The book sounds about right. I would add that we are turning into a developing nation with a pile of debt. This makes fixing the problem that much harder to deal with. It's akin to trying to repair a sinking ship while moving and with pirates closing in.
Have you actually looked at what the deal did? Because it did a lot to stop their programs and dismantle their nuclear infrastructure.
Dismantle 15,000 centrifuges. Gave up 97% of its stockpiled uranium. Those are pretty big concessions. And the most pertinent if the goal is to hinder...
So you take the word of Israel over the inspectors who had access to sites all over Iran and ignore the fact that the deal set them back by years at the very least.
Reminds me of the start of the Iraq war. Inspectors said no weapons but suspect intelligence proffered by the US, Britain and...
Because I have read probably a dozen articles from reasonably reliable sources and none of them support the assertion that this was a bad deal. The only people who I see making that claim are either a) dyed in the wool Trump supporters or b) those who have bought the rhetoric from Israel.
Yeah, because the Israelis don't have an axe to grind in this. They were against the deal, any deal, from the beginning.
I see no evidence of this being a terrible deal outside of rhetoric. But if I am wrong, feel free to demonstrate your point without pointing the finger at the sworn...
The problems I have with Reagan have more to do with the long term implications of his policies. Of course the economy was generally good as Reagan was the first to take the approach of cutting taxes while increasing spending. It's a methodology that will do wonders in the short term but is...
I think it was what is called for. Calling truth to power like that takes balls and she was swinging a massive pair around that stage.
I find it supremely ironic that the right is crying about how mean spirited it was.
It is nowhere near that simple. Congressmen aren't expected to spend the year in Washington. They are supposed to maintain contact and housing in their district. So you are talking about people who often have jobs paying much more, taking a pay cut while trying to maintain their housing...
Which is why republicans might impeach. It may be in their best interest to remove him, blame him for everything wrong with the world, and claim victory in fixing it.
I think it would be good for the most part. When I look at a state like NY, where the state always goes democrat but there is a large republican voting block, it is largely ignored every election.
Clearly the whole purpose for the electoral college (keeping someone unfit from office) has...
Just the opposite. You do not subpoena a sitting president without something strong in your pocket. Add to this the fact that the Russian attorney now admits she was an informant for Russia and you have a pretty cut and dry case for collusion.
Put it all together. We know Trumps team...
While that notion is appealing, I don't think it's accurate. One is a search for truth, the other is acceptance, through blind faith, that god gave us the truth. Faith based versus science based. The two could not be any more different.
As I said, you can believe whatever you like. But I do find it to be a problem if you are going to be a scientist or physicist. The bleeding edge of science and math are dealing with things that make the questions of god a serious distraction. It is too easy to simply run into a problem...
Sure, but one is based in faith, the other in reason. One is an acceptance that someone earlier said it, and you believe it is true. The other is an exhaustive search for truth using mountains of data and countless hours of study.