, I said it was more controversial.

I dare say even agreeing that we don't solely choose our sexual interests, when it comes to our actions I insist we treat those as the result of free will, aka choice.

When I'm not typing from a 4in screen I can pull up the references, but the peer reviewed studies on genetics hardly illustrate that sexual orientation and identity are dominated by it. Twins studies do show that identical twins more often share orientation than non-identical, which gives a correlation to genetics. However, I'll pull up the studies but last I reviewed them, more than half the identical twins in the studies did NOT share the same orientation. That is an arguably compelling indicator that genetics does not solely determine orientation.

Other twin studies comparing other behaviours like religion show a similar pattern. Studies with twins on violent and aggressive behaviour show an even stronger "genetic" component than the orientation studies, and nobody has any qualms about being politically incorrect declaring that violence is a choice and not a birth attribute...

For a megalomaniac worth 8 Billion he sure know how to get things done.
Political incorrectness be damned. Refreshing.

The only good thing about him is that he would not be bought by K street.

Guess you haven't heard: The "R" word is now politically incorrect terminology.

Wow, everyone making comments here (except voodoo, cause i blocked his comment so i don't know what he's on about) are just as opinionated and obnoxious as they think Steve is.

Absolute intolerance of an opposing opinion is what is on display.

At least Harvey likes Obama! He thinks people who don't like Obama are racists!

But it is interesting to see the abuse heaped on this guy because he is politically incorrect, and the abuse heaped on anyone who might call themselves a believer in a God.

You say things like 'asshole' and 'sweet monkey jesus' and you don't give one shit who you offend.

You think he is the epitome of offensiveness, then you do your damnedest to be offensive in your criticism.

...And the United Negro College League still calls themselves 'Negro'...I guess the progressives haven't told them what is politically incorrect yet, or perhaps they were created in a culture where that label was considered non-offensive by those in control and the new leadership of today has decided that, even though it's offensive to most people today, re-branding an otherwise positive organization in the name of minimizing temporal offensiveness could do more harm than good, but they may still realize their name is uncomfortable for many and an issue.
..or perhaps this sub set of natives is not offended by 'redskin'...it's far more offensive to believe all natives must think alike than it is to call them 'redskin' IMO.

The point is, for what the Civil War cost, they could have, for example, bought all the slaves and freed them, like the British crown did. The South may have seceded to preserve slavery, but the North did not go to war to end slavery, but to prevent secession (from Lincoln's own words). The North didn't go to war with slave-owning northern states, did it?

Slavery was economically inefficient, and with the northern states abolishing slavery, the South would have let go of it in possibly a short time. Low wage workers are much more economically efficient. And only 6% of southerners owned slaves. They would have had a hard time competing.

If you don't like the argument, take it up with Thomas DiLorenzo, the controversial professor at Loyola University. Or reference the two books cited in the post above. Or Tom Woods Politically Incorrect Guide to American History.

The Reddit comments are interesting for how it changes regionally.

The "politically incorrect" version starts with Black.

No mention that the whole thing is politically incorrect.

Unfortunately, I just read a book on memory. The first texts on helping to remember go back thousands of years -- the Greeks or the Romans, one of those ancient cultures. From the very beginning, it has been taught that using sexually charged and completely crude images will help you remember.

And.

That sucks.

How about 'every kid needs two parents'...

nah, that's too politically incorrect

Cheap seats here, your concerns' as over my head as the reference...Besides, it's perfectly fine to be as politically incorrect when using the adjective "white" with the noun "people" - My sensibilities, having spent most of my life in the United States south around too many white people concentrated in certain areas, afford me a perspective that places all the white races' regardless of adopted creeds or delusions, in the "poke-fun-at-me" box...That, and the fact that my own Euro-mutt origins place me in the historic line of fire

>> ^doogle:

Wrong Asian country, ignoramus.
When China takes over, they'll make sure you know that.
Or not. They may just sing you Bee Gees music because AMERICA, FUCK YA!
>> ^BoneRemake:
gungnam style !
heyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

sexyyyyyyy laaaaaaaaaaadyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy



Heaven forbid we confuse cultures! This moment of political incorrectness was smugly brought to your attention by someone better than you!!

it's like a child trying to talk at the grownup table. IIRC she was exactly the same in her days on Politically Incorrect. She'd double down on these insane positions, and everyone else would be wtf? you are provably wrong and she'd just continue talking over everyone.

Bill Maher was absolutely correct in last week's show. You cannot have a civil discussion if you cannot agree on basic facts. This was demonstrated in his opening interview with her. The jobs report says that a higher than expected number of jobs were added (still lower than it needs to be, but increasing all the same) which Bill was arguing for, and Christine argues that jobs actually decreased. The report says that unemployment dropped from 8.3 to 8.1 but somehow there are less jobs.

When you have this level of spin and partisanship, you simply cannot have a constructive process. There has to be some fundamental things everyone agrees upon and when you have two political structures disagreeing over even the most trivial things.

When our credit rating got dropped. It had nothing to do with the debt itself, that commission that dropped the rating specifically cited the inability of congress of getting shit done and the level of political bickering and shenanigans.

The president has fuckall to do with that. We keep focusing on the Executive Branch when the real power is in the Legislative.

The nation does not turn on a dime. Like the guy said in the show. This magic metric of "four years" is a completely shitty way of measuring success or failure. Shit at that level does not take effect overnight and lasts for years, if not decades.

3 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.

>> ^deathcow:

Where exactly is the line in the sand where killing becomes politically incorrect? Would a yard mounted 5 watt laser that cooked squirrels instantly draw ire?


To hell with being politically correct; I'm setting mine to "cat" and pulling up a lawn chair.

>> ^deathcow:

Where exactly is the line in the sand where killing becomes politically incorrect? Would a yard mounted 5 watt laser that cooked squirrels instantly draw ire?
Ire and applause in equal measure, I'm sure, depending on the audience's opinion of adorable, cuddly, disease-ridden vermin.

Where exactly is the line in the sand where killing becomes politically incorrect? Would a yard mounted 5 watt laser that cooked squirrels instantly draw ire?