but this is a ruse too.

the split between two halves of the same esurient pack of jackals can only be a gift IF they spend their energy against each other to allow their quarry to reevaluate their situation (escape).

'tho some of those on a smoking pile of manure end up burning.

and the recent 'flexing'...

Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. - Isaac Asimov

this isn't the first time Fox has used their platform to help promote violence.

Hannity used the Bundy standoff...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff
...as a ruse to push the idea of 'jack-booted thugs' and provide his viewership reasons to hate the Obama admins.

but this was a result...

https://abcnews.go.com/US/rampaging-couple-booted-bundy-ranch-radical/story?id=24067414

Strangely, they used hatred against the BLM then and now the BLM movement as a reason to scare white people.

Murdoch, an immigrant, anti-gun, has put the US back into Hearst hell. All those laws put into effect to stop this kind of inculcating methodology have been swept aside. w/o the Fairness Doctrine, there is no one to correct, or simply mock, a shill like *ucker. His influence would be shut off instantly if re-enacted.

Murdoch's companies have spent plenty of time in courtrooms. From the hacking corp in GB, sexually harassment suits - both men and women, and now slander against companies that make vote count machines. Criminality is their shadow.

(on a separate issue; Musk exposing his dick isn't the same as Musk exposing himself as a dick - right? Or the same really?)

Ever try to trick a dog w/the fake stick toss? Even they stop and scan to find evidence. (ours learned the ruse quickly)

spins my gourd that folks are SO EASILY misled by these fairy tales of teachers indoctrinating kids (yet, they can't get them to sit still, stop talking, or return materials on time); fears of giving citizens PSTD with known history (but explaining why 'person. woman. man. camera. tv' is NOT unsettling); or libraries can't be trusted to be run by librarians but the by the government (what were Ben Franklin and Andrew Carnegie thinking?)

look, boy! go get the stick! (no wonder all the anger. can't find it. but it has to be here!)

BTW: Roy and Silo thing is nuts. (not mentioned but peripheral involved) rather listen to John Oliver analyze "Air Bud". a lot less loopy.

Sorry if I’m being over sensitive….anything that seems to legitimize the bastardized definition of CRT, in my eyes, is buying into the intentional political ruse to paint any anti racism program, plan, or organization, even unpleasant history with the “CRT” label (and everyone knows CRT is the Devil), and I find that upsetting, even when it’s unintentional….maybe more so when it’s unintentional because that means the rebranding and improper conflation is working.

I think you know, CRT is an advanced law class taken by law students, not a racist movement to erase white people from history as the right claims, not a diabolical plan to make all white children self hating BLM activists, and it really irks me how successful the publicly admitted, intentional, blatantly racist scapegoating and misrepresentation has worked.

It seemed you were accepting the right wing definition even as you dismissed the (I assume anti) “CRT” movement by comparing it to unconstitutional anti German/foreign language laws in the past. Apologies if I misunderstood or came across as accusatory.

You don't think that has anything to do with the biased garbage you watch? I've seen every Democrat (politician) ever asked about the tax bill admit it benefits them, including Obama and Clinton.

Remember the last 6 months of "I pay more under this plan, it doesn't benefit me at all." ? You enjoy being completely lied to about a $1.5 Trillion a year handout to billionaires? So, Obama's problem was he wasn't rich or dishonest enough for you?

Democrats say it's financial Armageddon because handing over $1.5TRILLION per year to a hand full of hyper rich people when we already had a huge deficit is exactly that.
It's odd, (not really, it's typical Bob) I recall you and the right screaming Armageddon every time Obama passed a bill, and claiming he doubled the debt/deficit in his first term....clearly that was a racist ruse and financial responsibility is not an issue for you, because this single law costs far more than even you claimed Obama spent, a number that had you frothing at the mouth with rage, and is designed to benefit a single family...Trump's.

Bob...you admitted he's an unqualified liar who cannot get anything done, then you counter yourself with " Trump is kicking ass, making America greater this year even being dogged every day" Stop being idiotic and pretending you actually have a real opinion, you're obviously just trolling when you spout this nonsense, and it makes you look moronic.

I have no kids, and don't itemize, my tax rate goes UP under this law, so I probably pay more. This isn't the "pay your taxes on a postcard" promise kept, this adds serious complexity to the tax code, it doesn't simplify it. They admitted that, can't you?

Jesus fucking Christ, this single bill adds $15 Trillion to the debt over 10 years, so yes, let's be fair. For 2016, the deficit is expected to be approximately $590 billion, in 2020 that's now $2.09 Trillion...assuming Trump doesn't steal more for himself. Had Obama not increased the military budget by over $100 Billion (contrary to all right wing liars who falsely claim he shrunk it) in an effort to gain bipartisan support for his plans (a fool's errand) he would have actually SHRUNK the deficit. Clinton actually lowered the debt, erasing the deficit until your guy, Bush, turned us around bigly.

Only Americans who make over $150k a year will benefit financially...in the short term. When they have to pay for massive amounts of private security, private roads, water treatment, etc, and the country becomes Chinese (purchased and by force, with no allies left to help us, and China aligned with Russia, we're toast).
The "vase majority" of America might benefit, but the vast majority of Americans will pay dearly, as will the nation as a whole.

Sore looser? Compared to your (and the right's) treatment of Obama, I'm a trump supporter.
Stop trolling, you sound like a 4 year old ...lies, excuses, reversals, nonsense, misdirection, and high praise for a moron....not a good look, buddy. If Trump is kicking ass, it's for Russia and China, not us. Made us greater, by raising the debt and deficit by up to 400% with a single move and losing our international standing and allies. Dogged every day?....Not compared to Obama. Recall, instead of legislating, Republican leadership said 'my number one priority is making sure president Obama's a one-term president.', acted upon by being the most obstructionist and disrespectful congress in modern history.... during wartime, and not ending at the borders either. Better to hate Democrats than love America....morons and traitors, the lot of you.

Damn... you saw through my cunning ruse

Mea Culpa Notarobot and @dannym3141 ... I'd clicked on a 'suggested' video link to the right of a watched one because it looked interesting [and it was]. I hadn't seen any of this guys videos before and had no idea this was one of "those" channels. I too shun this type of rip-off. My apologies for not noticing the ruse as I was rushed and didn't look closely at the channel itself. I'd be happy to kill this if that's the consensus ... lemme know

During Carter's single term in office, Iran became a fundamentalist terror state, Saddam began his coup that led to the Iran-Iraq war-Hostage crisis?? Hello?? He gave the Sandinista cash for their fun-in-the-sun-OH-He gave away the Panama Canal, right? Claimed that the Soviets were no longer a 'threat' and they marched right on into Afghanistan. He set-up foreign policy for the next wave of presidential failures and shills for the assholes who really run the show, you know them by their smell, the richest gadjillionaires in the world, who have stolen humanity's hope for anything but anarchy or global fascism and world-government control and surveillance-state, in the form of what the world is fast-becoming. Yeah, the old peanut farmer was was a real piece of work.

Wake up people, the United States presidency has been a ruse for close to fifty years.

Like most of Sorkin's bloviating, this empty rhetoric is undermined by the incongruency of the climate change alarmists' own ballooning carbon footprints while attempting to use the government to impose force upon others' behavior. Until global warming alarmists themselves walk their talk (i.e., drive hybrids -- if they drive at all -- cease flying in airplanes, eat strictly vegetarian diets, have few if any children, and withdraw their consent from the worst polluter on the planet: the state), then no amount of freaking out, ranting, incentives, or attempts at policy will serve to avert the "impending catastrophe."

In China and India (where pollution is no doubt a significant problem), there are hundreds of millions of people who have far bigger concerns and more pressing problems than some remote notion of a "warming planet" or some looming "catastrophic collapse of civilization." (In fact, the same can be said for the majority of the population of the planet.)

And this is to say nothing of how ALL of the models used to support "evidence" for the case of a warming planet have ALL (not some, but ALL) been consistently undermined by serious skeptical science (PDF) while the claims of the political entity of the IPCC remain inconsistent with the data.

Since when do politicians get to decide the veracity of scientific fact?

EDIT: ALL of the climate-change alarmists' predictions, dating back to the 1980s, have all failed to come true. When this trend continues for the next few decades, there will be no shortage of "Told You So" moments that will undoubtedly be explained away by some unknown variable -- like the heat that is "hiding" in the ocean -- that, once "corrected for," will serve to further prop up this political ruse.

The ancestry of living beings isn't just traceable through the fossil record. The study of genetics shows us a huge and utterly overwhelming amount of evidence for the common ancestor idea. Common genes can be traced back to show the lineage of different animals and plants and groups of animals and plants.

Homology is a complex subject..it would take awhile to get into. I found a good link that illustrates the argument against it being a proof that macroevolution occured. If you want to take a look we could discuss further:

http://creation.com/does-homology-provide-evidence-of-evolutionary-naturalism

Ring species show that small changes can indeed lead to separate species. Antibiotic resistant bacteria are evolution in progress. You say that just because small changes can be seen it doesn't follow that big changes can evolve but that's stupid. Big changes are just a series of connected little changes.

I guess it depends on who you ask?

Erwin, D.H. (2000) Macroevolution is more than repeated rounds of microevolution. Evol. & Devel. 2:78-84.

the independence of macroevolution is affirmed not only by species selection but also by other processes such as effect sorting among species.

Lieberman, B.S. and Vrba, E.S. (2005) Gould on species selection. in MACROEVOLUTION: Diversity, Disparity, Contingency. E.S. Vrba and N. Eldredge eds. supplement to Paleobiology vol. 31(2) The Paleontological Society, Lawrence, Kansas, USA

Micro- and macroevolution are thus different levels of analysis of the same phenomenon: evolution. Macroevolution cannot solely be reduced to microevolution because it encompasses so many other phenomena: adaptive radiation, for example, cannot be reduced only to natural selection, though natural selection helps bring it about.

Scott, E.C. (2004) Evolution vs. creationism: an introduction. (Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press).

Macroevolution is decoupled from microevolution, and we must envision the process governing its course as being analogous to natural selection but operating at a higher level of organization.

Stanley, S. M. (1975) A theory of evolution above the species level. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. (USA) 72: 646-650.

In conclusion, then, macroevolutionary processes are underlain by microevolutionary phenomena and are compatible with microevolutionary theories, but macroevolutionary studies require the formulation of autonomous hypotheses and models (which must be tested using macroevolutionary evidence). In this (epistemologically) very important sense, macroevolution is decoupled from microevolution: macroevolution is an autonomous field of evolutionary study.

Ayala, F.J. (1983) Beyond Darwinism? The Challenge of Macroevolution to the Synthetic Theory of Evolution. reprinted in PHILOSOPHY OF BIOLOGY, M. Ruse ed. p. 118-133.

When discussing organic evolution the only point of agreement seems to be: "It happened." Thereafter, there is little consensus, which at first sight must seem rather odd. -(Simon Conway Morris, [palaeontologist, Department of Earth Sciences, Cambridge University, UK], "Evolution: Bringing Molecules into the Fold," Cell, Vol. 100, pp.1-11, January 7, 2000, p.11)

Wow. That is just scary doublespeak. It's like you can look up and see the sky is blue, and everyone can tell you the sky is blue, but you'll argue that's a ruse by the GOP and actually the sky is yellow because the "Retardicans" kept lying that it was blue so it must be yellow. It's just scary and sad.

I don't think she/he's trolling - i think she/he's an idiot. It reminds me of that picture i see around - "hurrr durrr i'm a idiot!" "go away idiot" "joke's on them, it was all a ruse!" ... In other words, if it looks and sounds like an idiot then it's an idiot, even if it's intentionally being one.

The only possible explanation is that she/he is some kind of innovative anti-troll that states the best possible argument for the worst possible opinion - worst as rated on a scale of how damaging and unfair it is to society; religion, the environment, equality - all videos that she/he has been spouting the most abominable shite about within the last week alone! She/He sets up the perfect bad argument for someone to come along and blow it up point by point, all of which she/he pointedly ignores. Everyone who reads past comes to understand the argument, see that one side makes sense and is rational, and comes to the correct conclusion.

In which case i hope you'll all join me in a great big thanks for her/his contributions to highlighting the plight of the boot-trodden minorities. You never fail to set up the perfect knock down for anyone who has any kind of reasoned understanding of anything you post about. Back in the 00s here in England we all thought Dom Joly and Sascha Baron Cohen were crazy fools, but they were 10 years ahead of their time. And now Zach Galifianakis is standing on the shoulders of giants. Great work, @lantern53.

Which flavor of Guyana Punch do you prefer? These politicians are pieces of shit and this ruse they perpetrate an actionable distraction from the crimes they willfully carry-out daily with approval from clueless boobs, some of whom may be your fellow drinking victims.

The government fed to the United States was taken by coop years ago and the culmination of the all they have accomplished is evidenced in your delusion and the coming shit-storm of jackboots enforcing the will of the criminal elite, and folks like you will line-up for more as long as you allow them to continue to suck air.