N.O. via West-Cal

I have not cared about any of this BS, but the Saudi is "dressed up" in his culture's traditional mode of dress, while Zelensky was not. Again, I don't give a damn, but the two are not comparable.

Great thread. I’m with the majority who see a really high ceiling, held back only by limited athleticism and good but not overwhelming height/length. Could you ever see DQ as first or second All NBA? I don’t think so, but how crazy is it that we can even ask the question.

Here is something to think about, say at the midpoint of the season: where would DQ have been drafted if there was a redraft? I suspect all will agree he would be MUCH higher.

Great question and I think the great weight of the evidence supports the first of the two choices: well meaning, largely principled conservatives who made some poor choices and who believed too much in the cause of liberty and the ability of America’s armed forces to promote the cause of liberty even in cultures that lack the prerequisite attributes.

"You could maybe argue the Spurs but that's a very unique outlier where you had a future MVP in Kawhi, a former one in Duncan"

Because of this, I wouldn't even call the Spurs an outlier. They just had a superstar that was at the end of his career, which was plenty with everything else they had.

In any case, I agree wholeheartedly that it is a star-driven league. Unfortunately, our star plays less than half the time.

This is exactly what I want from an owner.

Now, as much as I would have loved for Willie to succeed, has not. Dumars needs to make the move and time’s a-wasting.

“A tax on the American people is incorrect. We are not being taxed. It’s a price increase on foreign goods.”

A tariff is a tax on imports and clearly within congressional authority. The issue at hand has nothing to do with whether the tariffs are good or bad or whether they are paid by the importer or ultimately consumers—that’s a question for economists. This is about whether the executive has the power to levy them in the manner the administration did.

“You must not know that 'obamacare' was presented to congress as ANYTHING BUT A TAX !!!”

This is true! And I agree that the ACA should have been struck down. But that’s beside the point, which is whether Trump’s unilaterally imposed tariffs (taxes) are constitutional. I don’t think they are.

I am aware that many on this board are extremely exercised but the H1B visa program, the results of which are largely invisible to me. But in learning more about the program, I see that these visas are capped at 85k per year in industries that, as best I can tell, have low unemployment rates of 3 or 4% (depending on where you look and what sectors are considered). For these reasons, it is hard for me to see this in the same light as many on this board. I’d be interested in hearing some facts on the other side. In short, is this really a problem?

“ So for Obama care, he said it could survive as a tax, but for Trump, he wants to argue since it’s a tax on Americans, Trump can’t impose? Seems like that’s some assumed word substitution there, but what do I know?”

Obamacare was a law passed by Congress. I didn’t care for Roberts characterizing the mandate as a tax, but it was most definitely a Congressional act. With tariffs, Trump is attempting to levy a tax on his own. So, not the same at all.

With sufficient majorities, the Constitution allows for virtually anything, but we Americans have always been a fractious lot. What you cite as a flaw may be a feature. Presumably the Marxists and so forth you profess concern over are themselves troubled to live in Trump’s second term. Hand wringing and pearl clutching on the right may be even more unseemly than when practiced by the left.