Neo

I'll ask you to point out where I used "deserved" or "rugged individualist". You're just wrong. If "cop out" refers to my approach, you're wrong and rude. That's quite a combination. Wanting people to have the dignity of achievement is hardly a cop out. Suggesting self sufficiency isn't a sustainable necessity is fantasy. Both sentences allow for the compassion of assistance in rough times. Mr. DeLuca used the phrase "teach a man to fish". Is he, too, suggesting the undeserving need to become rugged individualists or is your venom reserved for conservatives?

I don't think it is mean. I think it's common sense and important when teaching a man how to fish. It's far from my primary suggestion though. There are dozens. Let's jump far to the margins. Is explaining to a family of five kids that affording a sixth isn't possible "mean" or "common sense"? Is providing more welfare after the sixth "compassionate" or "enslaving"? To these specific examples, I say "common sense" and "enslaving", respectively.

Mr. Swamp ... I want to help families get through rough times, as you stated. I don't want to help families ensure rough times for generations. We can discuss the word "ensure". There are probably better words. These are two thirty, no sixty, thousand foot views we probably agree on. The devil in the details starts at 100 feet where the majority of the work begins. Controversy alert: I think we've enslaved generations and some look for more resources to continue doing so. Whether you agree that we've enslaved or not, can we agree that this is (would be) bad welfare? I support all welfare to help families through rough times. Now that my compassion is established (not that you questioned it), I'll ask if you reject all welfare that enslaves generations. I'm guessing you do reject that horror even if you don't see our current system as doing that. Now, at 100 feet, what shall we do? Controversy two alert: I start with education and consequences. Here's $20,000. Develop a skill and make economically sound decisions before you ask for more money. Mean? I don't think so. Common sense compassionate advice? I do think so. Welfare bridging rough times is good. When the bridge spans four generations, it's bad. The cure isn't a bridge to five. I lack the capacity to change minds. That's my acknowledgment to a web board. My request, my ask, is that the board sees my approach as equally compassionate in intent. I give my progressive friends that credit while we debate cause, effect, choice and consequence. My heart hurts for generation four, contemplating generation five, and relying on assistance. Awesome ... forgive my snip for space. Being in a time of need - I'm IN! Fifty years isn't a "good" time. I'm laughing ... "Teach a man to fish" was on my mind, but I stayed away from a Biblical reference for fear of causing Mr. Drunkard to lose his cereal. Respectfully, of course. How about public assistance for those making use of the societal investments you reference? Imagine the outrage of Welfare with conditions! Here's your food and rent money ... let's see your grades ... and your drug test is scheduled for Tuesday. Don't we call people advocating that "mean"? I'll have celebratory beer and wings with you, on me, if that's a direction you're considering. Break a cycle, I'm in. Perpetuate it, I'm out.

Who wants to get rid of welfare?

Or, perhaps, I don't see "brothers keeper" as most compassionate when it creates or allows dependence. If birth control is your desire, here's to you. I can provide it for you, or I can participate in a society where you learn how to provide it for yourself. I'll agree you and I have different approaches. I'll reject one's more compassionate than the other. My biggest tears are for the generational failures big one size fits none programs produce. Varying opinions on the path exist. Neither has a monopoly on compassion. I keep lotsa brothers. I'll never say "if you can't afford anything you shouldn't have it". I will say "if you can't afford something here's how you get it".

Holy, schmoly, yes.

Well, it's fundamentally WildCard, which is awesome sauce, but I believe he channeled himself some Yuri. WC ... wonderful work. You bring gifts ... To: Mr. Woods ... we both tasted a pinch of Yuri! Just caught your post ...

I think you're on to something. Trump pointed it out in NH, although I didn't know if he was accurate, or not. Edit to add: I REALLY think you're on to something. I'm just hearing post debate polling results.

My fut based on conversations with, and occasional visits to, the good people of South Carolina -- deeply honorable people with traditional values and a deep respect for the military. The military liked GWB immensely. You could they say loved him. GWB's involvement could have more of an impact than I'd realized. Jeb mentions his dad, mom and brother most sincerely. That card's played very well tonight. A strong second would be progress.

The establishment isn't dead yet. At the turn, I'll call a good night for Bush, Kasich (he's just not well known or charismatic), Rubio .... then Carson, Cruz, Trump. I have nothing to back those gut feelings. I'm not sure if a bad night matters for Trump, but an accumulation of them may over time.

Trump's been spared for thirty minutes ... Cruz is the new object of derision. What an eventful night.

I added to my post, above. Saw him, too. Maybe we were there together.

I WILL read it, thank you. I'm not a lawyer, but muscle through decisions when I can. I have odd interests. His dissents are especially good reading to me. I may be reading in to your posts - we "hear" voice in web postings and are often mistaken - but I take it you're not a fan. I'll read looking for room to be critical. Adding: I saw Scalia at Canisius College in 1993. An attorney with Hodgson, Russ, et al. Brought me as his guest. I don't remember "huffy"!

Trump is not winning the crowd, tonight .... Interesting as the debates move south. Snippet, but he's been booed loudly.

I, too, am optimistic. I'm not sure why. It won't be my guy or gal, but I think there's hope for a moderate. I defer to the President for the choice. He's our voice in that role. We sent him to Washington for this job, among others. I'm hopeful a President who promised to unite sees an opportunity to do just that with this important aspect of his legacy. I will be unhappy with a recess appointment. That's a premature worry. I will be equally unhappy with Republican political posturing. Blocking a progressive version of a conservative Bork, well, that would be another matter. I'll decide if it's prudent or posturing when and if it takes place. The Bork theater formed many of the views I hold today. It was reality TV before reality TV. Before the sausage is made, though, I'll honor the man. Scalia would ask his colleagues "What is the role of the court?" and go on to say "the government, the decisions, belong to the people". This is why he was my favorite. I'll look forward to learning how nominees answer this question. He was not a judicial supremacist and, as a result, was so powerful. Consider that. Scalia introduced me to constructionist, textualist, and originalist. I am changed, better, and grateful. He worked with progressives and conservatives and held them both to the same standards, applied brilliantly time after time. POTUS speech tonight: gracious and responsible. I'll be watching. We all will be ....

NO ... You are remarkably humble. I meant, you have wisdom! I've watched you wrestle ideas back and forth. Damned interwebs. I tried to be clever and complimentary ...

Scalia was a giant, stealing a word I heard 50 times on the radio while driving after learning he died. I am sad. Scalia was Regan's greatest legacy, agree with the decisions, or not. "This" to your two sentences. PS. I'm playing ping pong with "means" and "ends", but will reply. I've been convinced of both since reading your thought starter. I understand K9's answer ("means"), but there's an element of free market human choice in "ends" that I have to wrestle with before elevating or rejecting it.

PA - I had the same thought but couldn't find a proper clothing shot with POTUS! Funny you should catch it. BTW - that looks like my golfing (very rare) outfit. I'm a Republican. Perhaps no COUNTRY CLUB Republican would be caught dead in those cargo shorts? I'm not a country clubber.

Foligno has his points, his PS .. and he's played physically, too. Nice game. I'm attributing it to TBPHD's suggestion of a 2% raise in the Stamkos thread.

Emoticons ...????

My God, I've figured it out. ✈

✅ YES

Respectfully ... don't argue with them, show them evidence. I tend to see the world as it is until the moment someone shows me it isn't.

First Marchand, now Foligno .... I don't know what a PS call is anymore. Nice shots, both...