No, see, *this* is why the Democratic party loses elections. Because they couch everything in technical talk and try so damned hard to be inoffensive.

You are conflating Obamacare repeal with the AHCA. They are related, but not interchangeable. I can have and have had productive discussions with people who wanted to repeal the ACA. Thinking that the AHCA is the correct way to go about fixing the system is a different matter.

My original statement presumes that their goal is reflected by the effect of their proposed bill. If that statement sounds over the top it is only because their proposed bill is actually that bad.

You may want to go back and read my original post. You know, the one that starts with me relating a conversation with a conservative friend.

“Yes but the debate on the AHCA has nothing to do with what Trump would do with the savings.”

Sorry, but that’s not an over the top statement. It is literally what the AHCA does. So, over the top bill maybe.

No, actually, I’m talking about one very specific political issue. Whether or not you support the AHCA. A bill which will result in the loss of health coverage for vulnerable people while providing very little in the way of deficit relief because it uses the savings from cutting that coverage to pass a tax cut that…

Yes, I am drawing a line where I think that someone’s position is so abhorrent that it does not warrant a civil response. There is also an “argument to be made” that societies would be better off if they were more homogeneous. So should I also be more respectful of white nationalists?

You want to try to dig up the most inflammatory comments from Rachel Maddow and I’ll grab some from Alex Jones and we can compare? Or would you prefer Stephen Colbert and Rush Limbaugh? Oh, and also:

I had a conservative friend tell me that she doesn’t like it when either side dehumanizes the other side. I agreed, and I held my tongue on the response that I can think of far more examples of that coming from her side than mine. I think maintaining a discourse that acknowledges shared humanity is a good thing.

It honestly wouldn’t really matter. It’s not like McGregor is known for a strong ground game that he’d be taking advantage of if it were fought under MMA rules. It would basically just be a boxing match with smaller gloves.

Nah. McGregor is a loud mouth, Mayweather is actual human garbage. The ideal outcome is Mayweather finishes the night with a feeding tube.

The thing that always gets me about takes of this sort is this, where is all of the hand wringing about the future of the league and competitive balance when a LeBron team is coasting on cruise control through the East for the better part of a decade? You know no one in the Eastern Conference has even pushed a LeBron…

This deserves all of the stars.

Hey fuck you man, I’m old right now. Get off my lawn.

Not trying to ignite a “are esports sports” argument here.

I have no desire to make grand pronouncements about “true basketball lovers” or arguments about why you’re wrong about what you do or don’t enjoy.

Just for clarification, that picture does not show a man “wired up to a breathing machine”. It shows a man wearing a partial rebreather, a mask used to deliver high oxygen concentrations. It does not have wires, and it does not assist breathing.

Also, people tend to overlook that what the Warriors have done was possible in no small part because Steph signed a below market value long term contract when it looked like he was going to be a big injury risk. He’s only making slightly more than Andre Iguodala. That’s a freak occurrence.

What exactly was the NBA supposed to do to stop it? They have established a maximum contract level. They have a draft system that in theory rewards bad teams with the better incoming players. They have a salary cap that limits the ability of super-wealthy owners to spend their way to success.