They? All rich people purchase political power? Seriously? Are the unions that purchase political power the enemy? The teachers? Retired people? The NRA? (Okay they are the enemy.)

Or you are bitter about the limited success you have had in life and want to blame someone.  It is one or the other. 

I don’t have a boss, kid. This is why I can bust on your communist ass in the middle of the workday. You are so incensed I disagree with you. Are you mad at the other 98% of the Americans who agree with me? Or am I special? (Please tell me I’m special.)

I agree on some level. The people who beat the rap are the ones that deny, deny, deny no matter what the evidence. Confess some culpability and you are ruined. Then again, they liars often have a base of support of low information people.

The better question is why on earth are the rich the enemy? A large number of rich people got rich because they paid the price of being rich. They put in the time, sweat, and effort to put themselves where they are. Why would these people be the enemy? If you really think this, you really are Lenin in 1917. I mean…

This reminds me of a poem. It might have been Yeats, I can’t remember:

It all sounds fun. But it would be a lot more fun if they got one more impact player.

There is merit to what you say. But when you say the rich are the enemy, you lose me. 

Amazing to me that the GOP is standing by him when the story is so likely to get worse. Pavlovian reflex?

“Trump did not Kermit a crime because he can’t commit crimes.”

What can I say? Kermit a crime and you gotta do the time.

Why do you say that? I make 96% of my decisions based on spite. It has been working great!

Sarah, let it go. John was kidding when he said he regrets picking you. 

If you don’t think he typed this post on one knee, you are crazy. 

Boston is a top 10 media market. But let’s ignore that and accept your argument that “big market” does not mean big market. It is a distinction without a difference. We were not pushing back on the big market’s power out of sympathy. We do it because it further the joint enterprise.

I think this was the exact plan that time Obama put his tongue in Dmitry Medvedev’s ear. At the time, I naively dismissed it is mere foreplay. 

I didn’t intend to speak in absolutes (and I don’t think it reads that way). 

Can we agree that there is the potential in an uncapped system for large market teams like the Red Sox and Yankees to have good teams relatively consistently while it is hard for teams like the Orioles or Royals to be able to do the same thing? Can we also agree that some level of parity (or hope) is really good for…

Even with the luxury tax, the evidence goes the other way.

I think common sense if a good guide in this regard. What sort of double-blind placebo study would satisfy you? Doesn’t it make sense to you?