Lol!
I'm not the one trying to use Faux news as a source of information.

I've said my whole life, I would vote Republican if only they (the Republican representatives) would. I've never had the option.
Anti war intelligent thoughtful fiscal responsibility became pro war greedy and short sighted fiscal and social insanity before I could vote.

That is the part that befuddles me with their whole argument. Every other country in the world has these games, movies, and TV... have they seen some of the stuff coming out of Japan and parts of Europe. They all have equally violent games and movies, and they don't have the same problem. And as was pointed out by CrushBug, they are all Rated M games.

They all have "mentally ill" people too... and don't have the same problem. Another argument that makes no sense, given that one of their first actions was to make it easier for "mentally ill" people to get guns. Though as I understand it that hasn't gone into effect yet, it's still the principle of saying "it's mental illness" while making it easier for those you are blaming. Not to mention every version of their attempts to get rid of Obamacare included massive cuts to mental health programs.

The fact that all these people are the same people who scream "right to life" in regards to abortion, and that's why they vote Republican (a party that loves war and the death penalty), is a bit odd since they seem to love their right to own a gun far more than the tons of lives snuffed out by said guns each year. I'd be more or less happy enough, for now, to just end the Dickey amendment and see how the data works out. But no, they still refuse to do that... probably because the NRA has an idea of where that data will go.

Ugh - how to I start this:

First, not many Republicans are "right wing" any more. Many vote against free markets and Capitalism and vote for social engineering, wealth redistribution, and growing the size of the Government.

There are a few true right wingers left, but the establishment Republicans are not right wing at all if you test their voting habits against what it means to be on the right side of the political spectrum.

Also, I patently reject that notion that all racists are Republican. If you think racism only happens in the white community I suggest you open Youtube and simply search the term "kill whites".

Not too long ago, David Duke, a major KKK leader of some sort, was a Democrat in Congress.

My point is the only reason these people are voting Republican right now is because the social engineering of the left is seen as anti-white, which I am certain makes it untenable for a white racist to vote for that candidate/party.

Like the cheeto in chief, you may not even realize you're standing with the Nazis, but make no mistake, they see it and understand.
Edit: if you want them to stand alone, you, and the exalted leader need to do a MUCH better job of both distancing yourselves and being clear they are alone in their levels of evil and bile, not state plainly that they are standing on a morality scale right next to some pc thugs (ugly as they may be, pc thugs don't advocate mass murders/genocides).
The KKK, neonazis, and alt right are absolutely on your Republican team, you can't wash your hands of them now after they voted with you because Trump's plan and statements mirrored theirs.

Edit: I may have misread you. Are you saying the republican "team" isn't on America's side? Because I'm saying the KKK and Nazis are undeniably Trump Republicans.

I refuse to acknowledge that ridiculous term....but I absolutely don't stand with the far left. I've said my entire adult lifetime that I would vote republican if only they would...but republicans today don't resemble the party I would have joined. They turned pro war, anti thought, pro spend, anti tax, pro debt, anti responsibility, pro corporation, anti citizen, pro oil, anti progress....I could go on but why?

Um...duh Bob, then you still had it badly wrong. Anti first amendment is still antifa, not anfta.

Actually, I do have fond memories of Berkeley, because I lived there in the 80's, not because I'm a leftist fascist.

Yes, he disavowed them, and in the same breath defends them and lumps his political enemies in with them, as if they're equally evil.
The media isn't saying he didn't say they're bad, it's saying he clearly didn't mean it.

If anti Nazi, anti fascist is the wrong side, color me proudly wrong.

I want you in that slinky black backless mini dress and a pushup bra please. I can't wait.

Drain the swamp... I don't see any swam draining. He drained the very same Wall Street people he complained Hillary would bring in, into the White House, and other low lifes... like Bannon.

And if we get just another 10 months of turmoil depends on how we pray... of course a minor chunk of Christianity don't vote Republican, and actually vote the way Jesus would, which clearly wouldn't be for Trump or his kind... but I digress. So they are praying against Trump, but of course we know she means we need to pray for the nation, and for Trump's divine leadership from God... odd how the right is willing to say that God appoints leaders like Trump, but wouldn't say the same about Obama, who clearly was far more Christ like than Trump... Anyhow, the point I was going to get to, is odd how one has to pray to get God to act, though His will is perfect, so you can't change His mind, or His will... and why would He just sit and go... "4,998,888 more prayers to go, then I'll answer.. ohh... 4,999,884 to go! Way to go My people." That isn't compassion or anything... Either His will is perfect and His will will be done, or He's malleable, which isn't divine... or He's a fake, or at least no more real than any of the other 5,000 gods out there, and can't actually answer prayer any more than those other gods... "It takes an action of faith on our part, by praying"... bull shit, either He's going to do it or not.... because most of those kids with brain and bone cancer, Christian, with Christian families who pray all the time, as are most of the people who are dying of horrible things in this nation, but somehow His answering prayer ratio seems to be about the same as random, and the same as to any other god...

All these kind of people, and Fox News types who also brag about their faith, and how Christianity is under attack bull shit line... is why I hate Christianity and what it's become... to which Christians take great offence, "why hate me?" but I hate Christianity, not you as a person... of course they don't get that, because they identify so strongly with their faith that they take that personally as an attack against them... of course then they don't see how their anti-LGBT rantings, and the "don't hate the sinner, hate the sin" is basically the same... they can't empathize, and see how their hatred of the sin of homosexuality as they see it, is the same as my hatred of modern Christianity.

I love how the far right is far more upset at the leaks than the crime... when the DNC was having leaks, they had near zero concern about the leaks, it was the potential crimes being exposed that they were concerned with. Now that it is against Trump, suddenly the potential crime matters nothing, all that matters is leaks. Were this Clinton or Sanders, they'd be screaming from the mountain top, "the crime matters far more than the leaks! Lock her/him up!" Now they are going after leakers, who haven't exposed anything that endangers national security, just is embarrassing for our asshole in chief.

Of course the people who watch this, 700 Club, TBN, Fox, listen to right wing radio, and the like... they are still fired up, they still believe. Some of the people who voted for him who may not be in that crowd, might start having doubts, but the vast majority of his base still is in love with him, and still thinks he's God's greatest gift to this nation. They've been lied to and deceived by their churches for so long... that even if they actually do take a moment to read the Bible for themselves, they can't interpret it any other way than the way these ilk violate it's teachings, and the teachings of the Jesus they claim to follow.

As I've said before, if I were still a Christian, I'd seriously consider the modern right wing evangelical movement to be part of the anti-Christ system, as they turn more people against God than for Him, and are teaching a system opposite of what Jesus taught... Satan/the anti-Christ doesn't need to deceive the world, we are already damned to Hell, what he'd need to deceive, would be those who think they are faithful to the teachings of Jesus. Use them, not as a beacon of life and hope, but the pure bigotry and hate that modern Christianity is. To make it it unappealing... they might still get into Heaven with those who actually believe the way Jesus taught (because believing Jesus is the Christ, the son of God and all that is the only requirement in), but the Judgement Seat of Christ would find them learning how they cost millions of souls, then He'd point to the Christians on the left, and would say, they did far better, they followed my lessons... He'll look at Jim there and say, "look at the thousands of souls that you personally turned against My message, because you didn't teach the Love I commanded, you didn't teach the golden rule as I taught it, you taught a corrupted message, and now they'll burn for all eternity in Hell, because of you. I tried to reach them, but they heard your message of bigotry and hate, of love of money over helping the needy and the poor, of greed over the command to heal the sick, and turned from me.... now because you believed in Me, I have to let you in, but you'll live seeing those who turned from me as they are tormented in the back of your mind... you'll have a small home here, not the grand home that those who have taught my message properly have... to those who much was given, much was expected, and you failed. That man there, murdered 33 people, and converted before his execution, and his home will be grander than yours. Those who had much, will have little... so enter to your reward... of praising me for all I've done, 24/7 for all eternity, but as you praise, remember those who aren't here, because you poisoned the world against me." "Surely Lord there must be some who were saved, I saw them come forward." "They were already saved, or would soon be, for each one of them that actually turned to me because of you, hundreds turned away... that's not a good exchange Jim..."

Hmm. I really like her, but I'm a little bit concerned about her reaction to some of Maher's quips/questions:

A) The Pocahontas thing seemed to really throw her off. I don't think Maher said it with any malice; just to remind her that there are some unreachable people who will vote Republican no matter what.

B) Maher was asking a very legitimate question (multiple times) when he was trying to get her to explain what the DNC needs to do differently to get people that agree with Democrat / Progressive policies to follow through with actual votes. She had no real answers beyond politician-speak.

C) As a further example of that, she took it a bit personally when Maher noted that people like her but clearly didn't like Hillary. Well, she needs to come to terms with that. Hillary was the wrong choice for the DNC, and Warren was right there along with most of her party in attempting to prop up that mistake. Warren needs to acknowledge and accept that, or she will fail to learn an extremely important lesson from it. If she gets taken off the Clinton's Christmas card list, so be it.

Enoch nailed this in the second post.

Trump is NOT the problem. The extreme right is the problem. The extreme left is the problem. BOTH the extreme left and the extreme right WANT both sides to become more extreme. Both the extreme left and right want a fight because they deeply believe their holy crusade is right, to facilitate their fight they need the moderates to fade away. Poisoning both parties so they are unpalatable to the moderates is what they want.

The Alt-Right doesn't want moderate right leaning voters in the republican party. They are so far right those moderates are traitors to their cause and enemies to their ideals.

OWS, BLM, and the SJW's don't want moderate left leaning voters in the democratic party. They are so far left those moderates are traitors to their cause and enemies to their ideals.

Trump is just a symptom of the two extremes successful campaigns of growth. The only upside to Trump being president is that at least their is some glimmer of the republican party itself questioning the wisdom of the direction it's being dragged along. The democratic party meanwhile is doubling down on an absolute refusal to try and lure away or court moderates that voted republican, because after all, they are the enemy.

If the parties can't be forced to try courting moderate voters, this just keeps getting worse. Don't delude yourself into thinking the answer is to get a Democrat in next time. Without moderating the underlying extremes this just keeps getting worse.

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.

@noims -- All rather academic, but I guess that Sanders might alienate some of the hard-line, "establishment" Democrats. But, I feel like the proportion of people that feel like that AND the extent to which it would bother them is tiny compared to the same figures for Republicans that are uneasy about Trump.

Then again, I'm from a pretty solidly Republican red state, so most of what I hear from back there is people that tend to vote Republican being upset with Trump. I wouldn't get exposed to steady Democrats being less enthused with Sanders, because I don't really know any.

So, interesting to hear your take on it but I still tend to think that Bernie's appeal to people in the middle AND Republicans disgruntled with Trump would very likely result in him getting more electoral votes than Hillary will get.

These ridiculous women again? They make their living selling discount Trump items, so their income is totally dependent on his success, yet they balk when asked about this and pretend they're just ordinary supporters, and not paid spokespeople.

When exactly did they 'destroy Clinton' here? They made a single ridiculous metaphor that made no sense...there can be no smoke without fire? They can't really be that ignorant, can they? Do they really not know that 99.9% of the idiotic conspiracy theories their boy spouts are totally baseless rantings, and they still believe Obama is a Muslim Kenyan bent on destroying America? You can't teach that level of stupid, it's innate.

I can't see how these characters help him anyway, they are prime examples of stereotypes that many in the black community find offensive. I guess it's the "see, I have black friends" argument, made so white people can try to pretend they aren't voting for a clearly racist douchebag.
I'm still astonished at the blinders and 3" thick rose colored glasses the Republicans are seeing the world through today. You would think I would have gotten over that by now.

And did that idiot at the end really claim that if he's dead, the Democrats will cast his vote, implying that voting for a dead person is something Democrats consistently do, but not Republicans? Better check your figures there, buddy. You've got it backwards, the dead consistently vote Republican.

That would be great, who should I speak to about changing that culture of ours?

As far as letting people fly, I never said I agree with it. I was referring to it because President Obama used it as an example. I said, somewhat sarcastically, that it wasn't a constitutional right. I never said we SHOULD ban people from flying.

I absolutely do not think we should limit a person's ability to travel based on an arbitrary list, especially since this incident pretty much proves that it doesn't necessarily stop terrorists. If a gun ban was in place, the shooter would still have been able to get weapons because he was removed from the list for some unknown (as of yet) reason.

Yes, in hindsight the Patriot Act should never have been passed. That is one of the main points of what I have been saying. We are in a crisis situation and people are knee-jerking the way they did after 9/11. Do we really need to have our government pass the Patriot Act Part Deux?

I understand the anger, the sadness, even the rage we all are feeling right now because of this incident. I've tried to remain relatively calm and not release vitriol on anyone I've replied to. I'm sure that I might have angered quite a few by not caving on my stance, but I refuse to back down because someone is pissed at me. I am not a member of the NRA. I am a fiscal conservative, a constitutionalist, and yet still a liberalist when it comes to personal life styles or choices. I've voted Republican, Democrat, Independent, and Libertarian. I think the fact that Paul Ryan ignored a possible discussion on gun laws is a bunch of horseshit. We should be able to at least talk about things, even if we might not agree with each other.

this is offensive on so many levels.
let me guess bob,because a black man posted this,it must,therefore NOT be racist?

this is incredibly racist,because this man is basically saying that black folk are too stupid to make up their own minds.that they are chumps and sell-outs for simply always voting democrat.

because republicans have ALWAYS been a voice of reason and championed the underclass! right bob?

we could use the same logic and apply it to the mind-numbing meth-head hillbillies who get cock hard at the voice of trump.who are convinced that the republicans represent freedom,liberty and the constitution.

while those very same republicans consistently rob these people,of modest means mind you,to pay their buddies in wall street.who pass legislation to poison their water,dumb down their kids,create food deserts,incarcerate them (while giving their CEO buddies a pass and a slap on the wrist).continue to allow tax breaks and subsidies for their donors.passing laws allowing big corporations to send jobs to china and utilizing prison labor (slaves) and then BLAMING the people!

yeah bob,that coin turns both ways.

so the black man who blindly votes democrat can be criticized for his lack of foresight,but so can the aging white racist who consistently votes republican.

because neither the republican nor the democratic party give a flying fuck about either of you.

you both are sell-outs,chumps and uncle toms to a system that threw you both overboard 40 years ago.

fuck this video,and fuck you bob.

I'll cover IUD's first. While there is some evidence that the older style copper ParaGard might have a slightly increase in preventing a fertilized egg from implanting, the evidence for the Mirena. Here are two medical journals documenting as such:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4018277
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3109/13625180903519885
If those are too much reading, they are summarized in http://videosift.com/video/Myths-About-IUDs

Remember Google gives personalized search results. No two people get the same results, even when signed out of Google... More details at http://videosift.com/video/There-are-no-regular-results-on-Google-anymore

I'd also agree that there are many things America gets right. Overall it's a good country.

And I think I started out by pointing out it isn't about guns, or just about guns.

Now I'm not sure what you mean assigning attributes to the right. I was pointing out policies that are consistent with the conservative right, Republican platform positions that are not pro-life.

The Death Penalty. This is a typically Republican strong stance position. And has been at various times part of the party's official platform. The Democrat party official position supports the death penalty too, after a DNA testing and post-conviction review. The point isn't wither or not the Death Penalty is right or wrong, I'd personally argue it's wrong, it's the claim of being pro-life while supporting the death penalty. There can be no way to reconcile those two positions.

One needs only to look at how Bush and the present day regime of Republicans in Washington think of handling issues in the Middle East to see what that they support a strong military and an interventionist doctrine (http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Republican_Party_War_+_Peace.htm). One of the key factors of the Bush Doctrine is preemptive strikes. While one normally wouldn't cite Wikipedia, I'll let their page on the Bush Doctrine and their references clear things up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_Doctrine. Heck Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize largely just because he wasn't Bush... sadly he did little to lower US involvement in the Middle East, a situation we should have left alone ages ago. Again the Democrats aren't as peace loving as they should be, and generally the most peace loving people in Congress tend to be Libertarians (who object more to the expense of war than war itself, and love pointing out how the war in Iraq from 2001 to 2011 cost more than NASA's entire history to that point, even after adjusting for inflation (https://www.nationalpriorities.org/cost-of/ and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA)) and Libertarian leaning Republicans like Ron Paul, and the Congressional Progressive Caucus (http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/). Again, war isn't pro-life, it is perhaps one of the most anti-life things one can support short of supporting murder itself.

It's also Republicans, aka the right, that are trying to undo the Affordable Health Care Act, a program that ironically enough is modeled after the ones they tried to pass twice under Bush Sr and once under Clinton as to oppose Democrat plans to push for a Single Payer system. Prior to the passing of Obamacare, the US was spending nearly twice as much on healthcare as a percentage of it's GDP than the next nation, and getting only the 37th best results . Just listen to the crowd at the September 12 2008 Republican debate that chant over and over "let him die" as a solution to a guy who needs medical care but elected not to buy private insurance. These same people are the one's who claim to be pro-life. Affordable health care should be a right, as it is in every civilized nation but the US. Obamacare is far from ideal, but much better than the previous policy of only those with good jobs could afford health care everyone else, die or go bankrupt, driving the costs of healthcare up more. One can't say they are pro-life and oppose affordable healthcare, including for services you don't support such as IUDs (it doesn't matter that I object to our overly huge military budget that is much bigger than the next several nations combined, so it shouldn't matter if some medical services such as IUDs are supported), as quality of life matters as much as being alive.

Related to guns however is the Republican stance on stand your ground. Watch Fox News and how they defend the use of guns, or how mass shootings would be avoided if people were carrying concealed weapons and could stop the shooters... again escalating things to a death penalty. Now in the case of a mass shooter, ideally you want to take them down alive, but if death is the only option, then I personally don't object. However stand your ground typically expands to home invasion, where criminals typically aren't looking kill, just rob the place. Here they defend the homeowner's right to shoot to kill (I've been in firearm safety classes, generally the aim is to aim for the center of mass, which will likely result in death, but the odds of making a shot at the legs to impede the crooks is very low, so if you shoot you have to assume it is to kill). This position is contrary to the pro-life stance. All life is equal... which could get into a whole other argument about how they don't value immigrants, especially illegal immigrants, people who just want to improve their lives by moving to what they hope is a better country that will allow for a better opportunity for them and their families, but the Republicans are fighting hard to stop them from improving their lives here just because an accident of birth made them born in another country than the US... heck just look at the way Republicans lined the buses of refugee children fleeing war and gang torn areas of Latin America and they shouted at the children.... children... to go home that nobody wanted them. That isn't a pro-life statement, to tell a child that nobody wants them. The pro-life position would be to want to nurture and protect the children fleeing a dangerous area... We should be moving to a world without borders, as that is the pro-life position, to realize we are all humans, and that we all must share this world, and that we should do all we can to protect one another and this world and all that inhabits it (except mosquitoes, roaches, most parasites, etc... lol)

As to high poverty rates, the Republican policy of trickle down economics helps drive that. Helps spread the ever growing income and wealth gaps in the US. The Walmart heirs alone have more wealth than the bottom 40% of the US population (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jul/31/bernie-s/sanders-says-walmart-heirs-own-more-wealth-bottom-/). Now true, some could argue it isn't trickle down economic that is causing the growing wealth and income gaps, but the correlation is very strong, and one is hard pressed to find any other causative points beyond the rich paying less and less to their workers while taking more and more for themselves while the government eases the tax burden on the rich more and more.

Overall I think it's clear that the people who vote Republican because they are "pro-life" are hypocrites given the party's positions in key issues that aren't pro-life. I'm sure many, especially those on the right would disagree. They'd argue the death penalty is needed to discourage others from killing and therefore protects life, and that preemptive strikes ala the Bush Doctrine keep another 9/11 from happening (although the counter to that is fairly easily that we make more extremist the more we use those strikes). So one's mileage may very. For me, I think they are hypocritical saying they are pro-life if they don't value that life as much as their own after they are born.

This spacecraft is about to start collecting regular data on the energy balance of the whole Earth - an important additional set of data on global warming. Of course the spacecraft was ready about 15 years ago - but Republicans did not want it to fly because (1) they hate Al Gore, and (2) they don't want us to know what they are doing to our planet. ("Close your eyes and vote Republican!")

No Bob, you have failed.
You and all the other citizens of the US. You allowed your government to became a corrupt, for-sale pseudo democracy. Why? Because you voted for the wrong fucking people or didn't vote at all.
Maybe I'm wrong but my instincts tell me you vote republican. That's even worse. While you got your panties in a knot over the two gays down the street trying to marry, your party leaders sell the future of your country to the highest bidder. They're throwing one ridiculous diversion after another at you (Obama ain't american, Benghazi!, The gays!1!1), which you gobble up like the good boy you're supposed to be, while they redefine free speech as money donations and bribery as lobbying. Corporations ain't people, my friend. But who cares? As long as we build a big ass fence on our border.
The problem is you. You have a vote, a voice and you could use it to put the right people in power. What have you done with it?