kids that attend. active participating parents who instill those values in their children will lead to better public schools in the area. i dont support "defunding public schools", but i do think the idea that if we throw tons more money at certain schools or force kids to go to bad schools even if they can succeed elsewhere that those schools will get better is a pipedream. what will improve those schools is better economic conditions for their parents.

its more than that, its a generational thing. the older sports writer (i.e.: hacks) still vote based on who they liked or perceived morality bullshit and less on stats (see phil rogers voting for buerhle and ortiz for the hall of fame and not bonds or clemens). the next generation will likely vote more on stats and will have other moral bugaboos (likely liberal social issues) and will not consider peds as a hindrance like their older brethren. living in chicago and having to deal with phil rogers, joe cowley, and paul sullivan over the years just highlights how stupid most baseball writers are. like you guys and mccoskey.

and again, grant hinders this team. look what they've done without him? they've finally done what most people here have told them to do all season: put hayes on the bench and give the ball to cade and let him work. if grant is on the team he hogs the ball with all his one on one iso shit that takes the ball out of cade's hands. cade defers to grant. look, if grant wants to stand in the corner and shoot threes, that's great. if grant wants to be the guy with the ball in his hands when cade is getting a rest? that's great too. but grant starting and continuing to go one on five in casey's weak ass offense? nope, nada, trade him now.

what type of #1 pick do you think youre getting for grant? any team that trades for him will be a contender and their pick will be in the late teens at best. youre not getting a lottery pick foe grant. any deal that gets a #1 pick for grant is good. the deal i would hold out for is getting a prime time rookie that is a bench guy (or injured) on a good team, a team that needs one more piece and can part with a top talent that might develop for one that is developed. like chicago parting with williams for grant. other than that, give me young players and a #1 pick.

the united states is not going to war over ukraine. the united states SHOULD not go to war over ukraine. ukraine is not a nato member and we owe it nothing. when we go off on our little dalliances to "defend democracy" we get ourselves in trouble. (and ukraine isnt much of a democracy anyway...freedom house gives them a lower ranking than (gasp) hungary with evil orban...even though freedom house is bullshit) we have a set of solid alliances that we need to respect and defend. israel, nato, japan, south korea, australia, canada!. other than that, we can pick and choose our battles in the new cold war. ukraine is not in our interests and should not be a red line in any sand. russia will not invade a country that is a member of nato. the us can use the ukraine as an excuse to bolster up some defenses in poland and the baltics to make them feel better, but it should not be fighting russia in the ukraine. i assume this is biden playing bad cop to europe's good cop to try to strike some deal that will leave russia holding the cards on ukraine without formally invading it.

i think there is real backlash against school closings and what people perceive as curriculum changes based on "crt." republicans are making a killing off of it and democrats are in a bad spot. its a fight with the teachers unions here in chicago. it seems to be a fight with the local school boards in virginia and other places. is there political fighting in texas between the state republican leadership and the blue local leaders in places like houston and dallas?

gattis or hart. i think gattis is the logical choice. if you hired hart, it would piss everyone else off on staff who got jumped by a position coach.

phil rogers is a buffoon. im surprised he didnt vote for for pierzynski and mark grace too. chicago moron.

when the queen dies, will canada put charles on their money?