Not with the judge throwing the case like he did, acting as the defense…but is there any doubt he’s going to be under threat of death the rest of his life? He’s going to have to spend his life surrounded by white supremacist guards looking over his shoulder.
People are going to be chasing him with rifles the rest of his life…he better not reach for anything, ever, or they might fear for their lives and shoot him in the head, in self defense of course.
Edit:He is now the public face of racist murderers literally getting away with murder, I’m sure you’re celebrating.
I’d murder that racist cunt if I saw him….his racist parents too. Give it a week before his house burns.
He might expect some federal charges may be coming.

As to doubt, how many times this year have you had no doubt at all….and been dead wrong, and racist in your wrongness. I’ve lost count after 30. We only have to go back to yesterday when you claimed domestic violence was 1-2% of violent crime and rarely involves guns, and that “ inner city gang killing” (which obviously means black thugs in your mind) accounts for over 90%….both dead wrong and hyper racist.

Aaaahahaha.

Another Bobesque tantrum post? How lovely.

Trying to equate the slight disappointment the international community has with Biden as president to the abject horror of Trump as president as if the disdain were equal. LMFAHS!! Ridiculously asinine.

As usual, right wing apologists can't read. Some gaps were left when construction halted after Biden halted funding, funding the courts had deemed illegal btw, but others were not. Some were planned, some were due to failures of the fence Trump chose, some were due to contractors doing half assed jobs or being incapable of the work, some due to topography, there were many excuses but in the end, it wasn't a wall, it wasn't complete, it barely extended border barriers, and many places were left less secure...none of which is Biden's fault. They knew full well the next administration wasn't continuing this plan. You don't think they should have planned for that maybe? Finished the parts they dismantled at least before the only supporter left power? Nope. Guess not. Perfectly reasonable to leave it half done and expect the next guy who campaigned against it to finish it or take all the blame for all it's failures. Didn't Donny promise to have it done his first term anyway?

🤦‍♂️

I read a few articles from multiple sources on both sides before responding...not just the one particular cherry picked one you linked...i know better.

Not half ever wanted the wall, and likely under 1/3 want more poorly built fencing now that we've seen how horrible it is. Over half want the border secured, but that's not the same as support for the dumb wall/fence. Border security isn't just a fence, it comes in all flavors. Indeed, many agree that the best way to stem immigration is not building barriers both physical and institutional, but to increase anti narco terrorism funding in central America and end the war on drugs. Starve the drug gangs of money, they'll lose power and stop driving families out.

It was absolutely NOT paid for, Trump had to use an executive order to redirect funds that were earmarked by congress to pay for military family housing, because he couldn't get congress to pay for his boondoggle, much less Mexico as promised. If it had been fully funded, it would have been fully built.

Biden is not doing well at immigration. In his defense, he was left a clusterfuck, but he hasn't solved any major problems yet. As an adult, I'm capable of admitting that easily. The level of incompetence between him and Trump, however, are worlds apart, and the approaches are as well. One dehumanized and demonized immigrants, the other seems to be at least trying to get a working immigration and refugee system back in place, but is moving slowly. Your implications that they're both equally awful indicates either a strong bias for Trump, or strong break with reality.

I and others have clearly said many times on other threads, Biden is failing at immigration, and failing at being prepared to accept immigrant children. As a seeming right wing apologist at best, you seem blind and deaf to those complaints from the left and pretend we are childishly hypocritical instead....so no, you're far from getting it right, you're getting it totally backwards and twisted. Derp.

Another empty complaint/accusation. What fake news did I spread? Pretty easy but also completely meaningless to shout "your wrong" with no explanation, no correction, no specifics. Very Trumpian of you sir.

Anybody who writes what you did about Biden must be a hypocritical and douchey Trump supporter or just a plain brown wrapper nutjob. Even with his speech impediment, Biden is clear, thoughtful, and coherent...unlike Trump who never said a complete sentence or even complete thought in four years. Your hyper biased characterizations and factless, pointless, non sequitor, insult ridden tantrums masquerading as an argument are what paint you as a Trumpster, not your baseless accusations of hypocrisy.

Now I remember why I had you on ignore. Thanks for the reminder.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/931266/pennsylvania-ballots-might-not-delivered-time-counted-postal-service-warns


No but You are swift on you feet for all research until I Say your wrong then you are suddenly dumb to search.

Congratulations! Your video, Which Planet is Closest? Spoiler: You're Wrong., 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 373 Badge!

Your video, Which Planet is Closest? Spoiler: You're Wrong., has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

"We" is those like me, that have always supported equality( for over 40 years in my case), but never liked calling that "feminism", as that word implies both separation and a bias, both of which EXCLUDE equality. There are many who think that. My mother is one, it's not just men.

You do not have to fight at all, I don't know why you seem to want to. Because someone suggests that it might be something to think about is not the same as saying 'YOU MAY NOT USE THAT TERM'! You may chose to not think about it if that is your choice, you may chose to think differently. No one is telling you how to think, I'm telling you how I think.

No one said "your wrong to use that term". I said there are reasons it's not a good name for a movement that is NOT based on a female centric, female dominant mindset. No scolding. My choice is my choice, my thoughts and reasons are mine, yours are yours, why are you so looking for me to be scolding you or telling you you're wrong? I'm not doing either.

It is only descriptive if the goals are promotion of purely female causes and rights, but not if the goals are equality....but that means they lose a LOT of people that have called themselves 'feminists' in the past, and not just men.

Um....OK....so forget equality for men then? Any time the equation is in the woman's favor, that's fine, huh? No thanks, THAT'S why we need another name. You can keep "feminism", as I think that's exactly what it describes, "equality for WOMEN, period". 'Humanist' as a concept (as I understand it) excludes that mindset of separate and pit against, it does not embrace and reinforce it.
Equality for people. Period.

Why is it that my stating my thoughts, to you, means I'm instructing you how to think, and stating you must "hew" to my definition? I certainly made no such conscious implication. May I, a man, not have an opinion without being labeled an oppressor of women?

No, clearly you don't understand my reason or goal in stating my thoughts and I feel that you have over-reacted based on that total misunderstanding.

Fine. Then I'm an equalitist. I care about equality and fairness for all people. You may separate and then choose sides, that's your right, your option, and your choice to make for yourself.
EDIT: Make that egalitarian...thank you @Babymech for pointing me to the correct term.

Your video, You're Wrong And Will Probably Never Know, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Richard Dawkins - "What if you're wrong?" has been added as a related post - related requested by Zawash.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Richard-Dawkins-What-if-youre-wrong

Your wrong @eric3579. There is no protection for the wealthy--it only looks good to them but everyone is less safe for these policies.

But I must correct one injustice (among a few others) that John was wrong on. Most, and by most I mean most, solitary confinement of inmates does have both appeals policies inside the jail/prison and Judaical recourse. It is not foolproof, but lawsuits have vindicated many people. As such, this forced policies in place when confining an inmate.

Not to mention that many prisoners are mentally unstable as is--just like many homeless are. I am not saying to punish them. The medications they receive in prisons and in jails really are helpful in keeping them functioning in general population these days and should be the first reliance. They really do go above and beyond in many jails/prisons. However, someone who would rip out his own eyeball or shove a pencil up his penis, someone known to be violent, or even those severely handicapped and who would be abused, they must be protected. This guy doesn't point out this--instead it's generalized as ALL torture.

Imagine your son being raped in prison violently by someone with mental illness, just because he couldn't be justified as a danger for his entire stay... Happens every day, and so do the lawsuits. It's an impossible balance really.

And indefinite is a misnomer. 30 days is a common number of maximum days a person can be held in solitary for disciplinary infractions. While this doesn't seem like a lot of time, I understand it's a LIFETIME to spend alone in a room that is abysmal. However, it is definitely not indefinite.

Additionally, the total ratio of inmates incarcerated in general population versus is about 5%. That's pretty small considering the totality of circumstances and general population inmates whose crimes are serious in nature.

As someone who has studied this issue indepth for the last 7-8 years I can say the jail/prison system is a failure on multiple aspects. It causes more crime. It hurts people who would be better served elsewhere. It is racially biased. In most cases there is no way out. However, in the dawning of the age of cameras, much has changed for the better. The fact that guards are charged with crimes for obvious abuse is one. The fact that solitary confinement is now working well is another. Prison populations are expanding less and less.

We should expand upon the good, instead of focus on the bad.

Buddhists would concur with you grinter, A10anis, though they simply couldn't give a fuck

@A10anis-No, youre wrong, it's neither pointless nor terribly cruel. As to necessity, maybe.

Richard Dawkins - "What if you're wrong?" has been added as a related post - related requested by Grimm.