The vast majority of white collar crime is committed by white people, many times at the expense of black people. White state attorneys fail to press charges. The media never points this out. There are not enough black people for a black racist ahole to become a leading candidate like the Donald. Patrick fails to notice because he is hyper-focused on all the ways that 'other' people are worse than those in his tribe.
under the misimpression that the Bush administration included Secretary of States Clinton and Kerry (both of whom voted to authorize the Iraq war)
Here are a few quotes from the Bush administration.
VICE PRES. DICK CHENEY: My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators.
CHENEY: The Middle East expert, Professor Fouad Ajami, predicts that after liberation, the streets in Basra and Baghdad are sure to erupt in joy...
RUSSERT: Do you think the American people are prepared for a long, costly and bloody battle with significant American casualties?
VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: I don’t think it’s likely to unfold that way, Tim, because I really do believe we will be greeted as liberators.
WOLFOWITZ: These are Arabs, 23 million of the most educated people in the Arab world, who are going to welcome us as liberators.
But you did the same shit in Libya, just with Aerial Bombardment and a few Green Beret/Mercenary Advisers and Forward Air Controllers.
Both parties have been supporting rebels in various coup attempts. It hardly ever seems to work out well. My point was not to bash republicans so much as point out the stupidity of saying that liberals imagine that we will be received as liberators. It's hardly a liberal talking point.
Statistically speaking, 100 people dying IS a round-off error, however dramatic it is. Anyone who spends more than a few hours worrying about their increased chance of dying (based on 100 people in the US dying from terror per year) should have spent that time meditating or exercising or having sex. That would certainly do more for their longevity than writing letters to the white house, and would most likely do more for their longevity than preventing a few thousand Syrians (out of the million or so refugees) from entering the country. But, we don't have 100 people in the US dying each year due to letting in refugees. There is some other number of deaths, apparently, none of which were classified as terrorism.
Clearly, when you let in 750,000 people, some of them are going to commit nasty crimes. I have no idea how many additional people come in through the backdoor that thunderlips is talking about. I have no idea if their crimes are any more than one would expect by chance. I'm guessing that thunderlips has no idea either, since he hasn't brought it up. Surely, some of the multitude of right wing sites have figured this out, right?
Did you flunk the part of the SAT that dealt with which item from the group was different from the others?
If it is no already included under sabotage, requiring people to affirm that they will uphold the laws of the US should be added. I would imagine that supporting groups that promote Sharia, which is inconsistent with our laws would be covered under sabotage.
Half of the people think all drugs are useless tools of the pharmaceutical industrial complex. The other half think that all people should be allowed to take experimental drugs because the are terminally ill?
You seem to have a problem differentiating between people voicing their opinions (aka bitching about feminazis or freedom of speech) and people demanding a change in the laws of society because other people are exercising their right to free speech
You seem to have trouble staying on topic and making a clear point.
Free Speech has nothing to do with not making an ass of yourself. Gary is a great example. Nobody on this board wants to make it illegal for Gary to rant about Sandy Hook People being Actors, as despicable as it is.
Agreed. Free speech also doesn't mean that you cannot have rules of decorum. People in public schools can't wear whatever distracting distasteful tee-shirt they want, and apparently, you can't dress your frat house in whatever distasteful tee-shirt you want on campus.
Gary is an ass with stupid ideas, but it is meaningful speech. He has ideas he is trying to spread, and he is doing it on a forum where people are free to ignore him. By allowing for free speech, we are trusting the marketplace of ideas to reject his wild notions. That doesn't mean that you can show up at your company holiday party dressed like a transvestite hooker and solicit sex with your boss's wife. You won't be arrested, because it is not illegal, but the institution that you are a part of (company/school) may disassociate itself with (fire/reprimand) you.
I guess I'm a lefty in your mind, but agree that this is a stupid law to create a separate set of rules. Polygamists shouldn't have their marriage recognized, and dumbfuck Christian religious conservatives shouldn't get to shirk their legally required duties either. I'm talking about ugly dumbfuck Kim Davis.
That is among Muslims who say Sharia should be the law of the land. It's kind of like a poll to see of the people who like ice cream, how many like ice cream. The question is why the numbers are so low. I'm not defending Sharia wanting dumbfucks, but this OP is kind of silly.
Or like when these right wing Christian freedom fighters (http://www.nclplaw.org/) sued a school in CA for teaching Yoga to students on the grounds that it was promoting Hindu religion (http://www.npr.org/2013/01/09/168613461/promoting-hinduism-parents-demand-removal-of-school-yoga-class).
Or when a GOP nut lapper in Montana decided that Yoga pants should be illegal (http://time.com/3705394/montana-yoga-pants-ban/).
That means if a school tries to expel a student for putting up "Drop off Freshmen Girls Here" signs on their privately rented balcon
Right, but as soon as we see a female child swearing on youtube, let's get out our pitch forks and bitch about the feminazis. Freedom of speech for college boys, even if they have nothing to say, but a vulgar joke.