Dog Brothers Public Forum


Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
February 11, 2016, 11:16:43 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
92670 Posts in 2301 Topics by 1080 Members
Latest Member: Tedbo
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Recent Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10

 on: Today at 10:36:54 AM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by Crafty_Dog

also see

 on: Today at 10:07:46 AM 
Started by ccp - Last post by Crafty_Dog
Hillary Lost Because She Lied
Published on on February 11, 2016
New Hampshire exit polls in the Democratic Primary indicate that Bernie Sanders defeated Hillary Clinton among self-described liberals by 60-39. Okay.  But he also beat her among moderates and conservatives by a nearly identical 60-37 margin.

They also show that among the one-third of all voters who said "honesty and trustworthiness" were the most important qualities of a candidate in determining their vote, Sanders beat Clinton by 95-5.
These data indicate that Sanders' victory was not the result of an ideological vote for a socialist but was due to a personal repudiation of a liar.  It was Hillary's dearth of personal ethics and her lack of veracity, not her political ideology or her issue positions, that led to her smashing defeat in New Hampshire.

So when Hillary sought to co-opt and plagiarize Bernie's rhetoric in her concession speech, she did nothing to solve the problem that brought her low.  Nor will any shift in her message or beheadings of her staff do much to help her. 

It is not her position on the banks, TARP, Glass-Steagall, or campaign finance reform that is dragging her down.  It is her email scandal, Benghazi, and her personal speeches for fees that are causing her candidacy to crash.

Hillary can change her issue positions as frequently and as totally as she changes her hair style.  She can flip on the Keystone Pipeline and flop on the Trans Pacific Trade Deal.  But she cannot go back and delete her lies, evasions, half-truths, and distortions.  They live on video tape and in our memories, ready to spring to life as soon as she lies again.

This personal reputation is not something a new consultant can fix.  All the king's horses and all the king's men cannot put Hillary back together again.
New Hampshire means Hillary is outed.  It's downhill from here.

 on: Today at 08:55:54 AM 
Started by Bob Burgee - Last post by Bob Burgee
Greetings DBMA Association Members!
10 New Open Gathering Fights Posted!
2015-09 - Open Gathering - 71 - Staff vs. Staff
2015-09 - Open Gathering - 72 - Single Stick vs. Single Stick
2015-09 - Open Gathering - 73 - Tomahawk vs. Tomahawk
2015-09 - Open Gathering - 74 - Chain vs. Chain
2015-09 - Open Gathering - 75 - Double Stick vs. Double Stick
2015-09 - Open Gathering - 76 - Double Stick vs. Double Stick
2015-09 - Open Gathering - 77 - Double Stick vs. Double Stick
2015-09 - Open Gathering - 78 - Sword & Shield vs. Sword & Shield
2015-09 - Open Gathering - 79 - Tomahawk vs. Tomahawk
2015-09 - Open Gathering - 80 - Single Stick vs. Single Stick
All the best.

 on: Today at 08:46:42 AM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by ccp
Mark Levin has pointed out  for years that the ban on DDT was junk science and proven false yet the left trumpets this as some sort of progess:

 on: Today at 06:55:10 AM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by ccp
Every time I hear or think that I am brought back to reading something about a statement :  "I don't know what has gotten in to the kids today" which is revealed after you read it to have been written in ancient Greece.

******Behavior problems in youth: Are things worse today than in the past?
By: DAVID C. RETTEW, M.D., Family Practice News Digital Network JANUARY 27, 2016

Every generation of adults seems to worry that the next generation of youth is in trouble. The perception of kids today is no different, with theories abounding as to why the mental health of the newest generation is slipping, compared with previous standards. From mobile phones to helicopter parents, it might seem like a foregone conclusion that our current crop of young people is destined to be insecure, inattentive, and unable to cope with challenges and stress. Many news headlines on the latest mass shooting or standardized test results often seem to confirm these widespread concerns.
Pediatricians often hear parents lamenting the “good old days” when such things as corporal punishment were more easily accepted to help keep kids in line. But taking a step back, it may be worth a more objective look to examine the assumption that child behavioral problems are worse than ever. Measuring overall mental health is not an easy task, but looking at several important metrics indicate that things may not be nearly as bad as many people think.
Substance abuse:
From the latest data from the Monitoring the Future Study, one of the nation’s most reliable sources on teen substance use, the use of both alcohol and tobacco among youth is at the lowest level since the study began in 1975. Use of drugs like heroin and ecstasy also are declining. The only major exception to this trend seems to be cannabis use, which has generally shown stable rates during this climate of marijuana decriminalization and, for some states, legalization.
One area where there continues to be sustained progress is in teen pregnancy. According to the government’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the overall pregnancy rate among adolescent females has been cut in half from 1991 to 2011, across many different ethnic groups. The rate fell from 61.8/1,000 teenagers aged 15-19 years to 31.3/1,000 teenagers.
Far fewer adolescents are being held against their will in juvenile detention centers. The number of youth who are incarcerated have dropped from a high of 381/100,000 in 1995 to 225/100,000 in 2010, according to a report by the Annie E. Casey Foundation.
Bullying has been increasingly recognized as the public health problem that it is. The use of online technology also has created many new settings in which bullying can take place. Nevertheless, there is reason to be optimistic. From the National Center for Education Statistics and the National Crime Victimization Survey, the number of students who report being bullied at school has dropped from 32% in 2007 to an all-time low of 22% in 2013. Another recent study reached similar conclusions for bullying and many other forms of child victimization between 2003 and 2011 (JAMA Pediatr. 2014 Jun;168[6]:540-6).
According to the CDC, the rate of completed suicide in youth peaked in the early1990s and then dropped and stabilized before starting to creep up again over the past 5 or so years. The trends are somewhat different, based on gender and the specific age group that is examined. The majority of completed youth suicides occur in males, with current rates still well below those historical highs.
This one is particularly tricky. While the rates of many specific psychiatric disorders such as ADHD and bipolar disorder have been rising in youth, as well as the use of psychiatric medications, it is much less clear whether this represents a true rise in these disorders versus other factors such as improved detection and a lower diagnostic threshold. One study by Achenbach et al. that measured quantitative levels of child behavior problems from the same rating scale over a 23-year time span found some increases in overall levels from the 1970s to the early 1990s, but then levels began to fall by the end of the millennium (J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2003 Feb;31[1]:1-11).
Of course, these hopeful trends in many significant areas do not mean that these problems have been overcome. While much work remains to be done on many fronts, it is still worth keeping in mind that the overall condition of youth mental health may not be as dire as we might be led to believe and that there is evidence that our efforts, perhaps, are leading to some progress.
Dr. Rettew is associate professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont, Burlington. He said he has no relevant financial disclosures. Follow him on Twitter @pedipsych. E-mail him at*****

 on: Today at 05:58:14 AM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by ccp
96 % 91 %;

Well what about the few hold outs?  They alone could mess up the whole thing.

Just like Atlantic City.  Everyone sold except this one old lady.

I am not for kicking people off their land.

Just saying.

He does have a very good point.

 on: February 10, 2016, 11:05:20 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by Crafty_Dog
Obama had a piece Monday on the editorial page of the WSJ about Cyber Security.  Could someone please find it and post it here?

 on: February 10, 2016, 11:03:16 PM 
Started by ccp - Last post by Crafty_Dog
second post

Donald Trump Among the Canaries
Trump owns persona. His opponents have to go after him on policy and substance.
Wonder Land Columnist Dan Henninger on the results of the state’s Republican presidential primary. Photo credit: Getty Images.
By Daniel Henninger
Feb. 10, 2016 6:56 p.m. ET

The one reliably true thing we are witnessing in this 2016 election season is a bipartisan repudiation of Barack Obama’s presidency.

When Democratic voters in Iowa and New Hampshire vote for a socialist senator because 79% of them say they are worried about the direction of the economy, the incumbent president’s seven years in office takes the fall.

When Republican voters make clear that their state of angst and anger is such that they will cast their unhappy lot with Donald Trump, that reflects disgust with Barack Obama’s conduct of the American presidency.

This isn’t raised merely to throw sand on Mr. Obama’s last year. It is more serious than that. New Hampshire’s voters, all present for the Obama experience, are the canaries in the coal mines of American political life.

Just as dying canaries warned coal workers that the shaft was filling with toxic gases, New Hampshire’s voters have told the political status quo, to coin a phrase, you are killing us.

Donald Trump owns the 35% of the Republican electorate that is hacked off about everything. In nearly every exit-poll category—age, ideology, the economy, terror—Mr. Trump has at least 35% secured.

What this means for the other candidates is they cannot possibly compete with Donald Trump on his terms, on display in his victory speech Tuesday, which began contained and ended semi-unhinged.

A story from the political past will illustrate. In 1958, when George Wallace, then considered something of a Southern liberal, lost the Alabama governorship to a segregationist candidate, he remarked, “I will never be out-segged again.” Wallace became the premier angry-man populist of his era, running in four presidential races.

No one is going to out-rant Donald Trump about the state of America. Chris Christie got in as the tough-guy candidate. He’s gone, unable to compete with the Marvel Comics character Donald Trump created.

Ted Cruz especially had better reflect. Mr. Cruz’s path to the nomination runs through the Southern states and leans heavily on evocative rhetoric and buzzwords—primarily immigration and attacking Washington and “them.”

But Donald Trump owns all of that, and will so long as four or five candidates are dispersing the other 65% of the GOP vote. Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio have the money and mutual animosity to go on. Ben Carson won’t quit. John Kasich is talking about winning Michigan—in a month.

If Mr. Trump’s persona is impermeable, the other candidates will have to go after him on substance.

Mr. Trump has been floating in an inch-deep pool of policy and shows no inclination to expand his pre-existing knowledge of anything. It will require patience and persistence, but his opponents have no choice but to start challenging the implications of what he says and criticizing it in detail.

At the core of the Trump campaign is one policy idea: imposing a 45% tariff on goods imported from China. In his shouted, red-faced victory speech Tuesday, he extended the trade offensive to Japan and Mexico.

Some detail: Combining the value of goods we sell to them and they to us, China, Mexico and Japan are the U.S’s Nos. 1, 3 and 4 trading partners (Canada is No. 2). They are 35% of the U.S.’s trade activity with the world. The total annual value of what U.S. producers—and of course the workers they employ—sell to those three countries is $415 billion.

Wal-Mart has 1.4 million U.S. employees in stores filled with foreign-made consumer goods. With a 45% price increase, many won’t be working for long.

Mr. Trump says the threat alone of a tariff will cause China to cave. Someone should ask: What happens if they don’t cave? Incidentally, unlike Mexico, China has between 200 and 300 nuclear warheads and 2.4 million active-duty forces. Irrelevant?

He said Tuesday about drugs: “We’re going to end it at the southern border. It’s gonna be over.” How?

He said: “I am going to be the greatest jobs president that God ever created.” How?

Another campaign venue Donald Trump owns is the national debates. In New Hampshire, 67% said the debates were important to their decision, suggesting the debates are backing out retail politics. If so, the survivor candidates need a new debate strategy.

They will always finish behind Donald Trump if they let the moderators design their performances by making the debate a pinball machine, as ABC did in New Hampshire. The randomness, baiting and irrelevance (immigration, the inevitable debate whipping post is the lowest-rated issue in exit polls) make it hard for voters to shape an impression beyond persona, which Mr. Trump owns.

Iowa and New Hampshire revealed there are three GOP voting issues in the primaries: economic anxiety, Islamic terrorism and voters’ emotional belief in their candidate. A competitive Trump opponent will find a way to drive those subjects—and ignore the rest—across two hours in 30 to 60-second increments.

Donald J. Trump reinvented modern media politics. Somebody has about three months to reinvent his invention

 on: February 10, 2016, 11:00:12 PM 
Started by ccp - Last post by Crafty_Dog
GOP Infighters Need to Focus on Trump
The four mainstream candidates are only wasting time if they go after each other.
Donald Trump on Tuesday in Manchester, N.H., after winning the New Hampshire Republican primary. ENLARGE
Donald Trump on Tuesday in Manchester, N.H., after winning the New Hampshire Republican primary. Photo: Jim Bourg/Reuters
By Karl Rove
Feb. 10, 2016 6:48 p.m. ET

Tuesday’s outcome in New Hampshire means two things: First, Donald Trump, while not unstoppable, is more likely than any other Republican to be the GOP nominee. Bet on Donald, but heavier on the field. Second, Bernie Sanders will win plenty of delegates, enough to influence the Democratic platform.

Mr. Trump had a very good night. He outperformed his poll numbers, receiving 35% of the vote, four points higher than his Real Clear Politics average going into Tuesday. The businessman ran equally well among Republicans and independents (who can vote in the state’s open primary).

The Donald’s tone in his victory speech was much improved. He movingly paid tribute to his parents. Gone were incessant references to polls. So, too, were insults about his competitors, replaced by praise of them as “really talented people . . . terrific.”

Mr. Trump even strung together a rudimentary platform, pledging to negotiate better trade deals, take care of veterans, build a border wall, replace ObamaCare, create jobs and “knock the hell out of ISIS.” He now must flesh out and defend these platitudes, as Republicans hit him for supporting single-payer health care and saying that he won’t increase the defense budget.

Second-place finisher John Kasich benefited enormously from having hosted 106 New Hampshire town halls, a feat he cannot replicate in South Carolina before its Feb. 20 primary. The Ohio governor is likely a one-state candidate—or, at best, a regional one, with future strength only in the central Midwest.

The overwhelming nature of Mr. Trump’s victory threatens Tuesday’s third-place finisher, Ted Cruz. He played down his chances in New Hampshire but quietly focused on carrying the state’s evangelicals, who made up 23% of the GOP turnout. Even so, Mr. Trump beat Mr. Cruz among evangelicals, 28% to 24%. If that happens in South Carolina, and in the southern “SEC primaries” on March 1, the Texas Senator is toast. Mr. Cruz must confront the New York hotelier, and not just on social issues as he pledged to do Tuesday night.

Then there are the Floridians, former Gov. Jeb Bush, finishing fourth, and Sen. Marco Rubio, fifth. After his surprise Iowa performance, Mr. Rubio was expected to do well in New Hampshire—until his robotic meltdown in Saturday’s debate. Now Mr. Bush is the one with a semblance of momentum.

The Granite State winnowed the GOP field to those five. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina dropped out Wednesday. Poor showings and an empty war chest will end the candidacy of surgeon Ben Carson. Still, five candidates is too many. If they all hang on until mid-March, the chances of nominating a mainstream Republican may dissipate.

Messrs. Kasich, Cruz, Bush and Rubio must resist the temptation to go after one another—which only wastes vital time—and instead concentrate fire on Mr. Trump. South Carolina is a great venue to pop him on defense spending and health care. They must also bring up the front-runner’s greatest weakness: Americans have never elected a serial bankrupt. Populist South Carolinians may not understand why, when Mr. Trump’s companies went under, such a wealthy man didn’t dip into his fortune to do right by the people who were hurt.

There is also Mr. Trump’s claim to be a great businessman: His casinos never reported a profit. The only person who may have made big money on them was The Donald, when he sold. So far Mr. Trump’s response to the bankruptcy charge has been that he “took advantage of the laws.” Thoroughly airing the issue will provide an opportunity for him to give a better answer—or for Republicans to decide they don’t want a nominee with such baggage.

Democrats are also in a pickle. Mr. Sanders beat Hillary Clinton across the board: among voters of both genders and most racial, age, education, income and ideological groups. Mrs. Clinton won only voters 65 and older and those making over $200,000 a year.

The self-proclaimed socialist celebrated by promising a raft of free things, and stirring up envy and class resentment. He is firmly inside Hillary Clinton’s head, causing her to offer a paler version of his left-wing agenda. Still, she leads in states coming up, where the Democratic electorate is not 93% white, as in New Hampshire. And even Democrats may realize how toxic his socialist vision is.

If you had predicted last summer that Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders would overwhelmingly win New Hampshire, you might have been placed in an institution. Now, you would be seen as prophetic.

Mr. Rove helped organize the political-action committee American Crossroads and is the author of “The Triumph of William McKinley: Why the 1896 Election Still Matters” (Simon & Schuster, 2015).

 on: February 10, 2016, 10:57:17 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by Crafty_Dog

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!