'Stormy Daniels? She's not attractive......not like my cousin, who I married, or like Trump sees his daughter who he's publicly listed over.'

What kind of moron makes this human garbage fire a spokesman?

I wish, in the middle of an interview when he's floundering and rambling, a reporter would just ask him "9?" to see if he instantly perks up and replies gleefully "-11!"

Reminds me of a skating joke:

It is the Olympic men's figure skating. Out comes the
Russian competitor, he skates around to some classical music
in a slightly dull costume, performs some excellent leaps
but without any great artistic feel for the music.

The Judges' scores read: Britain 5.8: Russia 5.9: United
States 5.5: Ireland 6.0

Next comes the American competitor in a sparkling stars and
stripes costume, skating to some rock and roll music. He
gets the crowd clapping, but is not technically as good as
the Russian. He slightly misses landing a triple Salchow and
loses the center during a spin. But, artistically, it is a
more satisfying performance.

The Judges' scores read: Britain 5.8: Russia 5.5: United
States 5.9: Ireland 6.0

Finally out comes the Irish competitor wearing a tatty old
donkey jacket, with his skates tied over his wellies. He
reaches the ice, trips straight away and bangs his nose
which starts bleeding. He tries to get up, staggers a few
paces then slips again. He spends his entire 'routine'
getting up then falling over again. Finally he crawls off the
ice a tattered and bleeding mess.

The Judges' scores read: Britain 0.0: Russia 0.0: United
States 0.0: Ireland 6.0

The other 3 judges turn to the Irish judge and demand in
unison, "How the hell can you give that mess 6.0?!"

To which the Irish judge replies "You've gotta remember,
it's damn slippery out there."

You replied to the wrong quote, buddy. I didn't say that stuff....but a quote of what someone might say is proper English. Get over it.

Also, Fox is not news, they're political entertainment, they admit it. Lumping real news networks in with the admittedly fake one is a disingenuous ploy to be divisive, not an adult argument.

Nah, I just think you're a closed-minded douche.

The comment I was replying to was about "racism" towards whites. Not sure where non-white on non-white racism comes into this. I just don't believe making fun of, or critisizing, or generalization of whites can be considered racism. We're on top. If someone marginalized by whites marginalizes someone else further down the oppression scale, that would certainly be racism.

As for the Nazi reference, I'm sure you're one of the good ones Trump told us were at Charlottesville.

The shepherd replied, "I herd that!"

in @eric3579's 1st reply above, there is video of such a box that prevents this attack. Similar idea to a 'faraday cage', but they found that cardboard box lined with aluminum foil was most effective.

From: http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/07/media/sinclair-broadcasting-promos-media-bashing/index.html

The instructions for producing and airing the localized versions went into great detail about how the promos "should look and sound," according to another document obtained by CNN.

"Talent should dress in jewel tones -- however they should not look political in their dress or attire," one of the documents says. "Avoid total red, blue and purples dresses and suits. Avoid totally red, blue and purple ties, the goal is to look apolitical, neutral, nonpartisan yet professional. Black or charcoal suits for men...females should wear yellow, gold, magenta, cyan, but avoid red, blue or purple."

At the end of the promo, viewers are encouraged to send in feedback "if you believe our coverage is unfair."

The instructions say that "corporate will monitor the comments and send replies to your audience on your behalf."

In other words, local stations are cut out of the interactions with viewers. Management will handle it instead.

Went over my head until I saw @serosmeg's reply. If this were youtube this comment thread would be filled with "wet P-word" puns.

Then you must remove it immediately. This is called a self link, and is forbidden on this site. Please kill the video now before you are permanently banned. (Type "*kill" in the comments section)
Because you nicely replied so quickly, I won't ban you right now, but please remove it now before others ban you.

Because of the shirt/meme shown around the 0:23 mark, where people ask "God, why do you allow violence in our schools" to which the reply is "I'm not allowed in schools". Remember that the Christian Right STRONGLY loves guns and are the biggest advocates of gun rights.

Every mass shooting, the Christian Right comes out and screams that it is a lack of God in schools and in our society that is causing the problem, not guns. It is never guns. It is the lack of God, and then violent movies and games, and mental health (which if true, then one would have to wonder why the GOP passed a law, which while it hasn't taken effect yet, makes it easier for mentally ill people to get a gun, and why every version of the repeal and replace Obamacare include massive cuts to mental health programs). Of course, other countries, as noted, doesn't include forced prayer in school, which the Christian Right wants to see returned, and they don't have the school shooting problems.

Basically, it is the Christian Right's fault. They have made fighting against gun control one of their major platforms. And as the Christian Right makes up the vast majority of Christians in the US (or at least the loudest, and near 100% guaranteed to get out and vote... which is why there won't be a Blue Wave 2018), they control the message. So the "God isn't allowed in schools" argument comes up every single school shooting as one of the most oft-repeated reasons for them. Just watch Fox News or any of the primary Christian programming like Jim Baker and 700 Club, and it is the lack of God in schools, the fact that there's a war against Christianity why we have these shootings.

The US is a country where a full 40% of the population believe the universe is under 10,000 years old. Where saying "happy holidays" is a war on Christianity, and that Christianity is the most attacked faith in the world, which proves that it is the one true faith. And this isn't hyperbole on my part, this is what they teach in the Christian Right churches, movies, shows, televangelists and the like (I used to be among their numbers). They honestly see attempts at controlling guns as an attack on their faith. They honestly ignore Jesus saying that it wasn't an eye for an eye and that he said those who live by the sword will die by it, and think that the right to own and defend oneself as a divine right from God himself. So they bring the lack of God as the reason for all these shootings in the US.

Sigh. What a sad day to have to read the likes of you.

I didn't know there was a strict definition. I asked a question and pondered some answers. Oh no! There world is ending. Why do you have to be a continual callow fool about such things? You'll note I didn't jump to google (like others do) to quickly look up a definition (I chose not to). I don't like using google as a false extension of my knowledge like others do. I like to have a good discussion using only the knowledge I have at that instant. But instead we all have to suffer people like you who jump in keyboard blazing "you're wrong on a thing and therefore you're an inferior fucktard who doesn't deserve to be here" instead of going "Actually, there is a strict definition of assault rifle. It's defined as...". Do you see the difference? I hate to be the one to tell you, but you need to learn to control your emotions. As an adult you should have learned this by now. You may believe you are communicating effectively but you are not. You are abrasive and abusive to anyone and everyone on far to regular a basis. You should be ashamed of yourself but I doubt you have the introspection to see your flaws.

The most irritating thing about having to point this out is that, now with strict definition in hand (provided by you), I can point out that instead of you telling Digitalfiend there is a strict definition and that "assault rifles" are already heavily restricted (as you should have pointed out), that I have to point it out to him instead.

And yes, I was already familiar with the studies I quoted previously - I have previously researched the topic of gun control in Australia.

"Why must you feign being so obtuse and naive as a pretext to sesquipedalian and pedantic argument of your own creation?"

Please stop making things up. The second you see what you consider a mistake you jump in with bullshit like this thinking you are going in for the kill. You're laughable and you're making life hard for yourself.

Shotguns aren't rifles? No shit Sherlock. It was an example of where semi-automatic is better. Semi-automatics are better than pump guns. You're dreaming if you think they're even in the same league. Duck hunting is better with a semi-automatic.

The only person who said anything about "Indiscriminately pumping animals, even nuisance animals full of lead" is you. I don't know where you learned to hunt but I learned one shot one kill. And a semi-automatic makes this more efficient (and if you do need a backup shot it comes very quickly). Most pest animals are left to rot. It's too much trouble picking up the carcasses (and often legislated that you must leave them where they drop). If you don't know how to hunt then leave it to the people who do, please (it's so easy to turn your words around).

Trapping, baiting, etc. are others methods that work well in varying circumstances.

Choosing a pump gun over a semi-auto is a beginners mistake. The spread of buckshot or home defense rounds at close quarters is fairly low and you must always aim your firearm properly. In a home defense situation, anyone who is relying on the spread of shotgun pellets to hit their target is a terrible marksman and should consider getting some lessons. You get the same loading sound from a semi-automatic when you let the bolt go forward. I don't know of any data to support the notion that the loading sound scares people away. It has some merit though.

Now, as usual for me I'll be busy for the next 4 months (back at work this morning - I shouldn't even be replying to this but I thought - "hey, I've gotta throw a dog a bone"). I may or may not get to reply to the expected vehemence to come. Have fun howling at the wind. Don't worry, you're views are the immutable truth and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong, and you're insults are totally the best (snigger).

Rimfire is typically .22 and smaller, definitely not for assault weapons.

Data:
http://wredlich.com/ny/2013/01/projectiles-muzzle-energy-stopping-power/


Edit: now I see, you misquoted them. I just now had a chance to watch the video and had replied based solely on your misquote in your comment. You're correct that single shot, semi auto, and full auto have nothing to do with projectile speed, but including rimfire ammo is misleading.

In Sweden I got in many language battles. In the shops, post office, on the street, with friends... I would speak Swedish, they would hear my accent and reply in English, and it would continue like that.

I was asked many times why I persisted in speaking Swedish when we could converse in English.

Because I came to YOUR country. I owe you that respect.

Or maybe they read it like I did and see zero proof of anything besides republican gullibility.
Nothing there but whining that the process he (Nunez) set up isn't fair when used against his friend, and insinuations that all Federal law enforcement is a liberal conspiracy working for Hillary....patently ridiculous to the point of clinical paranoia if believed.

No one needs marching orders to see reality besides cultists....I noticed you had to wait for yours before replying....those orders, keep shouting bombshell and pretending you understand how this is indisputable proof that Trump is innocent and why you agree federal law enforcement needs to have loyalty testing monthly, with less that perfect loyalty to Trump meaning expulsion.

I asked you how you can possibly think it's never been near the middle, you replied with essentially '100 years ago it wasn't close'.

That question, 'when have I had to fight for my right to vote', was either rhetorical or idiotic, I chose to give you the benefit of a doubt and assume rhetorical, but if you insist you're an idiot.....I have had to fight for my right to vote only once when my registration was not updated, which isn't the fight for women's suffrage but few alive fought that fight and none who still run marathons....it's not applicable. No woman involved (at least not the white women) has had to fight for that right personally.

I don't have time to answer that fully, because it's happened repeatedly. Specifically, there have been several classes I've wanted to take that were women only, I'm a pure honkey who lived in East Palo Alto, on more than one occasion I was turned away from stores/restaurants...usually by customers not the owners, and once chased by a group of men due to my race, sexual orientation, never, the gays I've known love me and I'm totally cool with them...and they're pretty all inclusive with events....but on reflection I'm sure there have been "girls trips" I would have been invited on had I been gay, if that counts.

Now, I asked you 4 questions you ignored completely, so which are you, exceptionally dumb or a troll X4? ;-)