Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.

[Not Bob]

Originally Posted by Adder

Kasich is only sane in relative terms in that party, but yeah. Delegates for Cruz+Rubio+Kasich would lead Trump 777-754. But I'm not sure the two drop outs can bind their delegates to Kasich (don't know) and not sure that Trump couldn't overcome that lead in the remaining primaries, where he would likely pummel Kasich.

Also: the email thing is a non-scandal. As usual.

But it did get me reading this, which is sort of fun. Let's look at some bits:



Oh really? Well, if Cucc, who is clearly an unbiased expert commentator says so...



Or, obtained materials that were not marked as such and only became deemed to be years later as they were reviewed for release amidst controversy.



It's pretty hard to "knowingly" remove classified materials that are not yet classified, which none of these were as of the time of any of those actions.

ETA: Okay, I moved through this too fast. So, Cucc, that first time, that can't be "knowing" because there aren't yet any materials, much less classified ones. I'm not expert in this area of law, but I'm pretty confident that "knowing" does not mean having perfect foresight of the future. The second and third, what I said before.

The shifting focus of this investigation of Hillary (8 or so different consecutively disproved theories as to why she permitted the death of Ambassador Stevens even though she could have stopped it; followed by State's refusal to provide emails; followed by "holy shit she had a private server!"; followed by ....) reminds me of the shifting theories of Robert Fiske and Ken Starr regarding Whitewater.

Consequently, I am convinced that it will come out (heh) that Hilary Clinton gave Anthony Weiner a blowjob and that Huma made him keep and save the navy blazer from Gap with the physical evidence.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

Consequently, I am convinced that it will come out (heh) that Hilary Clinton gave Anthony Weiner a blowjob

the original notbob would never write anything so fresh. that notbob posted assuming his wife will one day find and read his posts, so he kept safe.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

the original notbob would never write anything so fresh. that notbob posted assuming his wife will one day find and read his posts, so he kept safe.

These are crazy times. The world is upside down. Not Bob is making blow job jokes, and Sebastian and I are wondering how we are going to buy big bags of green when fat people outlaw Benjamins. Time to slow down, close your eyes, and discover how the Meters can squeeze more funk out of the spaces between the notes than most groups can put into the notes themselves. It's all going to be o.k. The Daily Dose is Cardova:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83do2qf6JEs

[Not Bob]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

the original notbob would never write anything so fresh. that notbob posted assuming his wife will one day find and read his posts, so he kept safe.

Agreed. The character's personality really changed when Dick Sergeant took over from Dick York.

[Oliver_Wendell_Ramone]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

These are crazy times. The world is upside down. Not Bob is making blow job jokes, and Sebastian and I are wondering how we are going to buy big bags of green when fat people outlaw Benjamins. Time to slow down, close your eyes, and discover how the Meters can squeeze more funk out of the spaces between the notes than most groups can put into the notes themselves. It's all going to be o.k. The Daily Dose is Cardova:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83do2qf6JEs

FWIW, while most Oregon dispensaries remain cash-only, a few have somehow figured out a way to accept credit cards. I've yet to see where the big bank lists my weed purchases in its annual by-category accounting.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I don't like that Apple, Samsung, banks, take a piece of every single transaction. But other than that, I'm all for it.

If you had more competition then maybe you'd see lower prices.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Seriously? Are you fucking nuts?

Bring it. I don't really like Larry Summers all that much, but now you're getting personal.

Cash is never going completely away, but alternatives to it have a whole lot going for them.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I meant Summers' most recent influential policy suggestion.

I'm not enjoying the Whack-A-Mole.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

Exactly. I'd prefer it if he destroyed the GOP be Not Getting the nomination at a contested conversation.

Me too. Seems like an even better way to drive Trump supporters away from the party.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

The unbanked will be even further screwed in the Brave New Cashless World.

The reason why people get screwed so often now is that the banks don't want to serve them and leave them to the bottom feeders. There are fintech companies aiming to offer bank-like services to the currently underserved. Banks are justifiably scared.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

It's all about the disconnect. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/poli...e68042192.html

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I'm not enjoying the Whack-A-Mole.

That I was referring to Summers' prominent positions was clearly implied. But you knew that.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Bring it. I don't really like Larry Summers all that much, but now you're getting personal.

Cash is never going completely away, but alternatives to it have a whole lot going for them.

How this is personal escapes me. But it's unintended from my side.

Perhaps this clarification will depersonalize it on your side: I have no issue with people's preferences and market forces moving us away from cash. I personally rarely use it myself. My criticism is solely directed at efforts to legislate it out of existence, particularly to enhance authorities' oversight and give the fed and banks more power (it is aimed at making it easier to use negative interest rates as a monetary tool).

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Relatively speaking.

TM

He's worked well with unions, pragmatically embraced the ACA, has stated he would not support any effort to undo gay marriage or LGBT rights, and has had the balls to tell primary voters they need to be more moderate. He also refuses to talk about his religion, taking the position it's a private matter.

I think he'd make a great, sober, sensible President. For these reasons, in this nomination cycle, he's DOA. His only path to the general is stealing it at the convention, which would render him DOA in the general.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

How this is personal escapes me. But it's unintended from my side.

Perhaps this clarification will depersonalize it on your side: I have no issue with people's preferences and market forces moving us away from cash. I personally rarely use it myself. My criticism is solely directed at efforts to legislate it out of existence, particularly to enhance authorities' oversight and give the fed and banks more power (it is aimed at making it easier to use negative interest rates as a monetary tool).

(1) No one is legislating cash out of existence. No. One.

(2) Whatever is being done to enhance authorities' oversight is being driven by a desire to stop terrorists. This will continue until the let's-go-soft-on-terror crowd gets elected.

(3) None of this has anything to do with giving the Fed more power. The Fed doesn't want to use the power it has, and would rather Congress used its powers for once.

(4) If you wanted a cashless society, you would make it faster and cheaper to move money from one bank account to another. The banks do not want to invest the money to do this because they don't see upside for themselves, and more importantly because they like making money on the current ways you do this -- i.e., credit and debit cards. Merchants are tired of this, and pushed for Durbin to make debit cheaper, with partial success. For a fun time, ask a merchant why the Fed did this:

The Durbin Amendment -- named after Senator Richard Durbin (D., Ill.) -- is part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which President Obama signed into law in July 2010. The Durbin Amendment placed limits on the interchange fees paid by merchants to large banks to process debit card purchase transactions, while also giving retailers more choice in which network to use to route debit card payments. [Durbin says that the interchange fees for merchants must be reasonable and proportional to the actual cost of the bank.]

The idea of Durbin was to lower debit-purchase-transaction processing costs, so that savings to merchants could be passed to consumers through lower prices.
The Federal Reserve in December 2010 estimated the average debit card interchange fee paid during 2009 was 44 cents, and initially proposed a cap on interchange fees at 12 cents. After the usual comment period, the Fed in June 2011 issued its final ruling, for an interchange fee cap of 21 cents, plus an additional "5 basis points multiplied by the value of the transaction."

http://www.thestreet.com/story/12016...in-ruling.html