I'm not normally a fan, but Mark Cuban nails it.....

13 August 2015, 01:56

quote:
In his Tuesday Cyber Dust post, Cuban also reflected on the meaning of leadership:

Leaders don't conform to the consensus. They create consensus to their vision and goals.

Leaders don't change their positions mid debate. They welcome scorn from the masses because it creates the opportunity for dialogue.

Leaders don't look backwards to condemn what has already been done, they look forward to create a better future.

Leaders are not dogmatic. They are principled and know that change is never easy, but when it's necessary, they must lead.

The Republican Party does everything possible to discourage leadership.

They want dogma.

They want conformity.

They want to conserve their romanticized past.

That's a shame. I wish they wanted to conserve the best of what America is today and find a leader that can take us to new places that make our future better.

I realize that's not the way politics work in this day and age. And that just proves the point.

"And btw, I know a lot of the same can be said about the Democrats, but I don't want to be a Democrat," he concluded. "Until things change, I'll sit in the middle and think for myself. Unlike the Republicans."

xxxxxxxxxx
When considering US based operations of guides/outfitters, check and see if they are NRA members. If not, why support someone who doesn't support us? Consider spending your money elsewhere.

NEVER, EVER book a hunt with BLAIR WORLDWIDE HUNTING or JEFF BLAIR.

I have come to understand that in hunting, the goal is not the goal but the process.

13 August 2015, 18:03

Kensco

Posted on Political Forum also.

13 August 2015, 19:48

Gatogordo

Kensco:

I'm not allowed to play in the PF, but I see that great minds think alike and you beat me to it by about 4 hours.

It's amazing how the lock step, arm raising Republicans can't understand why they keep losing the Big One.

The way things are going, they may well do it again unless Hilary is done in by the Benghazi email flap.

13 August 2015, 22:26

Kensco

I agree.

The Kool-Aid drinkers I suspect feel more comfortable losing. They want "bitching rights", not the responsibility to make decisions and lead.

My guess is that you aren't allowed to play on the PF because your IQ exceeded their maximum allowed, which is single digit I suspect. Doesn't say much for me that I can't find a way to get expelled.

13 August 2015, 22:48

Beretta682E

quote:
Originally posted by Gatogordo:
Kensco:

I'm not allowed to play in the PF, but I see that great minds think alike and you beat me to it by about 4 hours.

It's amazing how the lock step, arm raising Republicans can't understand why they keep losing the Big One.

The way things are going, they may well do it again unless Hilary is done in by the Benghazi email flap.

Why banned from political forum ?

Mike

14 August 2015, 06:06

Gatogordo

Actually no one ever told me, but I suspect it was because I mentioned that DRG's hero, Steve Jobs, was a liar and a thief in his earlier life. Truth hurts, I guess.

Several people PMed me and told me all I had to do was ask to be allowed to post.
Whether that was accurate or not, I don't know. My thoughts were that if I posted the absolute truth and got banned for it, then I didn't need to post in the SOB anyway.

The upside to it is that I haven't wasted many hours of my time trying to correct the multiple untruths that are spouted daily in the PF or "discuss" their views with people who get their main talking points from Rush/Hannity et al. To be honest, I'm glad I can't post there anymore and I very rarely read anything in there.

14 August 2015, 07:10

Beretta682E

quote:
Originally posted by Gatogordo:
Actually no one ever told me, but I suspect it was because I mentioned that DRG's hero, Steve Jobs, was a liar and a thief in his earlier life. Truth hurts, I guess.

Several people PMed me and told me all I had to do was ask to be allowed to post.
Whether that was accurate or not, I don't know. My thoughts were that if I posted the absolute truth and got banned for it, then I didn't need to post in the SOB anyway.

The upside to it is that I haven't wasted many hours of my time trying to correct the multiple untruths that are spouted daily in the PF or "discuss" their views with people who get their main talking points from Rush/Hannity et al. To be honest, I'm glad I can't post there anymore and I very rarely read anything in there.

The political forum often reminds me on www.stormfront.org . It scares me at times what people say on ARPF.

We all know Steve Jobs was a visionary who created the world's largest market cap company.

Strange he never sold a single share of disney which he owned billions of dollars worth to buy a single share of apple.

Mike

14 August 2015, 19:12

Kensco

My guess is that the government probably monitors the ARPF.

19 August 2015, 10:55

Norseman

Steve Jobs was a very smart Arab.

27 August 2015, 19:42

TomP

quote:
Originally posted by Gatogordo:
quote:
In his Tuesday Cyber Dust post, Cuban also reflected on the meaning of leadership:

Leaders don't conform to the consensus. They create consensus to their vision and goals.

Only a diehard anticommunist like Richard Nixon could have gotten away with the China initiative.

Only a diehard liberal like Clinton could have gotten away with putting limits on welfare.

27 August 2015, 20:34

Opus1

Ummm, you can thank Newt for that. Clinton was fighting for his survival when the entitlement cuts were put on his desk thanks to Newt's leadership. All Clinton could do at that point was lie to the American public about not having sex with that women. His goose was thoroughly cooked at that point.

And one other little tidbit, the Executive branch does not make law or control the purse strings...

30 August 2015, 10:15

NormanConquest

O.K. old joke for what it's worth. Chelsea Clinton comes home from her date. Hillary say's
'did you have a good time?" Yes then the next question "Did you have sex?" She replies,"Not according to dad."Kinda different when it's your daughter,right.

30 August 2015, 18:09

Gatogordo

quote:
Originally posted by Opus1:
Ummm, you can thank Newt for that. Clinton was fighting for his survival when the entitlement cuts were put on his desk thanks to Newt's leadership. All Clinton could do at that point was lie to the American public about not having sex with that women. His goose was thoroughly cooked at that point.

And one other little tidbit, the Executive branch does not make law or control the purse strings...

Well, yes and no. Your time line is way off. Clinton made welfare reform a major pledge in his 1992 campaign but stalled out and Newt and the Republicans took up the call, leading to the passage of the Personal Responsibility etc Act (welfare reform) signed into law August 22, 1996. No one except the principals, possibly the Secret Service, and Linda Tripp knew anything about Clinton/Lewinski until she turned the tapes over to Starr in 1998. So the "affair" had nothing to do with his signing the law. Actually he came up with the general concept as it was enacted in his 1992 campaign. I don't like him, but compared to Bush and Obama, he was a far better President. I just hope his wife can't get there as well.