patrick.net

Dan8267 says

25. NSA domestic spying -- well, not yet, but those damn liberals are working on it

Other things liberals are working on to ban:
26. Guns
27. Public safety
28. Poverty
29. Capitalism
30. Billionaires
31. Corporations
32. God
33. Fossil fuels
34. Red light cameras
35. Coca Cola
36. Fast foods
37. Frozen foods
38. Pesticides
39. Common sense - no that could be conservatives.
40. Farting cows

bob2356 says

CaptainShuddup says

FortWayne says

liberals today want to ban...

Everything but Freaks, Geeks and Weirdos.

Well at least you are perfectly safe.

HAHAHAHAHA!

Dan8267 says

1. Slavery

2. Genocide of Native Americans

3. War rape

4. Child labor

5. The all-male vote

6. Segregation

7. Jim Crow laws

8. Lynchings

9. Anti-miscegenation laws

10. Using firehoses to wash down hippies

11. Using guns to kill unarmed college coeds

12. Incest

13. Beating gays to death

14. Having the 10 Commandments in the court house.

15. Being able to sentence someone based on their religion and/or church attendance.

16. Agent Orange

17. Irradiating blacks for medical experiments without their knowledge

18. Starting bum fights and wagering on them

19. Same for dog fights

20. Getting into decades long wars based on outright lies.

21. Police brutality

22. False arrest for videoing the police committing crimes

23. Traffic stop strip searches and body cavity searches

24. Election fraud

25. NSA domestic spying -- well, not yet, but those damn liberals are working on it

Who leaked the official White house ministry of propaganda's list of Obama's accomplishments?

marcus says

That guy is just ourt to lunch. Extreme whacko assertions that would ebarrass any self respecting conservative. Not a one would want to be associated with such idiocy.

To correct the roots of your liberal left upbringing Marcus. It doesn't make *your people* morally superior if you just talk to yourself in third person like some homeless wacko.

Strategist says

Other things liberals are working on to ban:

26. Guns

27. Public safety

28. Poverty

29. Capitalism

30. Billionaires

31. Corporations

32. God

33. Fossil fuels

34. Red light cameras

35. Coca Cola

36. Fast foods

37. Frozen foods

38. Pesticides

39. Common sense - no that could be conservatives.

40. Farting cows

41. Personal responsibility

FortWayne says

41. Personal responsibility

I wanted to vomit when Obama waited weeks, or months, to can Shinseki or Sebelius.

A real conservatarian, like George Bush, would have fired them on the spot, as he did after 9-11 and the Iraq War: thousands of heads rolled after 9-11, and even Rumfsfeld was promptly fired just under 4 years after Iraq.

The one thing I admire about conservatives is their belief in personal responsibility. Obama would not have fired nearly the number of people that Bush did after 9-11.

Mic Check! Mic Check!!!

You're talking about Bush's management skills right?
Mr Failed baseball franchise, C- student GW Bush?

Well heh heh... Obama ain't Bush, see... Bush wasn't afraid to git his hands wet and go all nucular!

CaptainShuddup says

see... Bush wasn't afraid to git his hands wet and go all nucular!

STRONG AND WRONG! SALUTE OUR TROOPS! ACT, DON'T THINK!

When the individual cannot think nor operate in their own best interests, the union becomes the vehicle with which their dumbed down selves can be best represented.
One should feel pity for the unionist, like one would for an underdeveloped snail who happened to make its way to some frenchy fucks fast food fridaynite fishfry.

CaptainShuddup says

But do you really need to belong to an organization that has more lawyers than custodians, that you pay a fees to every month. SO they can meet with bureaucrats in Sunday closed door meetings deciding your fate, and hijacking the authority of YOUR plight?

MOST CERTAINLY NOT!!!!

CaptainShuddup says

Well heh heh... Obama ain't Bush, see... Bush wasn't afraid to git his hands wet and go all nucular!

Let's not forget that he promptly fired his best buddy "Brownie" after Katrina, and the poor guy had to scrape by on the millions he made from "consulting" jobs.

Heckuva job, Bushie!

So - let me get this straight - Liberals are EVERYWHERE?

FortWayne says

To correct the roots of your liberal left upbringing Marcus. It doesn't make *your people* morally superior if you just talk to yourself in third person like some homeless wacko.

This doesn't make any sense.

You're comments say more about you than I could ever hope to describe.

FortWayne says

Liberals are hell bent on destroying all the basic freedoms. It's the brick in the wall mentality that took over.

Man can't even say anything that is not considered 100% PC and kisses ass of every single delinquent, loser, race, gender or sexuality. What freedom of speech?

Just about anything that constitution says is a right, liberals today want to ban. And if you don't agree with their mentality, well IRS, NSA, and Child services like a Gestapo agency will come down on you and force you into their line.

Liberals are not liberals today, they've turned into some sort of pro-gay pandering offshoot of the Nazi party.

Strategist says

Other things liberals are working on to ban:

OK, let's go over your lies one by one.

26. Guns

This is typical conservative paranoia delusion. There are no proposed laws to ban guns or repeal the Second Amendment.

92% U.S. voters favor background checks for all gun purchases. Yet, liberals are trying to get guns banned simply by requiring background checks to make sure that violent felons and terrorists get them? Meanwhile, conservatives think it's OK to violate the 4th Amendment and strip search every plane passenger to protect us from terrorists.

Yeah, liberals are bad for wanting background checks for gun purchases like 92% of the American population, and conservatives are good for wanting to throw away the entire Constitution, except the Second Amendment, to fight terrorism.

By the way, only pussies are so scared they need an arsenal of guns. Liberals aren't trying to ban guns, but unlike conservatives, we don't need to use them as a penis substitute.
http://www.youtube.com/embed/LxeDn0IlesA

27. Public safety

Wow, this is such an outrageous lie that I don't even know what delusional case you are trying to make.

28. Poverty

Obviously one cannot ban poverty by fiat. However, ending vicious cycles of poverty is something that society should strive for. Even if you're not poor, it's in your best interest. The two leading causes of violent crime are income inequality and poverty. A young man with nothing to lose is dangerous to you and your family. So don't force him into a lifetime of inescapable poverty, or he might just revolt or turn to a life of crime. This is just common sense, which explains why conservatives don't understand it.

29. Capitalism

It is illegal for a person to poison another person. The same should be true for corporations. If Sam can't poison Bob, than neither can Sam's Club. So, if you're idea of banning capitalism is making sure that persons operating via a corporation can't rape, murder, and pillage any more than the common man, then yes, we liberals are for banning that. It's a shame that capitalism has become code for letting people behind corporations commit felonies.

30. Billionaires

There are plenty of people who should be billionaires like Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the World Wide Web. He should be the richest man in the world, having created more wealth than anyone else by several orders of magnitude. Yet, he's not a billionaire.

Liberals aren't against there being billionaires. We just think that a billionaire should become one through creating billions of dollars of wealth rather than stealing billions of dollars of wealth. Conservatives don't see a difference between wealth creation and wealth theft; to them it's all the same thing except, of course, theft is easier and therefore always the path chosen.

31. Corporations

Another fine example of conservatives making a ridiculous Straw Man argument. No bill has ever been proposed to ban corporations. The lie you are trying to make is that requiring corporations to obey the laws like don't murder or steal is equivalent to banning corporations.

32. God

One cannot ban that which does not exist.

I suppose the lie you are trying to make here is that separation of church and state is equivalent to a ban on your false god. If so, I'm all for it. Your vile religion has no place in my government.

33. Fossil fuels

Finally, one bit of truth. Although it's not a liberal issue, but a simple human survival issue, since most liberals are intelligent, they are typically for banning fossil fuels.

And fossil fuels should be banned.
- they literally poison the people and the entire world. E.g., coal power planets are literally brain-damaging children who eat tuna fish. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1474253/
- pollution is a form a theft, and theft should not be tolerated
- fossil fuels will run out and cause a world-wide economic collapse when it does unless we move off of them

34. Red light cameras

No idea what you are talking about here. I have no problem with red light cameras as long as the revenue goes to a charity such as an automobile crash victims fund rather than to the state. Allowing civil fines to go to the state creates a perverse incentive to defraud the people.

35. Coca Cola

Wasn't it you bigoted conservatives who had your panties in a bunch over Coca Cola's commercial featuring children singing America the Beautiful in multiple languages? Yeah, you conservative morons found it offensive to sing the national anthem in a foreign language. Then we liberals reminded you that America the Beautiful is not the national anthem, the Star Spangle Banner is. Then we liberals reminded you that we fought the American Revolution against the English, who by coincidence, speak English. Then we liberals reminded you that the French, who speak French, gave us critical support during that revolution, not to mention the Statue of Liberty.

But anyway... I had to Google this one. Turns out that the conservative propaganda media has its panties in a twist over an alleged ban on soda. Straight from Fox News,

The mayor of Cambridge, Mass. introduced a policy resolution that would ban soft drinks and sugar-sweetened beverages in restaurants.

“Whereas New York City has a plan to limit the serving size of soda and other sugar-sweetened beverages sold in restaurants; now therefore bit it ordered that the City Manager be and hereby is requested to refer the matter of a ban on soda and sugar sweetened beverages in restaurants to the Cambridge Public Health Department for a recommendation,” the resolution read.

Now, nothing in the above quote actually says the mayor or anyone else wants to ban soda. It just says the mayor wants the Cambridge Public Health Department's opinion on the matter.

Furthermore, the statement that the mayor is trying to ban soda or Coca Cola is an outright lie. She has proposed a size limit for servings in restaurants similar to the one in New York City. From a real news source

The mayor of Cambridge, Mass. has proposed limiting the size of soda and sugar-sweetened beverages sold in city restaurants, saying she was inspired by a similar measure in New York City.

Shit, that's like totally different from what your lying Fox News said!

Now, we liberals believe that the government shouldn't be regulating what people can put in their own bodies. That's a deeply personal choice, right or wrong.

It's you nanny state people on the left and the right who want the father-knows-best state to tell you what you can and cannot do with your own bodies. You're upset that some cities where you don't live are limiting the serving sizes of sodas in restaurants, and your so upset that you lie about it being an outright ban. Yet, hypocritically, you have no problem with an outright ban on marijuana.

If you truly believed in personal choice, you'd be every bit as much against a government ban on marijuana as you are against the fictional government ban against Coca Cola. After all, no one has ever died from over-use of marijuana, but tens of millions of Americans have died form over-use of sugar.

36. Fast foods

Same lie as above. Same response.

37. Frozen foods

Damn, I eat frozen foods all the time. This can't be possible because I'm a liberal and you say liberals are for banning frozen foods.

38. Pesticides

I'm for banning pollution. Pesticide usage that pollute our rivers, our oceans, and our drinking water should be banned for the exact same reason it is illegal to take a dump in your town's water reservoir.

But hey, don't think of pesticide regulations as a liberal cause. Think of it as a restriction on abortions. Banning certain pesticide usage is like preventing big Farm from forcing women to get an abortion. And you conservatives hate abortions right?

From the American Pregnancy Association

Annals of Oncology, Epidemiology, Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, Journal of Neuroscience, Occupational Environmental Medicine, and the American Journal of Public Health are just some of the journals reporting associations between agricultural pesticides and birth defects, pregnancy complications, and miscarriage.

So, why are you so pro-abortion? Not pro-choice, but pro-forced-abortion.

39. Common sense - no that could be conservatives.

I don't even know what you are trying to lie about here.

40. Farting cows

People who are smart and well-educated are almost exclusively liberal. And as informed persons, we understand and believe in science. You know, that thing that got us airplanes, the moon landing, doubled the human lifespan, and allows for hundreds of trillions of dollars of wealth to be generated through world-wide trade in the digital age.

Well, cow farts -- I know, you're juvenile and therefore cannot take the subject seriously -- are a significant part of climate change like it or not. We liberals don't choose our positions on mindless dogma, but rather on scientific fact. And the science is indisputable. You can Google it if you like.

Reducing cow production is one of the ways to mitigate the effects of climate change. And we liberals have a wonderful free-market way of doing so, that if you conservatives would whole-heartedly embrace if you actually believed in the free market. Simply apply a pollution tax on cow products that exactly offsets the cost of cleaning up the pollution. Cows release methane, so the cost of methane sequestering should be paid for by the cow product producers.

See, that's free market in the true sense -- not the sense that conservatives use the term to mean "everyone is free to rig the market" -- but in the true sense of the term. The producers of beef and leather have to pay the true cost of production rather than shifting those costs to everyone else in the form of theft call pollution. The buyers of the product have to pay a price that is reflective of the cost of the goods, thereby ensuring efficient allocation of resources. The demand for methane sequestration technology spawns a new industry and creates jobs.

All pollution should be taxed at whatever the market is able to charge to clean up the pollution. Now that's a free market system. The problem is you conservatives hate free markets. Cap and trade is a great idea as long as the cap on pollution is at zero. Every bit of pollution should require cleanup costs to be paid by the polluter rather than by your family in terms of your children getting sick or dying.

CaptainShuddup says

Who leaked the official White house ministry of propaganda's list of Obama's accomplishments?

Way to rewrite history, bro. Obama has done some downright vile things, but nothing on that list. Get your history straight.

sbh says

Strategist says

34. Red light cameras

You obviously have never been to Phoenix, or you think it's run by liberals.

Yes, the use of traffic laws to generate revenue for the state is what I called the perverse incentive. The solution is to make it law that the state cannot receive any revenue from fines. Instead all revenue from fines should go to victims' funds that help offset the cost the victims' bear such as medical bills, property damage, legal fees, etc.

FortWayne says

To correct the roots of your liberal left upbringing Marcus.

Marcus is not in any way, shape, or form a liberal. He's just a leftist. If you need to know the difference between leftists and liberals, just read any of the -- and I use the term loosely -- debates between Marcus and me.

FortWayne says

Personal responsibility

Actually, liberals are all for personal responsibility, which is why we are against
- banning marijuana
- blue laws
- restricting freedom of speech including
-- what can be said on public airwaves
-- what can be said on campuses
-- what can be said on the Internet
- anti-indecency laws of any kind including
-- speech and writing
-- t-shirts and other forms of art
-- anti-nudity laws

It's the conservative nanny state that takes away personal responsibility and dealing with the consequences of your choices by outlawing nudity, profanity, pot, and even music.

So get of your high horse of personal responsibility until you actually believe in it like we liberals do.

Dan8267 says

It's the conservative nanny state that takes away personal responsibility and dealing with the consequences of your choices by outlawing nudity, profanity, pot, and even music.

Why can't conservatives trust women to be personally responsible for their own choices? It's mystifying, this strong-father nanny state conservatives are shoving down our throats.

Seriously: 72-hour waiting periods, mandatory counseling, introducing strict licensing requirements which limit the number of abortion providers. Conservatives think government is the solution to everything, I guess.

When I think about how many jobs are lost when a clinic closes, I wonder why the conservatives hate America.

Dan8267 says

Strategist says

Other things liberals are working on to ban:

OK, let's go over your lies one by one.

I lean liberal. I posted some of those items as sarcasm, some from the conservative point of view, and some are true.
Dan8267 says

26. Guns

This is typical conservative paranoia delusion. There are no proposed laws to ban guns or repeal the Second Amendment.

He he he. There should be. I would probably support a ban.
Liberals are working on it, even though there may not be official proposals for it.
I'll have to get back to you on the rest. My mean wife want's me to vaccum the whole house. That's another thing the liberals screwed up. Making men do women's job, when we could be doing important things like watching sports.:(

Strategist says

I lean liberal.

A true liberal doesn't "lean". I'm open to both sides of the issue, but I lean anti-slavery isn't exactly a liberal mantra.

Strategist says

Liberals are working on it

Actually, liberals can be pro-gun or anti-gun just like they can be pro-abortion or anti-abortion. In the case of guns, a liberal likes that a person has the right to arm himself in defense against other. In the case against guns, a liberal likes that a person has the right not to be shot and killed by another.

The fact remains that the Second Amendment is not a gun rights law. The Second Amendment says,

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

No where does this amendment use the word "gun". It uses the word "arms" which includes every weapon available to the U.S. federal government including tanks, land mines, ICBMs, Apache helicopters, and nuclear bombs.

If the Second Amendment were truly the law, the federal, state, and local governments could not legally hinder you from buying, transporting, or building a nuclear weapon. But try doing one of those things and see how long it takes the snipers to take you out.

The fact is that the Second Amendment has been dead since the American Civil War. And since at least WWII and the Manhattan project, acting on your Second Amendment rights would make you a terrorist who's considered so dangerous that you have NO RIGHTS.

Using the Second Amendment to justify gun possession is utter bullshit. If people have the right to bear guns than we should have a new amendment that says just that and specifies precisely where the line is drawn between what arms a civilian can possess and what he cannot.

As for the Second Amendment, it should be revoked unless the government is willing to state on the record that a person has the right to build, possess, and transport nukes.

As a liberal, I'd leave it up to an instance-runoff vote on what arms can and cannot be possessed by civilians. Seems more just than letting corrupt politicians decide. Give the population a dozen well-defined chooses and let them rank them.

One thing of remarkable insight on this thread is how petty conservative complaints are. Conservatives are bitching and moaning about limits of the serving sizes of sodas, frozen foods, and fast food culture. Liberals complaints about conservatives are genocide, slavery, world-wide pollution, police brutality, and the sexual brutalization of people. Even if conservative complaints had any legitimacy, they would pale compared to the evils done by and advocated by conservatives.

Strategist says

Dan8267 says

Strategist says

Other things liberals are working on to ban:

OK, let's go over your lies one by one.

I lean liberal. I posted some of those items as sarcasm, some from the conservative point of view, and some are true.

You guys are confusing each other with your own Bullshit.

Here I got an Idea! Why don't YOU Just tell it like you see it, and leave what "I" said to stand on its own accord with out some pompous know it all jack ass liberal leaning retard trying to re-frame it for the rest of us.

It just makes it too difficult for Dan and Marcus to keep track of who's who.

The Irony isn't lost on me though btw...

Dan8267 says

Conservatives are bitching and moaning about limits of the serving sizes of sodas, frozen foods, and fast food culture.

It's like this:

- Soda size restrictions, central banking, women choosing whom to have sex with, different incandescent bulbs, black-president deficits and possible magazine-capacity restrictions? BIG HUGE PROBLEMS COMMUNISM FASCISM ENDGAME LEFT BEHIND TURNER DIARIES OMIGOD WHERES MAH GUN?!

- Extinction of 100s of millions of species due to human stupidity? no big deal meh... we can still see them in Disney cartoons so who cares the climate is always changing.

Conservatism got much easier to handle once I accepted this.

CaptainShuddup says

You guys are confusing each other with your own Bullshit.

Honey, if you want to call bullshit on anything I've said, feel free to point out specifics. As for me disagreeing with Strategist, that happens often. Just because you want to lump us together does not mean we share the same political philosophy.

Strategist is not a liberal. And even if he were, that would not matter because liberals can disagree with each other on issues. For example, on gun control vs gun rights and on abortion, as I mentioned above.

CaptainShuddup says

In 1860, the Republican candidate, Abraham Lincoln, was elected President of the United States. He became the symbol of the Republican Party for all the generations to come.

Key word symbol. The fact is that the two parties reversed positions with Nixon's Southern Strategy in the 1950s and 1960s. All the Dixiecrats became Republicans and later Tea Party members.

Abraham Lincoln -- who by the way was no hero and has been greatly cartoonified -- would not be a republican today. Not a fat chance. Hell, he'd be kick out of the party for being a leftist loon.

Who am I goin' to believe YOU, or Google?

CaptainShuddup says

Who am I goin' to believe YOU, or Google?

Your belief in things that Google reports is highly selective.

Remember "miserable failure" returning George Bush's Whitehouse page?

http://www.youtube.com/embed/dAtteTnh9kY

Yup now it returns Obama.

CaptainShuddup says

You guys are confusing each other with your own Bullshit.

In other words I was right when I observed that you can't learn anything at this point ? OR at least not anything that contradicts any of the many lies that you believe ?

Whatever you do, don't you dare use your alleged non-retarded intellect to actually do research to try to back up your opinion that Lincoln was not a member of the more liberal and more progressive party at the time.

I know that even you know the following, but are too much of a liar (to yourself) to ever admit it. Ever since the 1960s racist whitse in the south switched from the democratic party to be republicans. This is a fact that everyone knows (look up "southern strategy").

And NO, I'm NOT SAYING ANYWHERE NEAR ALL WHITES IN THE SOUTH ARE RACIST. But it's common knowledge that if you were a white racist in the south in 1960, there was a 90% plus chance you were a democrat. Now, if you are a white racist in the south, there is a 90% plus chance you are a republican.

Again, I know that logic isn't your strong suit, so I'll repeat,

White racist in south ----> republican

is not the same as

white republican in south ------>racist

I am not implying that at all. Just stating a fact that you know to be true. Everyone knows this. Nobody denies it unless they are a total lying imbecile.

So if we know that the political parties can change that much in just 50 years (far less really - it took maybe 25 years max), then how can you be surprised about the change in 150 years ?

"That's the scariest part of all, that they actually allow you to be in a room with children... Talk about a fucked up education system in CA!!"

Don't worry. I don't deal with actual children the way I do with adult children such as yourself.

And by the way, lowering yourself to criticizing my teaching of children, or saying that I shouldn't be allowed to work with children because of my politics says FAR MORE about you than it does about me.

Dan8267 says

This is typical conservative paranoia delusion. There are no proposed laws to ban guns or repeal the Second Amendment.

Electable Democrats aren't dumb enough to try for a complete ban, although Obama was frothing at the mouth about eliminating the most popular rifle in the country and the Democrats tried federally, in California, and in other less relevant states with varying degrees of success.

After 21 years registered as an independent who voted for Obama twice that was enough to make me Republican. While I'm all for gay rights, abortion, open borders, and universal income I don't want to marry a man, can afford to fly female family members to free states or countries if they have an unwanted pregnancy, my family arrived between the 1600s and the early 1900s, and I don't need the help. I do want to own the guns of my choice without legally mandated mutilations that get in the way of legal use (for example, a welded-on muzzle brake makes a rifle ineligible for NRA/CMP competition).

Democrats like Michael Bloomberg fund anti-gun measures places outside their home states like Silicon Valley where they can win. When that schmuck bought a ban on regular capacity magazines with no grandfather clause in my town I realized that merely being Republican wasn't enough - I needed to subsidize winnable battles elsewhere.

Democrats declared war on America's 80,000,000 gun owners and it's time we stuck together and excised their scourge from our political landscape. Any time a Republican who isn't a Meg Whitman type weasel is running a winnable campaign we need to pay their way to victory until we get first-term Obama behavior or better from Democrats even when they are lame ducks.

The federal government crammed unpopular civil rights legislation down the states' throats before (with color), and can do so again (for guns).

CaptainShuddup says

Google:

In 1860, the Republican candidate, Abraham Lincoln, was elected President of the United States. He became the symbol of the Republican Party for all the generations to come.

Hey capn why didn't you include the link to the article the quote was out of? http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2010/04/08/chris-matthews-would-lincoln-be-republican-today

It's chris matthews talking about how lincoln wouldn't be welcome in the republican party today.

Don't you ever feel foolish about your posting? Nah, never happened.

Remember, kids:

1) Conservatism is never wrong. It is beyond analysis, because it is the definition of correctness and perfection. Therefore conservatism cannot fail; it can only be failed.

2) It follows that a vote for the more conservative candidate is never wrong, and that any Democrat president to follow a conservative president must be worse than the conservative president - if this is not apparent, then the definition of "worse" in the English language, as well as the definitions of "up", "down", and "turquoise" are to be changed until the facts, real or created, show that Democrat president to be worse.

This has nothing to do with liberals or Obama. This is about conservative orthodoxy and rightness. Obama must be shown to be worse than Bush, because conservatives cannot have erred by electing Bush. The end.

CaptainShuddup says

Yup now it returns Obama.

Easily disproved. The top result not returns the Wikipedia article about the Bush miserable failure result.

Any other lies of yours you would like me to disprove?

HydroCabron says

Conservatism is never wrong. It is beyond analysis, because it is the definition of correctness and perfection. Therefore conservatism cannot fail; it can only be failed.

Sounds just like a religion.

HydroCabron says

conservatives cannot have erred by electing Bush

They didn't. He wasn't elected.

Dan8267 says

HydroCabron says

conservatives cannot have erred by electing Bush

They didn't. He wasn't elected.

+1
He wasn't elected - twice.

I just wish there really was a liberal - a fearless one - in the White House. It's probably never going to happen.

Elizabeth Warren and William Black would make a good ticket.

Call it Crazy says

marcus says

And by the way, lowering yourself to criticizing my teaching of children, or saying that I shouldn't be allowed to work with children because of my politics says FAR MORE about you than it does about me.

It doesn't say anything about me.... You're the delusional, twisted one who is allowed in the same room with them... God help them!!

It says everything about you.

You might see me arguing with the Captain, or calling him an idiot for his trolls, but you don't see me calling in to question what kind of husband he is to his wife, or what kind of father he is to his children. Although I guess if I was as vile and pathetic and as tiny a hate filled little loser as you are, I would.

Call it Crazy says

Oh yeah, I can just imagine what type of absolute bullshit you're filling their heads with...

You mean like, geometry ? Calculus ? Statistics ? There's nothing subjective in these subjects, I guess unless you're a republican. I know republicans hate science and facts in general when they get in the way of their lies. I guess I shouldn't be surprised if Math is next.

Call it Crazy says

injecting your racism of Repubs

Good grief. That's poor even for you CiC.