I think it's more like if they would stop redistributing the wealth to themselves from their workers.

If they would stop being greedy f'tards, then more people would have money to buy the things that move the economy and nobody would need government aid in the form of food stamps and welfare (save those who are honestly mentally or physically unable to work).If you want to build an economy the keyword is "build". You don't build a house by building the attic first magically floating there, then the foundation and walls to get up to it, you start with a foundation, then walls. If the people at the bottom have money to do more than barely survive, they buy things that actually move the economy, they buy things at retailers, who need to hire more people; those people buy things which results in transportation and warehouses hiring more people, those people buy things; manufacturing starts hiring (if the rich f'tard didn't send those jobs overseas, which the conservatives blame on the government rather than the rich guy who sent the job overseas for some reason, it's not like the price of that shirt went down when they sent it overseas, they just pocketed the extra wealth for themselves) and those people buy even more expensive things.

Our right wing economy favors investors and large business over the needs of the vast majority. It doesn't matter how much GM stock investors buy and trade, GM won't make more cars and hire more people until enough people can buy cars.

As we slide more and more money from the people who actually spend money in the economy and make it move, to people who just horde and invest, the economy will continue to spiral down. More and more people will require food stamps and welfare due to the actions of the rich, but the conservative right will blame the workers and former workers rather than pushing blame onto the people who are refusing to pay living wages, who push jobs overseas so they can personally pocket more wealth, and complain about the people they aren't giving living wages to and the people they laid off need government assistance, and the conservative voters go right along because the pulpit and Fox News has brainwashed them into believing that a party that disobey's everything their Jesus taught them is the Christian party.

The growing wealth and income gap is the biggest challenge facing our nation, and indeed much of the world. Of course most of the rest of the world does a better job of caring for the work force than the US does, paid maternity leave in all but 4 nations, paid vacation time in most of the world by law, paid sick time in most developed economies, minimum wages tied to inflation in much of those countries, a minimum level of health insurance for every man woman and child without having to buy from for-profit corporations (most actually use a single payer, which sort of ignores the fact that our individual mandate that we have now was invented by the Republican party, and is financed the same way they wanted to do it and the tax penalty for not participating is the same...the other nations that use individual mandates do so via not-for-profit insurance)... We do so much to protect the rich and investor class in this nation... sickening really.

Where are the teabaggers this time? Why have they not surrounded the home and stopped the seizure?
It sounds like they'll win their lawsuit against the city, have their property returned, and get a bunch of taxpayer money for their trouble. It sounds like an obvious over-reach, since the cops/DA have no proof that the home was built with, or purchased with illegal funds.
More "legal" institutionalized theft. Don't stand for it.
DO make a complaint to all your reps, local, state, and federal, and tell them if they don't move to fix this issue they will lose your vote in 2 months (or when their next election comes around) and create a vocal critic with an issue near 100% of the public agrees with no matter their political affiliation. Contrary to the video poster's past comments, well worded, well thought out complaints with follow through often DO get results, and even if they don't you'll know you tried the right thing first.
"doesn't pursue forfeiture because the issue is resolved....when a settlement agreement is reached with the property owner" sure sounds like quasi-legal blackmail and/or bribery to me. Why has this not been tried in this case, or did the owner refuse to pay the bribe, having committed no crime?

I agree that it may have been unintentional. Still, he has clearly *tried* to cancel his service and is simply being held back by their unresponsiveness. I'd say that is good enough justification to send an email to any corporate Comcast address he can get saying that he has TRIED to cancel but they have failed to respond in a timely manner, and as such he is going to refuse to pay any future bills. They are of course free to cancel his service, which is what he was trying to accomplish all along.

This. Seriously, if a Republican was in office right now, they would be screaming the same thing everyone else was screaming, that's he a welfare rancher, refusing to pay his federally mandated dues that Regan made last forever now...

They are so obsessed with their Anti-Obama message they are missing their best chances to score with the American public at large. The individual mandate of Obamacare, is their idea, it is funded the same way they wanted to fund it. If they were smart, they should be shouting, "we could have had this back under Bush Sr, but the Democrats stopped it twice, and they stopped it again under Clinton. They couldn't pass their single payer or government option so t hey went with our plan. We told them so, and the American people had to wait all these years for them to come around to our plan." They then could explain why they oppose the changes from their versions like going from catastrophic only care to comprehensive care is bad, since apparently stopping people from getting sick is bad in their eyes... For this situation they should be noting how the Federal government got the land in 1848, before Nevada became a state in 1868 and before Bundy and his extended family was grazing cattle on the land in 1877... and ages before his family actually purchased the ranch in 1948... after the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 was passed... and even before the BLM was formed in 1946. Their hero, Reagan passed, as Stewart noted, the right to collect grazing fees forever. Bundy is just attempting to make a profit off the government's dime without compensating the government back. They should note how he threatened violence against federal officials... which if a Republican was in office now rather than a black man, they'd be screaming he's a domestic terrorist, and when he called in militia to support him, they'd be screaming how they were all terrorists against the government doing its rightful duty.

The right's hatred of Obama has blinded them to the very things they would normally be for and against, just because suddenly a man (who's probably closer to the Reagan era Republican than any of today's Tea Party members are) they oppose is in office rather than one of their Tea Party extremist...

I've just been reading up on this a bit and it's sort of interesting. I don't think anyone is doing serious investigative work on this whole thing because I keep reading that these are either just local families who own cattle, or they're corporate entities.

Also the disturbing thing is that apparently these people owe the government a lot of money and they refuse to pay. In order to get out of being harassed they got a lot of Militia friends from other states to come armed and stand with them. So this doesn't seem to me like it's being handled very well at all, and it probably is something to do with local law enforcement not interested in causing trouble on a big local name.

Either way this hasn't become all that clear, and it always annoys me that I have to wait a long time before someone gets to the bottom of these things.

EDIT: I totally forgot to talk about the video which I couldn't get through because this guy is a moron. He cites the Federal Government not caring about a tortoise because we detonated tons of nuclear bombs in the desert. That was before the environment and conservation because a large issue, now it is and it isn't just about tortoises it's about the land as a whole. Land that if we destroy we don't get back for generations.

Also imagine if this became violent...just imagine how quickly helicopters would've destroyed everyone and everything in the desert. You cite that we test nuclear weapons yet you don't think we can take on a bunch of fat useless farmers that have AR-15s?

I can hardly listen to this idiot, I can certainly see how the federal government acted inappropriately (although I think I need more information) it's pretty much a common occurrence. But my god this smug little cunt just pisses me off the way he presents his arguments. I would take great pleasure beating him with a pipe until he drowned in his own blood.

My last thought on this is I hope it doesn't come of like I'm defending the government or their idiocy. If they're idiots which they usually are they don't get what they want. However I can't take stupid attacks on the government when there are so much better ones to be had. I love steak but there's too much of it, too many cows and our environment is being wrecked because of it. Red meat feeds cancer and destroys your health if you have too much of it, take it easy on the red meat. Global Warming is a serious issue, and apparently not one that InfoWars agrees with so as far as I'm concerned they're anti-science and anti-humanity. Fuck them.

I see @lantern53 has no idea how gov't works. You see bobknight33, err I mean lantern53, There are three branches of government. Only one of them can create laws.

After much compromise, congress passed a law called the ACA. The President agreed and signed it into Law. It was ALSO upheld by the Supreme Court. So you see, ALL THREE branches of gov't are OK with this law.

Now this faction in the House of Representatives are trying to pass a law that says "sure, we'll fund gov't...but only if you de-fund or repeal the ACA. That's not governing, that's called taking a hostage. The senate isn't going to agree, so there's deadlock. See, the president isn't even involved.

He would ONLY get involved if both housed agreed with this, but guess what, even if congress agreed with the Tea Party, The President has this pesky little thing called a veto, which sends it back to Congress and they need a whopping 2/3rds majority vote to override him.

sorry, ain't going to happen. But hey, I'm happy that I could give you some remedial education since you refused to pay attention in class.

So in actuality, The Tea Party can keep having their little temper tantrum, They're all but digging their graves in the next election.

I will get to what is wrong with strongly denouncing Islam in a second....

As for the article, I hadn't actually read the whole thing but rather had heard coverage about it along with an article on Al Jazeera. Specifically, I take issue with Harris and his stance on the 'war on terror' (and aren't you essentially advocating for religious profiling by condemning Islam and its practitioners? Or is it rather that you identify it as a threat but wish to see no action taken?) I also have problems with Hitchens and his enthusiasm for the invasion of Iraq.

As for the quote I posted, after re-reading it, I think that I saw something that wasn't there. I believe that trying to prove that one religion is more evil than another is pointless. Reading history books, which oddly I have done, will not disprove that belief but rather reinforce it as the tragedy of all religions would be laid bare.

Finally, I would gladly take up your 'snidely', non-issued challenge. As a matter of fact, I've already done it. I lived in Indonesia for a year both in Muslim dominated areas and tribal, animist Christian dominated areas. While I am by no means an atheist activist, I nonetheless lived openly as an atheist and honestly answered the question of my religion (I have none) when it was asked of me. Nothing happened to me. Furthermore, I currently live on the Thai-Burma border in a Buddhist dominated country and do not hide my lack of belief when asked about it.

And that is where I come back to the problem of denouncing Islam. Just last month there were pogroms against Muslims by Buddhists in Burma (a smaller conflict than that which occurred last year against the Rohingya in Rakhine state). The proximate cause of this pogrom was a Muslim jeweler refusing to pay for damaged jewelry of a Buddhist woman. But more generally, it is a result of a campaign of extremist Buddhist monks issuing edicts about the evils of Islam and the dangers it represents to Burmese culture. Unequivocally condemning an entire religion invariably leads to this type of violence, and therein lies my concern.

I do know that. However I refuse to pay top dollar (59.99) for 12 hours of gameplay. I bought SC1 for 15 bucks. 1 hour per dollar spent is the benchmark I try to adhere to.

At the very least, they should be charged for refusing to pay for their cab ride.

There has to be a charge for that.

I WANT GOVERNMENT SERVICES BUT I REFUSE TO PAY FOR THEM!!

Obama has released 12 years of tax records. Romney claims he is following precedent, but the only people to do only 2 years in recent history (dating back to Regan) is McCain and Palin, everyone else has done 5 to 20 years.

I agree Reid is probably speaking out of turn. However, Romney, beyond the lie of following precedent has also said that if he releases them Obama and others will use the stuff in there against him... which means there is something there to use against him, which while may be legal, would paint him in a bad light. He doesn't want to disclose because there is something he wants to hide. It may even be as simple as his church finding out he hasn't paid his full tithe as he says he has paid. In the end, this guy believes in giving big tax breaks to people who have refused to hire people because they want the life of luxury. The CEO of Wal-Mart takes $36 million a year, if he only took $1 million, imagine how many people could have jobs? But no, there was a choice at some point in the company's history that employing people or paying their existing employees living wages wasn't worth while and it was better spent on those on the top... one of the local 1%'rs fires over 1000 people over 3 years and keeps everyone else with no raises (almost all at minimum wage), then goes out and buys a jet and another mansion. This is the attitude of the rich. That they deserve privilege and if they have to ruin thousands of families to do it, then they will... and then they threaten that if we raise their taxes another 3% they will fire more people so that they can maintain their ultra high standard of living, and the Republican answer is "no, don't do that, we'll in fact lower your taxes, and punish those people you fired so you could have a jet, and punish those people who you refuse to pay a living wage so you could have that second mansion. We won't cut spending on the military, god forbid, we are only spending more than the next 19 countries combined, almost all of whom are our immediate allies... we should also cut education and science and NASA... look how expensive NASA is, it almost costs as much as it costs us to give our troops in Afghanistan alone A/C... I mean if we ended the wars that would free up almost all the deficit that Bush created and we blame on Obama, we could nearly have a balanced budget by just cutting that and increasing taxes a small 3% on the top 2%, and while we say deficits are bad now, we all know they aren't when they are for our stuff, just if it helps the people we are screwing over, then it's bad..."

EDIT: Again, I think Reid needs to back it off. Its nearly as bad as Trump's whole birther thing...

>> ^EvilDeathBee:


Have you ever been to Japan?

Nope, but I'm going in september... can't wait

>> ^EvilDeathBee:

Every where else is a mixed bag. You get friendly, you get indifferent. You get surly, you get downright rude.

True, there are definitely highs and lows, but overall, I've found the standard to be much higher in the US than almost anywhere else I've been in Europe, Asia or Oceania.

>> ^EvilDeathBee:

The place where I encountered the friendliest waiting staff was my local cafe back in Melbourne (god i miss it) where I've never been obliged to tip (did occasionally though).


Haven't been to Melbourne in a few years, but I remember it being pretty good there too (and great coffee!).

I dislike being expected to tip regardless of service. I remember being outraged that a service charge of 15% was added to my bill at a reasonably expensive restaurant in Ireland where the service was just awful. I point blank refused to pay it.

On the flip side, I'm happy to tip in countries where it's not the norm if the service is good.

Putting aside the tortured "logic" of this horrible Court decision, here's the straight dope:

People who couldn't or wouldn't pay for health insurance are now forced at gunpoint to pay for it.

Boy that's new, before there were limits to federal power. Now for the first time, the federal mafia can force you to buy a product, and if you refuse, they illegally penalize you under the guise of a "tax", an argument so warped even His Earness didn't use it.

If the formerly uninsured don't have the money or refuse to pay for health insurance, someone else pays the tab anyway (you can't easily put 30 million people in prison).

In other words, nothing has changed, except for expanded unconstitutional government powers and huge, economy-destroying tax hikes with 19,000 new IRS agent/enforcers to collect.

If there's one constant in life, it's whenever government gets involved in business, everything gets cheaper and more efficient.

Putting aside the tortured "logic" of this horrible Court decision, here's the straight dope:

People who couldn't or wouldn't pay for health insurance are now forced at gunpoint to pay for it.

Boy that's new, before there were limits to federal power. Now for the first time, the federal mafia can force you to buy a product, and if you refuse, they illegally penalize you under the guise of a "tax", an argument so warped even His Earness didn't use it.

If the formerly uninsured don't have the money or refuse to pay for health insurance, someone else pays the tab anyway (you can't easily put 30 million people in prison).

In other words, nothing has changed, except for expanded unconstitutional government powers and huge, economy-destroying tax hikes with 19,000 new IRS agent/enforcers to collect.

If there's one constant in life, it's whenever government gets involved in business, everything gets cheaper and more efficient.

1) Vote taxocrat
2) watch sh1t gets worse
3) Blame Bush
4) repeat until revolution