Big surprise, @bobknight33 can’t understand what’s anti American even when it’s clearly spelled out in the US code….but you can’t read or write English above a second grade level (proven once again by this barely literate post), so it’s not that surprising.

Being against fascism and for the freedom to do what you want with your own body are VERY American sentiments, buddy. Again, no surprise you don’t understand. You believe we should have Christian Shariah law and no freedom of religion or bodily autonomy, and want to Make America Great Again like you think it hasn’t been since women and non whites got to vote.

Wearing an American flag as clothing, or defacing one to make a political statement is 100% AntiAmerican. I know, MAGA loves to do both of those things, so without putting two brain cells together you just insist that’s wrong, despite it being clearly stated in US law. Truth is that’s the least unAmerican thing MAGA has done…but it’s still actually an anti-American crime that carries a one year sentence.

Supporting an abusive civil servant displaying an anti American terroristic gang symbol of division that’s also undeniably a desecration of the American flag on a police uniform is about as unAmerican as it gets. Derp.

Again, your damaged little brain misfires…I’m hell bent against corrupt abusive cops because I love America, ya ijit.
(Btw- having a bent means having an aptitude, natural ability, capacity, or knack…so thanks for the unintentional compliment when you said I’m good at opposing corrupt cops.)

Enjoy watching MAGA eat itself and the Republican Party with it. Bankrupt in multiple states and physically fighting each other at GOP meetings. Talk about trash people! There is no group more trashy than MAGA, untouchable orphans in India are less trashy. 😂

ROTFLMFAHS!!! Triggered much!?

No, I think it’s disgusting the way Republicans groom and indoctrinate kids with intolerance and intentional ignorance.

As noted above, you do not know what the word “indoctrination” means.

Republicans want to eradicate any diversity in thought or action that doesn’t fit their tiny narrow mindset. Republicans want a world where children are taught early on that only cisgender white men are capable of leadership or honest success, and all others are peons or untouchables. That’s indoctrination.
Removing or hiding any diversity to force one “proper” whitewashed syllabus on all students is indoctrination.
Teaching religion or religious morals and ethics is indoctrination.

Teaching diversity is the opposite of indoctrination.

If you want your children to have most knowledge kept from them, to be indoctrinated with ignorance and intolerance, go ahead and send them to school in Afghanistan where your ideas are accepted, and stop trying to turn America into another failed theocracy.

If your ethics and morals are threatened by diversity, they are weak or non existent.
If your world viewpoint is threatened by knowledge, it is ignorant and immature.

If you want to make a real dent in child molestation, close religious schools and pull all Republican teachers who are more than twice as likely to be abusers than the general population, and keep getting caught doing it WHILE whining incessantly about “groomers”.

One more, who is Mark Foley, bob. Why do you know that name? It’s because he was caught molesting 16 year old male congressional pages for YEARS, with many many witnesses and proof, proof the Republican led congress hid and destroyed to shield him from prosecution for child porn. He is still a big wig in your party, still courted by your leaders (much like Epstein), still accepting massive donations from this serial child molester, still wining and dining him and begging for his support. Why? Because so many of them are also child molesters, more caught every week.
Republicans LOVE child molesters and vote for them constantly, almost never voting them out “just because they touched some children” or just because they “covered up for others touching and penetrating multiple children in their care for years allowing the abuse to escalate to hundreds of young victims.” (Jordan).

Remember, it’s a fact that every accusation you make is an admission….we all see it. Your whining about “indoctrination” is, like every complaint, simply more of your own self loathing. There are better ways to deal with that you might have been taught if only your school had been allowed to teach you.

Your video, One Untouched Home In A Sea Of Debris, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Title should be - Most Noticeable Untouched Home In A Sea Of Debris

They must have had armed guards on site I'm thinking.

The point of me quoting the youtube commenters was to illustrate that THOSE are the lines that the racist people on youtube are using with sincerity and being repeated here.

Here's some others - see them on the youtube link yourself

"These kids need fathers"
"Surprisingly, school supplies, birth control, and Father’s Day gifts remained untouched and in full supply!"
"Bunch of hoodlums without fathers in the home."
"Took everything but the Fathers Day cards"
"Took everything except job applications"
"If Obama had sons, nieces and nephews"

It's not a joke, it's an echo of the racism. Yes, what these kids did is criminal. Yes all of them should face real legal consequences. No, not because black people don't like working (taking job applications). No, not because single parent homes are a real problem in this country (father comment).

The internet leaves no happy place untouched.

These are all continuity errors, which are traditionally defined differently than mistakes.

My favorite one in film is Sean Connery's opening and closing collar in The Untouchables.

Congratulations! Your video, How to Destroy People: Japan's Untouchables, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 21 Badge!

Your video, How to Destroy People: Japan's Untouchables, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

*quality , that untouched fresh powder is unreal

How many of those fact checking organisations would have flagged Judith Miller's Iraq pieces in the NYT as "deliberatly misleading content"? Or what about the 16 hit pieces on Sanders within 24h at Bezos' rag of a newspaper? And let's not even start about the reporting on the recent night of the long knives in Saudi Arabia ("reform", really? fuck off)...

Point is, the effort to curtail "fake news" regularly goes hand in hand with the suppression of non-establishment views while leaving the main sources of deliberate misinformation untouched. Remember PropOrNot and how Bezos' rag, amongst others, jumped on it? That list included prominent left wing/anti-war sites such as TruthOut, Counterpunch, TruthDig, ConsortiumNews, etc.

Want some examples of "misleading content" or "deliberate misinformation"? Just browse through the articles at Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting for a few minutes.

I'm Canadian so maybe that's only a problem here from my country. We have complaints and confrontations against churches for not hiring or rejecting a hire based on sexual practices, or even in one case for being an atheist. We also have a 'women's only' nude spa facing human rights complaints for keeping out people with penises because they are women too.

http://vancouversun.com/news/staff-blogs/will-atheist-rev-gretta-vosper-obtain-no-fault-divorce-from-church

A 5 second google at least has some American tracking of demanding sexual practices be untouchable when religions or other clubs add new members or hires:
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/lgbt-employment-discrimination-churches_n_6082846

It is happening, and more importantly, whether the laws are all there already or not, the fact a complaint likely would travel to the supreme court at least is certainly a pretty legitimate concern about where that line is being drawn.

And hey, maybe the Dems don't want to try and find common ground with that particular demographic. The fact is though that there are plenty of anti-nazi people in that demographic and many others that the Democrats have currently cast as 'enemy' thinkers. The Dems need to pick some things they are willing to compromise on that will help them reach out to voters that didn't show up for Hillary.

I never talked about the nomination, only about liberals pointing out that Sanders would stand a much better shot at winning against Trump.

Yet Sanders not winning the Democratic nomination is sort of the point. The DNC and the talking heads had their mind set on a candidate from amongst their midst, and put their combined weight behind her. They went with a candidate who was vulnerable on just about every angle to attacks from Trump, due to her being a continuation of previous policies. That's not picking the candidate who stands the highest chance of winning the Presidential Election, that's picking someone who represents their own interests. Which is fair enough. But then don't blame the purist liberals for pointing out the dangers of this strategy.

Thing is, we know the DNC colluded with the Clinton campaign. Even more details of this are coming in bit by bit through discovery during the class-action lawsuit filed against the DNC. To call the Hillary Victory Fund a money-laundering operation for the Clinton campaign might even be too kind by now.

We also know that they actively pushed for Trump to be the nominee, thinking the election would be a cakewalk then. Brilliant strategists, the lot of them.

And the same people are running „the Resistence“ now, doubling down on what they did before. How is that for learning a lesson. Instead, they play the blame game. And Maher, in this clip, jumped in and blamed „purist liberals“. Not the DNC, not Clinton for running a campaign based on platitudes, clichés, and everything except policy substance.

If you want to blame the purist liberals for anything, blame them for not having campaigned hard enough, for not having put enough pressure to either get their candidate nominated or to get Clinton to at least pretend to be willing to do something about the suffering of the lower class. Blame the liberals for being content with a few improvements in social policies while swallowing economic policies that cause a continuous degredation of the standard of living of the lower class.

Still, purist liberals kept saying that the antidote against right-wing populism is left-wing populism. Sanders was not vulnerable on policy issues. In fact, this 187 year old bloke with bad posture is nigh untouchable on policy issues. When even Trump voters in West Virginia admit that a guy from the Northeast is a better advocate of theirs than local Republicans, you know his policies are not open to attack from right-wing populists.

As for purity vs pragmatism: pragmatism is a label for the policies that led to the current state of affairs. It's the policies that led to large-scale devastation across the country. It's not pragmatic to vote for more of the same if it means a continuation of policies that led you into despair. Purity is the label talking heads apply to a principled stance when they don't agree with it, plain and simple. Both labels allow them to distract from discussions about policy substance.

The most interesting graph happens at roughly 4:38. 3.7 trillion dollars, made up of roughly 1/7th discretionary spending, 1/7th defense, and 5/7ths SS/Medi*/Interest.

The one philosophical holdout that I still appreciate about the GOP platform is generally smaller government. But for all they harp on that, they usually do jack shit to actually cut down on that total from the graph.

That huge 5/7ths portion is close to untouchable; or at least it would be political suicide to mess with any of that stuff. The only exception is the interest payments, which *do* have to be paid, but we could work to reduce the debt which would in turn reduce interest. How to do that? Raise taxes. And suddenly all the Republicans think it's a terrible idea.

That leaves the 1/5th from Defense and 1/5th from other Discretionary spending. To me, Defense is the obvious target. If you really want to tighten the belt and be fiscally conservative, do we actually NEED to spend all that on defense? Couldn't it be cut in half or even more drastically and we'd still easily be able to actually, you know, defend the country? But again, pretty much zero Republican interest in cutting Defense budget, unless you're a kooky fringe element like Ron Paul with zero intra-party backing.

So that leaves the 1/5th of Discretionary spending. And yeah, sometimes Republicans do actually make cuts here. At best, they cut "drop in the bucket" type stuff like mentioned in the video, with negligible effect on the budget and a loss of programs that are valued by some/many. At worst, you end up like KansasBrownbackistan, with zero budget for schools, etc.

That rift between party platform and actual action is the biggest reason that I tend to have *zero* interest in voting Republican for any national office, in spite of still being registered as a Republican. State offices (governor, state legislature, etc.) are slightly more palatable places to consider voting in an R, but not by much. I do think they tend to be good options for Local government offices, especially for more rural areas. On the other hand, D's tend to be much better at promoting things like Bond Issues for improving schools, maintaining infrastructure, etc.