TBayXXXVII

They need to stop making Clark out to be the white devil and promote the heII out of her and protect her. The league should tell their players to STFU about race... man hating also. The WNBA's biggest demographic is white men. Why? Because they're buying tickets for their daughters. Women and minorities aren't going or watching as much. Trashing the majority and pandering to the minority is only going to hurt their popularity. Why not just be truthful?

They need to hit as many major markets they can to capitalize on Clark's popularity. It's hard to get people interested in your sport, league, or teams if there's no team in your area. Get into more major markets to get more eyes on the product. They need to entice more girls to play.

I think this is a good idea. People thought UConn's dynasty was bad for women's basketball, but what it was, was the catalyst. People starting taking notice in women's basketball because they wanted to see if these girls were really this great. They were, and it inspired more girls to play and spread the talent more across the country. It's no longer the UConn Women's basketball league and 200 other schools vying for 2nd place, it's gotten to the point where men's college basketball was in 50's with about 20 good schools and people starting to take notice. They need to continue this trend. Yes, the only reason why viewership is up, is because of Clark. But, it brings viewers. Viewers mean interest and translates to more girls playing. The more girls that play, the better the product gets. The WNBA just needs to make sure they don't destroy the goose that lays the golden eggs.

I don't believe that this is what he's doing. He is voting for the candidate he likes over the rest, but he'd much rather have his 3rd choice if it means defeating the one he doesn't like, instead of his second. I'm ok with a ranking system for primaries, but not for general elections.

Considering the target, I'm guessing this is someone with a personal axe to grind and nothing to do with political agendas.

On topic... I'll take Henry until Henry gives me a reason not to. I'm willing bet on him.

I agree with you. If you're going back to the poor neighborhood to run a business, that's ignorance. If you're going back to help lift it up, charging money is something you never considered in the first place because you know they can't afford it. The expectation would be on Smith to give not just his time and presence, but his money. Otherwise, don't go back and pretend to care.

What it is, is a short term aid that will have very little to no positive impact. The people who take advantage of these, incentives and encouragements, were already more health conscious than others to begin with. The few people who sit back and think about changes they should make in their lives will start to take advantage of things like this. Though, the vast majority will fall back to their old ways and the only outcome will be that a few rich people will get richer. What you're saying is a good idea, is something that addresses the results, but not the root of the problem. Again, I don't have a problem with this. The problem I have is that it doesn't address the root of the problem and this will only end up being a waste of money. It's not because of their lack of trying, it's because our country is full of lazy, glutinous slobs who think they're entitled to things and we have politicians, media outlets, and big corporations pushing that mindset. RFK's plan to remove chemicals from foods, is a great idea and should be implemented. It's not complex. This alone will have a substantially bigger positive gain than anything else. Telling people to not be fat and that it's not acceptable, is not complex. Telling people on government assistance that their tax payer funded bank accounts can't be used to buy junk food is not complex. All of those things don't cost money. It costs people a reality check. These are all initiatives that make people healthier and it doesn't cost money. None of them are complex. Over time, people will become healthier. It will get to a point where Healthcare will be mainly for catastrophic incidents and not and every day living. No, none of these things are complex. Complex is putting a band-aid on a major wound and paying for more band-aid's over and over again.

I'm speaking in terms of generalities. You can incentivize anything you want, none of it will work because (as my last paragraph notes), too many people promote universal healthcare (which means no money out of their pocket to see a doctor), to allow them to keep living crappy lives (which makes taxes go up - then they complain about taxes... because how else is universal healthcare getting paid for). Too many people promote that being fat is good (body positivity). That again, incentivizes people to stay unhealthy. A financial incentive won't trump emotional acceptance. They'll still lead unhealthy lives. People who promote the idea of medication, again, promotes the idea of "don't worry about it, they have pills to help you" (big pharma). Politicians and lobbyists do that. They don't care about people, just themselves. They know that the healthy people are still going to make healthy decisions. This initiative won't move the needle. Politicians need to promote NO healthcare, only out-of-pocket expenses. That's a person you should listen to and trust.

The point is, those incentives aren't better, they're worse, and make things worse. Instead of pandering to that, politicians across the board should be promoting healthier lifestyles and personal accountability. They should all be promoting RFK's agenda to get chemicals out of food. The only people who promote universal healthcare, promote "body positivity", promote big pharma, have only 1 person in mind, themselves. They are the enemy of the people.

If they want better healthcare and the best financial incentive there is, taking care of themselves is the answer.

Correction, the only way it works is if we remove health care and force people to take care of themselves instead of being gluttoness slobs and expecting doctors and big pharma to come up with ways for them to stay unhealthy, as cheaply as possible.

Always a first time for everything, I was due. Had to happen at some point. You're a pro at it though.

Yes, because he wasn't born here. He can have his citizenship revoked under The Communist Control Act.

That was a pretty good video. lol

Trump is right, he didn't sign the act when it was written in 1798. Do you have evidence that says otherwise? I'd be very interested in that. Someone should be on top of that documentary.

Its because the leftist elitists have indoctrinated enough sheep. They live in their mostly white gated enclaves with armed security with brainwashed dopes doing their bidding.

I don't have a problem with that autopen thing as long as the person who's signature it is, knows exactly what's being signed, when, and why. Biden clearly had no idea what's been going on for at least the last 2 years of his presidency. There is a 0.0% chance he knew what was being signed. I have no doubt that the party had unfettered access and used it without Biden's knowledge. That's the issue I have. Biden was the President, fine, as much as I didn't like him, it was still his job. He's the guy who should've been calling the shots. But, he wasn't. That's the problem here.

This is not an issue for leftists because their media doesn't tell them that it is.

It's the same person. lol My guess is that he's trolling Cowboys fans.

I'd put him 6th. I think he has a high risk/high reward factor that could get him to #1 though. I'd be ok with taking him over Hurts and Herbert in a gamble.

Interesting... I didn't know that was a thing. Honestly, the only thing I remember about Tupac was when my dad saw his name in a movie (w/Janet Jackson), and he looked at my brother and I, and asked "What is a two piece shaker"?

You're not going to get that, ever. Overwhelmingly, this country wants illegal immigrants out. If they want a path to citizenship, fine, I'm all for it, but the path starts with them going back to their country of origin and going through the proper channels. Under NO CIRCUMSTANCES, should they be allowed in over people who are doing it the right way. They have to get in line, behind those people. They cheated. They came here illegally and don't belong here. It's that simple. Get the criminals out first? Absolutely, but the others need to go as well. Funny how Democrats complain about bio business' involvement in government and here you are, saying that the Chamber of Commerce is on the right side of this.

Joe Biden and the Democrat party believes in it too (as does the vast majority of the countries population), that's why he deported over 5M people. It's only an issue now, because Democrats have to pretend that Republican's are racist. The court filings are 100% a measure to keep people like you, towing the liberal line. The next time a Democrat is elected president (hopefully that never happens), they will continue to do mass deportations, and just like under the Obama and Biden regimes, the liberal courts and media will be silent. I know you won't accept this, but on this issue, you're being played like a fiddle by your party. Your party, doesn't actually agree with you on this topic it's actually a bipartisan stance.