i don't understand the point of this. is this fooling people? do people think this is a cool filter?

THE PEOPLE?!? THE PEOPLE are firmly against THESE very few people who think their imagined rights trump everyone else’s actual rights.

Isn’t it funny how much of a problem you had with black people protesting being murdered and imprisoned for their skin color, you were outraged they disrupted traffic and business….but when white truckers do exponentially worse, much more economic damage to protest their having to get a tiny pin prick to secure a privilege (sniveling little crybabies that they are) you are 100% in favor of disrupting traffic and business to the extreme.

Clearly having to get a small shot to have the privilege of free travel between countries is far more draconian and a much bigger, more serious issue than having zero recourse against being gunned down in the streets and in their own homes by organized thugs with immunity from prosecution and military equipment, and of course that makes the disruptions to economies and livelihoods not just excusable but laudable.
Holy fucking shit, dude.

Maybe it’s true you aren’t actively racist, I’m not there to see, but it is definitely true you always stand with active racists and against equality under the law on every single issue.

Aaaaahahahaha! Stop projecting, Bob.

ROTFLMFAHS!!! 139 IQ Bob. Excelling in college level classes at 6th grade. Over 10 years of higher education….including critical thinking. I know you wouldn’t post your actual IQ score because it’s double digits, and the first digit is not 9.

You know full well you’re the uneducated ignoramus living in a fantasy world here, still spreading the big lie with no evidence, just like 99% of what you’ve said in the last 13 years (yes, you lost your mind over Obama and have only gotten worse under The Biggest Loser, the convicted con man and consummate liar.)

MY head is up MY ass!?! LMFAHS!!! You have the long term verified clinical diagnosis of cranial rectosis….I know it colors your viewpoint, but that shit you see is in your eyes, not on me. Too funny, Ms Iknowyouarebutwhatami.

Bob, you know how often the partisan nonsense you spout is wrong, verifiably and definitely wrong, based on blatant lies? More than 9/10. You still think Trump won, or at least that there was massive democratic fraud last election, despite no evidence, despite a dozen times you were told the evidence would be released tomorrow, but when tomorrow came there was nothing, despite multiple audits, including the hyper partisan unofficial biased vote review that found hundreds of votes for Biden but zero evidence of vote fraud, despite 62 failed attempts to prove any fraud in court, despite dozens upon dozens of accusations that all turned out to be misrepresentation, misunderstandings, and outright lies, but not evidence, despite Mike Pillow, crazy moronic crackhead that can’t produce a cogent thought much less evidence of fraud being the failed clearly insane spokesman for the movement. (He now claims he has proof every American over 7 committed vote fraud that can put us all in prison for life)

You like to spout insanity, see it debunked with facts figures and citations, and slink away so you don’t have to try to defend the indefensible or admit you were w-w-w-wrong. When I make a claim, you rebut it with a “nuh-uh…your dum!” and think you won an argument when you haven’t offered one….and I still bother to verify them with facts, figures, and often multiple citations to prove my point anyway.

Tesla stock was a good deal 3 years ago, not today. It’s a bubble, one day it will pop. Better get out before then. My increases came largely from a ton of S&P, various energy stocks and medical stocks, and some tech. I sold my J&J before their vaccine flopped, knowing they have billions in lawsuits to lose soon. My one account went up >30% this year. I made more than if it was all in Tesla (> 30% vs Tesla at 24% for the year)….and I don’t have a PE ratio of 360 indicating a major correction in the future, and I get dividends. If China comes up with a better battery, you better sell immediately. They’ve done well, but are unstable, randomly fluctuating, not secure, and run by a nut that doesn’t care about hurting his own stock prices (or manipulates them for his own gain, I can’t be sure).

Please name these failures, I don’t think you can. You’ve listed the economy, insanely better under Biden, unemployment, insanely better under Biden, immigration, still using the Trump era rules and methods (so there’s one), Inflation, Trump devalued the dollar by 30% and only paused inflation for a year by halting the economy, actually making it a negative growth. Covid, lol. The people responsible for the lack of Covid response are your people, the people who are still unvaccinated and still having problems are idiot Republicans. Covid was, and is a right wing caused issue, fortunately it now effects mostly right wing morons, they should be banned from hospitals, they chose to be vulnerable.

He has failed to remove disastrous Trump appointees, projects, policies, and programs. He’s failed to pass more thorough infrastructure (build back better) but has gotten infrastructure funding. He’s going to fail to secure voting rights thanks to 100% Republican obstructionism, true, unless there’s a miracle in November.

CNN leader in fake news? WHAT?! I suppose maybe, because OAN, Newsmax, and Fox along with all the other right wing media aren’t news at all, they’re dishonest propaganda channels that lie to you daily….and you just fucking love it, you love the lies, and because you love them you believe them, and for no other reason because there’s never evidence for your lies….that’s why you disappear so often, caught in too many lies and called out on them, proven wrong, and you don’t have the spine to admit it. Coward. Use the same criteria and CNN beats every right wing outlet for honesty, correctness, willingness to correct mistakes, and their lack of involvement in a violent attack against the country and democracy, you fool.

So it really boils down to people fearing people. What do you call that?

Your best revenge now is to move on and never give someone the satisfaction of watching you suffer.

My favorite president. ;-)

My favorite Franklin story is about how he would enter the constitutional convention in a sedan chair carried by four prisoners from the Walnut Street jail in Philadelphia. Hardly the humble man of the people some people think he was.

*promote *quality history

I've been to Malta about 2 years ago and it was horrid in comparison to most mainland Europe how fat people are. People are fat there and they eat a lot of unhealthy food. Lots of puff pastry and starchy meals.

Newtboy eats people. Swallows people like an octopus lol

*related=https://videosift.com/video/How-a-Corrupt-Chicago-Cop-Framed-Dozens-of-People

And people still have the gall to question those of us who don't trust police and claim there are no good cops. The excessively few who were good are quickly threatened by other cops and driven out of law enforcement, while the blatantly criminal cops get promoted and congratulated.

Read it, it said almost exactly that.

"The entire religion of Islam is simply the violent ideology of a sixth century despot masquerading as a religious leader, which justifies endless war against anyone who opposes it and calls for the murder of unbelievers and apostates.
The truth is Islam is not like any other faith. It is the religious equivalent of fascism, and just because the followers of this savage belief were not the killers in this instance does not make them blameless.....
....Those who follow a violent religion that calls on them to murder us can not be surprised when someone takes them at their word and responds in kind."



He clearly says ALL who follow Islam. He says they are all fanatics. His speech did not include the words homosexual, Jews, free speech, or woman, you added that in it's entirety.

The dumb lie that no one condemns the destructive parts of islam is ludicrous. People are lining up to shoot Muslims over these usually ignored parts of the Koran, not egg them. Christianity has all the same requirements to murder non believers and apostates, the same violent prescriptions against women's rights, Jews, Homosexuals, atheists, inpious people, nonchristian people living where they want to, etc. and has actively done so for centuries, and it creates plenty of viciously violent fanatical terrorists too, obviously. Why does he not attack them as well?.....hmmmm.....since these related religions share so much of their doctrine, what's different about the average worshipper....hmmmmmmm......just can't put my finger on it.

The difference is whether they are punching up or down, or at least should be, even if local laws don't reflect it.

Does Israel need defending? Are trans people, gay people, etc, discriminated against routinely? Then it is arguable that it is the employer's duty to his workplace environment to rid themselves of forces hostile to gender and racial diversity.

So if the person above had been actively maligning Jews, for example, it would of course be a fireable offence, but requiring them to sign some sort of pro-Israeli document is demeaning, even if you are not particularly anti-Israel or anti-Judaism.

Upvoting that feels dirty, at least in the direct sense.

I suppose this is inevitable, merely part of a process that has included turning points like ET's Reeses Pieces. But isn't there some point at which people (*enough* people, not just rabid anti-advertising nutters like me) get turned off by this and tune out in numbers high enough to affect the bottom line? Parasites (successful ones) generally avoid killing their hosts, but I suppose there are some mishaps along the evolutionary trail...

Reminds me of this poor fella. It also reminds me that the majority of the people in this world are good people. Caring people.

Legal, yes. Culturally accepted, not so much, slavery always had cultural opposition by the non ruling class. Natural, WTF?! Show me an example of pure non human slavery (not harems, not parasites) and I'll discuss it.

Granted, I don't know exactly how they measured, but his gene expression is what they measured, not his pure DNA. This goes to my point, that environment determines how your DNA is expressed, so twin studies are flawed from the onset by thinking they begin identical, they don't. They don't even start with identical DNA, just close.

"Genes and the environment", but not pure gene study....at least not like people think. People think twins are carbon copies, so one can be a control to study effects of what they're studying. That's not quite right. Certainly they are useful in genetic studies, but not that way. From before birth, they diverge in how nearly identical DNA is expressed. They might be good for finding what genes/traits need closer scrutiny, but only with large samples.

Grounds for individuals to (privately) discriminate, perhaps, but not (public) businesses....at least not in America. Our national identity is a melting pot of cultures, intolerance for the different is antithetical to that idea.


Gender, nope, you can totally choose that now.
Race, many people change their racial identity...Rachael Dolizal comes to mind....as does the term "passing".
Ethnicity, people pass as ethnic groups they weren't born into, sometimes unknowingly, daily.....again, Dolizal springs to mind.

So, I'll argue that all you mentioned for all intents and purposes are today often the result of free will and not beyond the control of every individual, but a full grasp of brain chemistry and design and well understood methods to change them are well beyond our current knowledge, so their behaviors and actions are, in part, out of their control and not the result of free will but of brain construction.....now what?

Excellent.

"The problem is that very dangerous people have very easy access to very dangerous weapons."

So, there's 3 issues there. Address any ONE of the three, and things would get better. Maybe not "job done" better, but better. Take moderate, corrective steps on all three, and we'd be MUCH better off.

1) Dangerous people. How could we take dangerous people out of the equation? Background checks. Licensing. Revoking gun ownership privileges for convicts and people diagnosed with mental health problems.

2) Easy access. What could we do better to sensibly and fairly restrict access to firearms? Well, lets see ... fucking anything stands a better chance of working than the nothing that we're doing now. So again, background checks, licensing, registration. Enforcement of said requirements.

3) Dangerous weapons. I think a legitimate criticism of "the left"s typical stance on gun control is that they might be a bit TOO focused on this one.
There is some core truth to the NRA harping "guns don't kill people, people kill people." If a murderous psycho decides that they want to kill a bunch of people, they can find ways of doing it that don't necessarily require guns.
However, it is also true that easy access to weapons designed for war can escalate the degree of tragedy quickly.

Basically, this one and #2 are a trade-off. Bolt action rifles and shotguns might be OK with fewer restrictions. Semi-automatic? High capacity? Doesn't it make sense at some point to at least be a bit careful about who we allow unfettered access to these things?


Trump's parroting of the NRA plan to put MORE guns in schools would be laugh out loud stupid if it wasn't guaranteed to end in tragedy rather than comedy. I can't fathom how anyone, even the nuttiest of gun nuts, could think that is a good idea. And I'm actually rather pro-gun. But, c'mon ... some limitations and restrictions just make obvious sense.

A car is a much better and more legitimate general-purpose "tool" than a firearm. But improper use is dangerous and potentially deadly, so we take some common sense steps to try to limit that. Want to drive? Get a license. Pass a safety test. Pass physical and medical tests to show that you are capable of controlling the vehicle. Periodically re-test to stay current. And, expect to LOSE your license if you drive irresponsibly (drunk, moving violations, etc.).

I don't think those are unfair requirements to be granted the privilege of a license to drive a motor vehicle. To me anybody that has a proper respect for the utility of a firearm, and also a respect for the damage that improper use of firearms can do, should be in favor of sensible restrictions and limitations placed on the privilege of being allowed to own and use a firearm, just like we accept for cars.

I'm honestly rather confused about the NRA stance (or lack thereof) with regards to mental health.

"Guns don't kill people, people kill people." OK. So... Wouldn't it make sense to go after those people that are the problem, then? Crazies with guns equals pressure to take away the guns from everybody, which is exactly what you don't want. Wouldn't mild inconvenience of background checks / licensing be better than bans? (from NRA perspective)