No one comes here to find capitalism, they come from capitalist countries (except those few fleeing Cuba and Venezuela).

The masses come fleeing danger, poverty, and oppression...from capitalist countries....often caused by capitalist drug cartels. Even those fleeing socialist countries aren't fleeing socialism, they're fleeing poverty caused largely by our sanctions and embargoes of their nations.

Venezuela is poor today largely because of sanctions/embargoes (not being allowed to sell their main resource and export, oil), poor planning (basing the entire economy on one resource, oil), and corruption.... in that order.

Atrocities?! We don't have time to list the atrocities caused by capitalism. They are greater in number and detriment.

Public schools, public police, roads, medicine, food subsidies, public housing, a state (not private) military, ecological regulations, etc. These are all socialist, and are the exact reasons these same people claim the immigrants are coming.

Once again Bob misuses the channels, this is absolutely not history, not educational, not a debunking, and no one was destroyed. Just more right wing nonsense *political propaganda that ignores the salient points to make baseless claims.

Injenueity?! They're coming for our unsophisticated young women?! Now I get why the right is terrified.

Can't say I ever saw you misuse a word. ; )

1) I'm not opposed to suicide. If life makes you unhappy, I don't insist you suffer through it. People who judge themselves unworthy of life fall into that category.

2) I've been at it for 45 years+-. It has nothing to do with strength, it's about a compulsion to work towards fairness, knowing it won't ever be reached, at least in my lifetime. I'm strong enough to never condone or excuse clear racism as long as I draw breath.

3) ? You would catch the arsonists before the home owner and their children and not lay blame at their feet. I would let the arsonist burn, locking them inside the house they ignited after saving the family. He's the one with the gas can and lighter if you can't identify who is who.
Calling out wholly inappropriate behavior/speech is never a waste of time. Gaining the trust of racists at the expense of their victims and society as a whole is worse than a waste of time, it's supporting racism.

4) My point. Let them get it, while not allowing your gift to be stolen or misused for harm or other things they get judged harshly for. No judgement, no opportunity for misuse, not just throwing money at a problem, helping a person.

So, the argument is two fold.
One, this issue of personal freedom/choice is important enough that it can't be left to states who might eliminate individual choice in favor of a state's choice. This is the liberal position on this issue, that states will take the choice away from individual woman in favor of the choice made for them, usually by groups of old men. That's why Roe V Wade is essential, it denies the states the right to enslave women to their unwanted, potential, in some cases forced upon them, offspring.

Second, he argued we can't allow laws that take away the freedom of individuals to choose, which slavery did...as do anti abortion laws. You cannot crush the choices of another person....this includes the choice to not be an incubator for another "person" (to misuse the word, assuming they're incorrectly insisting a blastocyst or foetus is a person, all medical and scientific evidence notwithstanding). The "developing life" (doesn't realize he just blew the "life starts at conception" argument with that phrase) cannot take away the rights of the womb's owner, cannot make them a slave to the blastocyst/foetus. The right to life argument fails when you realize no person is forced to donate blood or organs, which people need to live. Real right to life would extend beyond birth and require people become medical slaves to those who need them or their parts.

If it can live without help, fine, develop an abortive processes that allows that at any point in pregnancy, fund it across the board, and start the debate again. Until then, this dumbass just made two arguments for pro choice.
Pathetic.

No, it's not. You understand it, so did most people who listened. It's perfectly fine communication and that communication was clear about what they're doing. You may not like the fact they're using the system as they are, but their communication wasn't lacking imo.
If Christianity can abandon every tenet of the bible and stop following it's teachings yet continue to claim to believe in and worship Christ in order to receive the benefits of being a religion, bearing more false witness in the effort, Satanism can do the same without the lies and duplicity.

Um....many anti vaxers say EXACTLY that.

When words are misused by those attempting to control and harm you, misusing them in the same way to stop that is perfectly acceptable to me, especially when you're honest about it like they are (but Christianity isn't). The pretend lava daddy is just as valid as the pretend sky daddy and deserves exactly the same special protections and exemptions....none at all.

I'm talking about racism itself, not the tools and advantages used by racists.
By themselves, power inequities aren't harmful like they are when paired with racism. Carter had a power inequality with the entire planet, and never once abused it. He's abnormal, absolutely, but also proof it's possible.
Without the power inequities, racism isn't an issue (most) people care much about....case and point, people don't care that many blacks are racist against whites because they can't do much damage to whites based on disgusting racist morals, (at least not on an institutional level)...so much that many claim it's impossible, that non whites can't be racist because they don't hold power, but that's the exact misuse of the term I'm talking about.
I don't disagree power imbalances matter, I don't disagree those imbalances are used by racists as weapons, and are how institutional racism is born. Imo, it's a bit like saying guns=murder. Guns are often the tools of murderers, so they're related, but aren't the same thing. I know it's nit picking, but how can we have a productive discussion on an important topic if we can't agree what words mean?

Systemic racism is different from the blanket term "racism". Had they used that term, I likely would have agreed with them.

In the UK we have a the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, a public body whose evidence is dismissed by politicians, and whose chair is then sacked for suggesting politicians dismiss the scientific evidence. Still mad about it 2018.

Also related, see use of undercover cops in protest groups (at least two of which actually had children with the people they were surveilling...).

Great fucking Britain.

The sound effect right before makes me think the guy watching on CCTV has a button that drops dogs. First of all, that's a silly security system. And misused in this case.

Twins aren't genetically identical, even at birth. They begin separating from each other genetically when the zygote splits. Environmental factors determine how genes are expressed, and those factors are not identical. That makes twin studies a piss poor method of gene study. All it can tell you is how much the environment might effect their expression over time, and they aren't very good at even that.
http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/epigenetics/twins/

Now that genetic testing is cheap, we're finding out most identical twins aren't identical at all. Proper gene testing doesn't assume twins are identical clones for life, it actually disproved that hypothesis. The space study with twins showed that in under a year their genes permanently diverged a full 7% (with a larger temporary change initially that lowered as they returned to similar environments).
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-twins-study-confirms-preliminary-findings


I feel that people often misuse mistaken assumptions to validate their prejudices. If the science isn't clear and validated, using it against others is improper in the extreme.

Discriminating against people for their legal, culturally accepted, natural behavior makes the person doing the discriminating an asshole. Homosexuality is quite present in nature, is now culturally accepted in western cultures, and is legal. Tolerance is a learned behavior I wish was taught better, especially by churches.

I could well be wrong about this, but my understanding is that the data wasn't really stolen, it was freely shared by Facebook. I also don't think there is any evidence that suggests that CA used their psychoanalytic stuff on the Trump campaign specifically. It sounds like they are targeting voters more on purely their geographical location than any in depth analysis of their social media profile. It seems doubtful to me that CA were the only ones at this game though...

I do think Facebook absolutely shares some blame - They hand over their users data and make app creators etc pinky-swear that they will use it responsibly and delete it once they are done...and then they do absolutely nothing to ensure that agreement is honoured. They either willfully ignored it because they knew the data was likely to be misused, or they were naive to the point of complete incompetence. I really can't see an option C.

That is an awful argument......and it kind of makes you an anarchist. Let me explain.
No law ever has completely stopped the crimes they outlaw. By your measure, no law should exist.
E.g. speed laws don't prevent speeding by all cars, theft laws don't prevent theft by all thieves, bribery laws don't prevent bribes by all real estate tycoons, drug laws actually increase drug related crimes, but firearm laws must prevent all misuse of all weapons, not even just all firearms, or forget it?!

Your requirements of gun control are completely...insanely... unrealistic.

Also...crazy cat lady is "using those cats to claw your face" just like shooting wildly into a neighborhood is "using a gun to shoot you". Her irresponsibility directly created a situation that endangered the neighborhood and caused damage, no? Damage caused by firing unguided fur missiles is always the shooters responsibility, not the missiles'.

The entire thing is bias, not factual, or at best misleading because of intentional omission of fact. I can't say what fact is false if there's no fact. Opinion about perceived/alleged bias isn't factual.
A lie by omission is a lie. The whole thing is that kind of lie.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/feb/05/devin-nunes/nunes-memo-twists-james-comeys-words-steele-dossie/

The "unverified and salacious" (not wrong or debunked, mind you) part was personal accusations, you know, the golden showers with Russian hookers part, which was NOT used to get a warrant. He was clear that was not his opinion about the entire thing.

Yes, as I've told you at least twice now, I read it twice before commenting on it looking for anything in it and found nothing but biased whining. "Steele said bad things about Trump, so he's an untrustworthy liar" is hardly even an honest accusation, much less evidence he lied about anything, and farther from proof that this one piece in the puzzle of evidence against Trump's administration was key. One statement by one person taken out of context and misrepresented is not even an indication, much less proof that this was THE key bit of evidence, without which there was no case, but that's what this is all about. it was likely the most damning bit that tipped the scales from 'could just look bad' to 'this is something that needs investigation today'.
Recall, the continuing investigation already actually found criminal activity PROVEN, ADMITTED, AND CONVICTED.

As I've told you repeatedly, they (democrats , the fbi, and the DoD) tried to block it because 1) they wouldn't let the FBI screen it for secrets/classified information/pure lies and 2) republicans blocked (and continue to block) releasing the full story because it paints a completely different picture from the memo. Don't pretend to be so dumb you don't understand that.

Just keep saying bombshell, that will make it real...Jebus Christ.

I'm sure it is just the tip....of the ass fucking the Republicans are giving our democracy and system of checks and balances. What it's not is the tip of some insane conspiracy iceberg between liberals and top law enforcement.

Get your head out of your ass. No one is ever going after Obama or Clinton, as they committed no crimes, they've both been investigated with pure malice and bias for years and Republicans found nothing, this is just more nothing. It's almost funny you would even consider that, but it's actually sad you are that deluded you could keep thinking such nonsense after so many disappointments.

Really? A pure bias opinion piece from ' the hill' is your evidence? It was factless, logic free garbage that actually referenced Benghazi as one of Obama's prosecutable crimes, I'm dumber for having read it. You should feel shameful.

Clearly you don't recall that Obama's administration had zero convictions for misuse of power, zero indictments, how many has Trump's had already? 5? 6? 10? At least 4 high ranking members have been convicted or plead guilty already before year one or the first investigation is complete. Only Nixon's record was worse, and that only after he left office after Watergate.
Trump has by far the worst criminal conviction record for sitting administrations on record....by FAR!

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/1/11/1619079/-Comparing-Presidential-Administrations-by-Arrests-and-Convictions-A-Warning-for-Trump-Appointees

Since you asked so respectfully.....
Taken one point at a time....
1)You are not a special, beautiful, unique snowflake everyone treasures. You are just part of the all singing all dancing decaying compost heap that is humanity. Your parents lied to you.
2) IMO, children under 18 shouldn't have smart phones at all, and should only be allowed to access a highly filtered social media if any at all. Both are highly destructive when misused, and children misuse things, especially when unsupervised as most are. I'm 47 and still don't indulge in either. (Unless the sift counts)
3) I actually think impatience is good....If paired with the drive to make what you want happen yourself and the intelligence to grasp the work required to make it happen and recognize your own abilities. Being impatient while expecting handouts should get anyone nowhere fast.
4) You escape the trap of being unrecognized by your jobs and easily discarded by having skills and making yourself invaluable, not by having no skills (or ubiquitous so worthless skills), social or otherwise, and just expecting advancement for attendance like your childhood.

I agree those he describes were dealt a bad hand....I disagree that this is unique to any one generation. We all had generational issues to overcome. That so many have failed to even attempt to overcome them to better their own lives and instead think the world at large owes them happiness, is at fault for not delivering, and must change to suit them IS a fault of their own, imo, contrary to the narrator's repeated assertions. It may be a flaw their parents fostered, but it's their own personality flaw now, no one else can fix it for them.