American Politics

[kkck]

Apple doesnt have a problem settimg up shop in locations where people are making 7.25.

So? What's your point?

 

[SharkBait]

Just recently I was speaking to someone from a German manufacturing company. He told me that the main production site had been moved to Romania, they had a plant in China and they were building a huge new plant in Mexico.

And you know were most companies are NOT building their fabrics? In the US and Europe. All that regulation and government intervention in wages makes it much more convenient to build their plants somewhere else. So in the end the US just keep losing manufacturing jobs to China, Mexico and everyone else, like Trump has been saying all this time. The tendency is only going to continue. Expect to see more and more companies moving their business overseas because the anti-business climate liberals have created.



See that's the problem right there. Who on earth said that you were supposed to be able to support an entire family from a minimum wage job? Minimum wage jobs used to be a way to start gaining some experience while you work your way up, not a permanent thing, certainly not a way to support a family.

How about this for a radical suggestion: If you have a shitty, low paying job, try focusing on working your way up or getting some kind of education on the side so you can later get a better job instead of having a bunch of children that you won't even be able to feed without other people's money.

Instead, you have all these women who are unemployed or working at some low paying job and they go on to have 3 or 4 children anyway since they know the government will support them. That is extremely irresponsible and liberals just keep promoting that kind of behavior.

Under Obama, the number of people on food stamps has increased by almost 50%. There are many millions of people in the US who are literally unable to even feed themselves without government handouts. How can democrats look at this situation and think the country is going in a good direction is beyond my comprehension.

Democrats love to support people who make bad life decisions while punishing people who are successful and hardworking, so its no surprise more and more people find themselves employed but on more food stamps and govt assisstance than ever before.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 5, 2016, Original Post Date: Feb 5, 2016 ---

So? What's your point?

High tier companies will still set up shop in locations where people are making minimum wage. These people will still buy their MacBooks and iPhones and more. Since they dont have to spend much money on groceries they can go all out with wearing high tier outfits, makeup, and use high tier electronics on their fast fios internet.

 

[kkck]

High tier companies will still set up shop in locations where people are making minimum wage. These people will still buy their MacBooks and iPhones and more. Since they dont have to spend much money on groceries they can go all out with wearing high tier outfits, makeup, and use high tier electronics on their fast fios internet.

Ahh, yes, I recall reading on the new york times how people on minimum wage rode their diamond encrusted lamborghinis to buy iphones and macbooks pallets.

 

[Franckie]

Just recently I was speaking to someone from a German manufacturing company. He told me that the main production site had been moved to Romania, they had a plant in China and they were building a huge new plant in Mexico.

And you know were most companies are NOT building their fabrics? In the US and Europe. All that regulation and government intervention in wages makes it much more convenient to build their plants somewhere else. So in the end the US just keep losing manufacturing jobs to China, Mexico and everyone else, like Trump has been saying all this time. The tendency is only going to continue. Expect to see more and more companies moving their business overseas because the anti-business climate liberals have created.

http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2078121,00.html

Under Obama, the number of people on food stamps has increased by almost 50%. There are many millions of people in the US who are literally unable to even feed themselves without government handouts. How can democrats look at this situation and think the country is going in a good direction is beyond my comprehension.

Why single out food stamps? Who isn't on a government dole out these days? The vast majority of people don't care about these things. What they really cannot stand is some "loser" on a government "handout", like "lazy blacks", "mooching Latinos", or "white trash".

 

[SharkBait]

Double standards. you're willing to blast the democrats for infighting, but you do not mention anything about the republican infighting, which is way worse and pathetic. The republicans barely have middle ground or diversity either, except for Jeb not hating Muslims and Rubio being immigrant friendly.

What in fighting? Sanders and Clinton fight over who is the more "progressive' a fight over definitions. Republican candidates fight over actual issues. Trump's walls, Cruz's New York Values, people attacking the flipflopping, Carson's tithes, these are actual issues.

Immigration helps provide you cheaper labor and services. More people in the country means more money flows, unless I'm missing something.

So you want increased minimum wage, yet cheap labor and services? That seems unsustainable and odd. The cost a service technician gets per hour for servicing a clogged toilet or dry cleaning clothes will increase yet the overall price to the consumer will decrease? How?

Anyway, that also seems negative, why have more people in the country to increase money flow, when the less people there are the more money each person can actually get. Immigrants snatch and steal jobs from the hardworking actual native born american citizens. Its unfair especially to those who are unemployed. How strange it is when one goes to a chinese or other ethnic restaurant and the workers are only people who cant even speak english, these are jobs that native hard working unemployed Americans could have had instead of these immigrants.

I don't understand how anyone can say Muslims are a security liability when white people are literally committing mass shootings, from inside a theater to inside a church. From what you continually say or side-step, it's okay by you if white people commit acts of terrorism, but bad if Muslims do it. There's no inconvenience in being on camera or having a stricter security. Oddly enough, I've rarely ever had my luggage checked.

Blocking Muslims fixes nothing, especially when there has been no attempt to hijack American planes. You're statistically safer from Muslims than you are from white or black people in America. There really has been absolutely no decent argument as to why we should block Muslims from coming in. And if you actually do research, you'd find that more Americans have died at the hands of other Americans than they have from hands of Muslims in America. But of course, if republicans did research using unbiased source, they'd have no argument to most of their stupid thoughts and views.

I would prefer a world where no one committed mass shootings or other things like it. We have to start somewhere and blocking high risk groups of people at the borders makes sense, as well as building that national registry of Muslim people. Muslim people produce the more shocking and large scale attacks, sniping on interstates and roads, mass shooting at public health centers like this is a place in the middle east, bombing at marathons, plane bombings, (2) meanwhile when was the last non muslim large scale mass attack conducted? I dont see any plane bombings, snipers on interstates, shooting at public health facilities, or skyscrapers being brought down.[/quote]

I cannot identify ways that republicans have been important in my life, but I can identify ways that they have caused inconveniences and even trouble. We should deport republicans back to Europe, whichever country they came from. And if you know your history, which I doubt you do, you'd know that Muslims are among the most influential religion groups.

But one thing I also noticed seeing the candidates talk and reading/hearing the republican voters' views: republicans are extremely selfish. It's either "me me me" or "GIVE WEALTHY PEOPLE MORE MONEY AND TAKE MONEY FROM POOR PEOPLE! THEY'RE DIRT, ESPECIALLY BLACKS AND MEXICANS!"

I was sure past republicans have been vital for advancing civil rights of minorities.

Because it's none of your business what women choose to do? Abortion is bad, but again, it's not your choice, nor is it mine or even the woman's significant other. If she wants to get an abortion, she has all the right to. And if you think banning abortion will stop it, you're dumb. All it does is make abortion unsafe and unsanitary, but it won't stop it.

How isn't it her significant other's decision? They were apart of this bad lifestyle choice.

So, homosexuality and same sex marriage should be banned too because people already identify it as against the natural and religious law.

Laws can be changed.

No, it makes sense to republicans and ignorant people because the republican politicians have lied through their teeth about Planned Parenthood. Obviously you did not read the links I provided or did your research, which is understandable because it would destroy any and all arguments you and republicans have against the organization. Planned Parenthood is not socially linked with abortion, it's because of republican lies that you think so. It is also a fact that less than 5% of the services performed by Planned Parenthood are abortions, so again, how does it even come close to kind of trumping everything else that they do?

No republican deserves to have an opinion on Planned Parenthood because they either know nothing about it or lie about it. Provide me with unbiased facts that what you say about Planned Parenthood is true. And if you really do care about babies' lives, why not start with the babies that already exist, as well as the kids and adults?

I did read your links, you said they do 3% of funding to abortions which is 3% too many, any percent above 0% means they do abortions, which is why they do not need funding. The amount being used to fund planned parenthood coulld go to supporting other things that we all could benefit from, like decreased sales tax, lifting the purchasing burden off of us.

Bush apparently lied about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Proof? Ive never seen anything to suggest that there was not sufficient evidence at the time that terrorist anti us nations did not have weapons of mass destruction.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 5, 2016, Original Post Date: Feb 5, 2016 ---

We should not be the world's protector, that's just bullshit to justify exploiting the countries for its resources and leaving it in worse state. You'd rather the US spend time and money to help other countries than itself? But you don't benefit from them doing that, and it's an inconvenience because they're spending your hard earned money to kill people and steal the country's resources!

No. I like to think of it as the military help make the world a safer place. Why would I want to leave America if the world is unsafe and full of terrorists in Europe and abroad? Because I want to travel to other countries filled with nice resorts and experience other western cultures, then it is to our benefit that they spend the time to be the world's protector.

 

[Claver]

You're statistically safer from Muslims than you are from white or black people in America.

Thats is simply not true. Muslims do have a higher RATE of terrorist attacks. Of course, the total number of shootings and stuff is higher for whites but thats because there are waaayyyy more whites than muslims. But muslims are more dangerous statistically speaking. Look it up.

 

[M3J]

Just recently I was speaking to someone from a German manufacturing company. He told me that the main production site had been moved to Romania, they had a plant in China and they were building a huge new plant in Mexico.

And you know were most companies are NOT building their fabrics? In the US and Europe. All that regulation and government intervention in wages makes it much more convenient to build their plants somewhere else. So in the end the US just keep losing manufacturing jobs to China, Mexico and everyone else, like Trump has been saying all this time. The tendency is only going to continue. Expect to see more and more companies moving their business overseas because the anti-business climate liberals have created.

And? That's the company's fault for wanting to make 5 dollars or 10 yen or whatever more, not the US's fault that companies are too greedy to pay more when they can afford to. If a company claims to be about America but builds its plants and manufacturing sites in other countries despite being able to afford being in the US, then there's something fishy about said company.

See that's the problem right there. Who on earth said that you were supposed to be able to support an entire family from a minimum wage job? Minimum wage jobs used to be a way to start gaining some experience while you work your way up, not a permanent thing, certainly not a way to support a family.

How about this for a radical suggestion: If you have a shitty, low paying job, try focusing on working your way up or getting some kind of education on the side so you can later get a better job instead of having a bunch of children that you won't even be able to feed without other people's money.

Instead, you have all these women who are unemployed or working at some low paying job and they go on to have 3 or 4 children anyway since they know the government will support them. That is extremely irresponsible and liberals just keep promoting that kind of behavior.

Under Obama, the number of people on food stamps has increased by almost 50%. There are many millions of people in the US who are literally unable to even feed themselves without government handouts. How can democrats look at this situation and think the country is going in a good direction is beyond my comprehension.

And yet, given the cost of tuition, high unemployment rate, and the amount of jobs lost, it's hard to get anything better than minimum wage jobs. Doubt it's just for gaining some experience like people like to claim.

That "radical" suggestion is idiotic, and like typical republican arguments, shows ignorance. You don't think people are focusing on working their way up or want education? Education isn't cheap, and it's not like some companies or positions will promote you. Aren't there many people with bachelor's or higher who are doing minimum wage jobs, after they got laid off? I remember reading about them during Bush Administration, but I could be wrong.

Source? Because I see a lot of women juggling two to three jobs to support their family, and I know many who lament not havin a good job to give their kids better life. But anther reason why we need Planned Parenthood, and now we have proof that Planned Parenthood can help prevent women from having babies if they're not ready.

The link I provided many posts ago might explain why. I know under a republican, number of people on food stamps would increase to 75% while the wealthy get wealthier. Actually, republicans would just cut food stamps and likely give the money to the warfare and defense or to the wealthy for whatever reason.

Democrats love to support people who make bad life decisions while punishing people who are successful and hardworking, so its no surprise more and more people find themselves employed but on more food stamps and govt assisstance than ever before.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 5, 2016, Original Post Date: Feb 5, 2016 ---

High tier companies will still set up shop in locations where people are making minimum wage. These people will still buy their MacBooks and iPhones and more. Since they dont have to spend much money on groceries they can go all out with wearing high tier outfits, makeup, and use high tier electronics on their fast fios internet.

Because supporting people can help them become successful and contribute to society. I don't see what's wrong with punishing people who became successful through dubious means, like Bernie Madoff. Or how successful and hardworking people get punished.

Yes, because they don't have to pay rent, utilities, or transportation costs. Typical republican ignorance at its finest. Make the poor people look lazy or wanting handouts while excusing the wealthy who want to hold on to their money and make more money in any way possible.

Wait, can it be possible that these "high tier outfits, makeup, and electronics" are because they bought cheap products or products on sale, instead of expensive ones? Christ, it's like you've never been out in the real world or experienced anything, and you're just saying whatever republican thoughts you were brainwashed with.

What in fighting? Sanders and Clinton fight over who is the more "progressive' a fight over definitions. Republican candidates fight over actual issues. Trump's walls, Cruz's New York Values, people attacking the flipflopping, Carson's tithes, these are actual issues.

So basically, it's okay for republicans to fight, no matter how stupid their squabbles are, but democrats aren't allowed to fight. Gotcha.

So you want increased minimum wage, yet cheap labor and services? That seems unsustainable and odd. The cost a service technician gets per hour for servicing a clogged toilet or dry cleaning clothes will increase yet the overall price to the consumer will decrease? How?

Anyway, that also seems negative, why have more people in the country to increase money flow, when the less people there are the more money each person can actually get. Immigrants snatch and steal jobs from the hardworking actual native born american citizens. Its unfair especially to those who are unemployed. How strange it is when one goes to a chinese or other ethnic restaurant and the workers are only people who cant even speak english, these are jobs that native hard working unemployed Americans could have had instead of these immigrants.

Isn't that what immigrants or illegal immigrants offer? Doing jobs no one else would do at a cheap price just to make a living. Also, not what I said, as the consumers are not employers, they are consumers paying for services.

If they're as hardworking as you say they are who can speak English well, then how are their jobs taken? Wouldn't employers want to hire English-speaking people who work hard over immigrants? Hmm, maybe they're not as hardworkin as you claim? Maybe immigrants work harder? Again, it's dumb to accuse immigrants of "stealing" jobs when the employers don't have to give them jobs in the first place.

Not strange to see a Chinese person working at a Chinese restaurant. I don't get how that's strange, but republican logic.

I would prefer a world where no one committed mass shootings or other things like it. We have to start somewhere and blocking high risk groups of people at the borders makes sense, as well as building that national registry of Muslim people. Muslim people produce the more shocking and large scale attacks, sniping on interstates and roads, mass shooting at public health centers like this is a place in the middle east, bombing at marathons, plane bombings, (2) meanwhile when was the last non muslim large scale mass attack conducted? I dont see any plane bombings, snipers on interstates, shooting at public health facilities, or skyscrapers being brought down.

Given your argument, it seems like you don't care if white people committed murders, but you're against Muslims doing such thing.

It makes no sense nor does it make sense to build a registry of Muslim people. I don't get why people want the country to be the next Hitler/Nazi with that shit. All blocking Muslims and making a registry for them do is just alienate the Muslims and make them hate the US. I'm not sure you want that.

Seems one sniper joined the Nation of Islam, which is apparently about African Americans, not necessarily Muslims from Middle East. The other suspect did not seem to be a Muslim or make his name look more Islamic, like John Allen Muhammad did. Marathons? You mean one marathon, the Boston marathon.

That's because you don't read or watch the news that's not Fox News or republican biased. A white man killed three Muslims for absolutely no reason; the very same Muslims who contributed to society and helped people. A non-Muslim shot at people inside a theater. Two non-Muslims carried out the Columbine High School massacre. Non-Muslims are attacking Planned Parenthood centers, and one of them shot up a center. A non-Muslim carried out Virginia Tech shooting. A non-Muslim killed innocent kids at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

Plenty of proof non-Muslims are just as violent and dangerous as Muslims, if not more. And I'm pretty sure there are more Muslim victims from attacks by Islamist people than there are non-Muslim victims. Makes more sense to do something about these non-Muslims first before focusing on Muslims who have taken less American lives. Problem is, people are too blind and ignorant to see it.

I was sure past republicans have been vital for advancing civil rights of minorities.




How isn't it her significant other's decision? They were apart of this bad lifestyle choice.



Laws can be changed.

And I was sure Muslims have played a huge role in shaping the modern world.

You calling it "bad lifestyle choice" just makes you look silly
And because it's not his or her body that's affected, it's the pregnant woman's. She's the one who has to carry the baby around for nine months, hence her choice. Why should you get a choice over what a woman wants to do when you're not affected? If you truly care about the baby's life, then you should support food stamps and "handouts" that help support the baby instead of complaining how democrats give families free handouts.

Hell, from your logic, male homosexuality is a bad lifestyle choice because it leads to males getting AIDS or HIV because they make dumb decisions. Therefore homosexuality and same sex marriage should be banned!

Nope, it can't. Not Christian laws, and Christians say homosexuality is bad. You're going to hell. Also, if you actually did do research/fact checking, you'd see homosexuality is actually natural as there are animals who are homosexuals.

I did read your links, you said they do 3% of funding to abortions which is 3% too many, any percent above 0% means they do abortions, which is why they do not need funding. The amount being used to fund planned parenthood coulld go to supporting other things that we all could benefit from, like decreased sales tax, lifting the purchasing burden off of us.





Proof? Ive never seen anything to suggest that there was not sufficient evidence at the time that terrorist anti us nations did not have weapons of mass destruction.

No, if you read my links, you'd see why they need funding, and what they have to offer. There is also proof that thanks to Texas defunding Planned Parenthood, more low-income women have become pregnant. Fundin Planned Parenthood does benefit everyone, less children in the country means less tax burden. You should be happy! Again, there really is no good argument as to why Planned Parenthood should be defunded other than "waah abortions are no-no!" even though they do 3% of abortions. And no, I never said they do 3% of fundin to abortions, and I don't understand how or where you got that from, especially if you read my link. Hell, I've even said multiple times that there is proof NO tax money whatsoever goes into abortion.

Also, not sure if you should have an opinion on abortion if you're against refugee and Muslim kids coming in this country for safety and asylum.

lololol you actually think it would decrease sales tax? Why would the states want to decrease sales tax?


Doesn't seem like you read any of my links, so I won't bother with proof. But the research I did indicates that Bush Administration was not able to find any weapons of mass destruction, but years later reports leaked that there were old weapons. The Bush defenders are up in a tit about it because they think it proves Bush right, which it doesn't unless he knew about the old weapons.

No. I like to think of it as the military help make the world a safer place. Why would I want to leave America if the world is unsafe and full of terrorists in Europe and abroad? Because I want to travel to other countries filled with nice resorts and experience other western cultures, then it is to our benefit that they spend the time to be the world's protector.

Not really, it doesn't. Not according to a lot of people whose country houses military. I say a lot instead of most or all because some people have said the soldiers helped them and stuff. But ultimately, many say no.

Not really, no. Why should we waste resources and money to be the world's protector when they should protect themselves? Why should you be allowed in other countries? What if you're a risk to a country's wellbeing? I mean, I'm sure a British would not want an American who supports gun freedom in their country, many of them would say they'd be scared you'd start shooting out of nowhere. Lot of these jerks joke about or casually mention school shootings as if it's funny to bring up tragedies. I'm sure they'd feel uncomfortable with you there. They definitely feel uncomfortable with Trump, who has proven he'd be a horrible president when it comes to international relations.

Thats is simply not true. Muslims do have a higher RATE of terrorist attacks. Of course, the total number of shootings and stuff is higher for whites but thats because there are waaayyyy more whites than muslims. But muslims are more dangerous statistically speaking. Look it up.

Proof? Source? I'm not gonna look it up when there is a history of white people and/or non-Muslims being far more dangerous in America. I mean, the US has had no more than 10 terrorist attacks by "Muslims" since 9/11, while there have been over 100 shootings by non-Muslims. If you considered worldwide, then you might have an argument.

 

[SharkBait]

The link I provided many posts ago might explain why. I know under a republican, number of people on food stamps would increase to 75% while the wealthy get wealthier. Actually, republicans would just cut food stamps and likely give the money to the warfare and defense or to the wealthy for whatever reason.

I think thats very doubtful. I think the rules for being able to get food stamps and such aid would be put more in line with the current economic forces at work and we would see less people on them than during Obama's tyrannical reign. The program would be streamlined to assist the most marginalized people, the ones who need it most. I dont think the monetary savings would actually be used.

Because supporting people can help them become successful and contribute to society. I don't see what's wrong with punishing people who became successful through dubious means, like Bernie Madoff. Or how successful and hardworking people get punished.

Yes, because they don't have to pay rent, utilities, or transportation costs. Typical republican ignorance at its finest. Make the poor people look lazy or wanting handouts while excusing the wealthy who want to hold on to their money and make more money in any way possible.

Wait, can it be possible that these "high tier outfits, makeup, and electronics" are because they bought cheap products or products on sale, instead of expensive ones? Christ, it's like you've never been out in the real world or experienced anything, and you're just saying whatever republican thoughts you were brainwashed with.

If someone is being supported for their bad lifestyle, why would they contribute to society? Ive already provide examples of how people in these bad lifestyle low to no income settings oftentimes have iPhones, pricey cable packages, HDTV's, pricey video game systems, fancy clothes, makeup, and high tier fashion and electronics. People are mooching off the system which is justifying and enabling their bad lifestyle decisions. You never see poor or badly dressed people in the Chicago, Baltimore, NYC, or other areas with very high income disparity levels apart from the actually homeless people.

Meanwhile the hardworking people breaking their backs everyday toiling away in their 40-60hr a week jobs with tons of student debt behind them are having to face high tax burden, stress and depression, and job insecurity, while those other folks are being supported by these people. Its not right and it shows that if you are successful you will get punished. Its unfair that I have to part with more money than I need to while these people get more benefits from the government than I and others get. We Americans live in a very unfair world.

Maybe immigrants work harder? Again, it's dumb to accuse immigrants of "stealing" jobs when the employers don't have to give them jobs in the first place.

Not strange to see a Chinese person working at a Chinese restaurant. I don't get how that's strange, but republican logic.

American laws prevent employers from discriminating. The problem is the number of immigrants are vastly outnumbering true Americans from applying, flooding the system and preventing real American's from having these jobs. Its not right and not fair.

Additionally a Chinese place full of non english speaking Chinese people is not right either, why are there never actual American's working there? Bostonians to Floridian's are having waitress and waiter jobs snatched from them left and right, cause great disparity at restaurants.

It makes no sense nor does it make sense to build a registry of Muslim people. I don't get why people want the country to be the next Hitler/Nazi with that shit. All blocking Muslims and making a registry for them do is just alienate the Muslims and make them hate the US. I'm not sure you want that.

Makes more sense to do something about these non-Muslims first before focusing on Muslims who have taken less American lives. Problem is, people are too blind and ignorant to see it.

A registry would be harmless though. It would be a quick way to have homes and phones hardwired into our high capacity intelligence gathering measures that some of our next candidates hope to have in play. I think we could also track these folks and know their purchases to flag them when guns and materials to make explosions are bought. Our country would be really safe.

I don't know what you would propose to do to decrease these massacres. There are more non-muslims than there are muslim people so I think you would have an issue. I think with Muslim you could at least expand to focusing on muslims as well as nearMuslim people.

And because it's not his or her body that's affected, it's the pregnant woman's. She's the one who has to carry the baby around for nine months, hence her choice. Why should you get a choice over what a woman wants to do when you're not affected? If you truly care about the baby's life, then you should support food stamps and "handouts" that help support the baby instead of complaining how democrats give families free handouts.

Hell, from your logic, male homosexuality is a bad lifestyle choice because it leads to males getting AIDS or HIV because they make dumb decisions. Therefore homosexuality and same sex marriage should be banned!

Nope, it can't. Not Christian laws, and Christians say homosexuality is bad. You're going to hell. Also, if you actually did do research/fact checking, you'd see homosexuality is actually natural as there are animals who are homosexuals.

Why would someone who is making the choice to be pregnant get a handout? I could see the usual getting general discounts for food [WIC] but anything more is excessive. Again getting pregnant is a lifestyle choice and if one is truly faced with income insecurity than getting pregnant is a bad lifestyle choice. One has to wonder why a service like "planned parenthood" isnt actually helping people plan their parenthood, another reason why this funding for this program needs to end.

Im very offended by those homosexuality comments. please apologize. I dont think there is any bad lifestyle choice with homosexuality. If the same rules with marriage applied and people waited until they were financial secure, and lived healthy clean wholesome lives, then even people who are homosexual would be able to avoid making a bad lifestyle choice and have a wonderful sex life and a wonderful marriage.

What Christian law prohibits homosexuality? It is generally understood in todays times that the laws of the old testament do not apply to today and that the laws of the bible are heavily dependent upon social cues.

Doesn't seem like you read any of my links, so I won't bother with proof. But the research I did indicates that Bush Administration was not able to find any weapons of mass destruction, but years later reports leaked that there were old weapons. The Bush defenders are up in a tit about it because they think it proves Bush right, which it doesn't unless he knew about the old weapons.

Meaning that Bush has kept us much safer than Mr. Obama and the war on terror was very justified.

Also, not sure if you should have an opinion on abortion if you're against refugee and Muslim kids coming in this country for safety and asylum.

Fiscally conservative spending would dictate that we would need to defund planned parenthood and avoiding taking refugees into the country. All of these are huge black holes for money that provide little to no economic benefit in return. And why should Muslim kids enter the country, arent kids easily radicalized and used as bombers? Allowing them in leads to way too many security liabilities.

Do you interact with many people who are muslim, are immigrants, or are both? Do you ever feel frightened? Ive had roommates who were Muslims, and were immigrants, as well as another immigrant roommate, but Ive sadly fell away from talking with them. Only past roommate I talk to was partially Mexican and American. In any case, their very progressive and liberal comments have made me feel frightened.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 7, 2016, Original Post Date: Feb 7, 2016 ---

Rubio hitting it out the ball park all night long. He is by far the clear winner.

 

[M3J]

I think thats very doubtful. I think the rules for being able to get food stamps and such aid would be put more in line with the current economic forces at work and we would see less people on them than during Obama's tyrannical reign. The program would be streamlined to assist the most marginalized people, the ones who need it most. I dont think the monetary savings would actually be used.

Pretty sure republicans would try to get rid of food stamps altogether and cite "lazy people depending on government." Then they'd use the money they saved on warfare and defense or give it to the wealthy somehow.

If someone is being supported for their bad lifestyle, why would they contribute to society? Ive already provide examples of how people in these bad lifestyle low to no income settings oftentimes have iPhones, pricey cable packages, HDTV's, pricey video game systems, fancy clothes, makeup, and high tier fashion and electronics. People are mooching off the system which is justifying and enabling their bad lifestyle decisions. You never see poor or badly dressed people in the Chicago, Baltimore, NYC, or other areas with very high income disparity levels apart from the actually homeless people.

Meanwhile the hardworking people breaking their backs everyday toiling away in their 40-60hr a week jobs with tons of student debt behind them are having to face high tax burden, stress and depression, and job insecurity, while those other folks are being supported by these people. Its not right and it shows that if you are successful you will get punished. Its unfair that I have to part with more money than I need to while these people get more benefits from the government than I and others get. We Americans live in a very unfair world.

No, you haven't provided any examples, you only shared what you thought was true. Have you even taken into account sales, thrift shops, discounts, and whatever else? I've been around people with low income, and rarely any of them have iPhones, HDTV, fancy clothes or any other "high tier fashion and electronics." Sounds like the typical republican bullshit you hear to argue against food stamps and welfare. I did not know it is a bad lifestyle decision to be born in a bad area and be raised in a bad area where there's rarely any chance for these people to get past the negatives. Have you even lived in areas like these? I highly doubt it, with the way you're talking.

How do they get more benefits from the government? They can't afford medium-priced items, they can't go on vacations, and they can't do anything but the basics. Pretty sure most of these people would rather have a job than live on welfare, but given how royally Bush screwed up, it's harder to find jobs. The student debt is the school's fault, and if I recall, Obama wants to ease that burden. Yet, republicans seem to be against that, again.

Well, if you really had an issue with money and all, you'd support reducing the immense budget for warfare and defense and using the difference to help the society out. I'm sure the difference can help alleviate the burden for "hardworking" people. Though to be honest, I'm still irked that an illegal immigrant (or son of illegal immigrants?) got a scholarship to a school.

American laws prevent employers from discriminating. The problem is the number of immigrants are vastly outnumbering true Americans from applying, flooding the system and preventing real American's from having these jobs. Its not right and not fair.

Additionally a Chinese place full of non english speaking Chinese people is not right either, why are there never actual American's working there? Bostonians to Floridian's are having waitress and waiter jobs snatched from them left and right, cause great disparity at restaurants.

No, it prevents them from openly discriminating. They can say no to you because you don't meet the qualifications, when the truth is because they're homophobic. It also doesn't prevent them from paying less wage to women, less to minorities, and even less to minority women, apparently. I highly doubt that's the problem, but feel free to provide proof.

I'd say nepotism is part of the reason why. If a Chinese restaurant is owned by a Chinese, he/she is more likely to hire another Chinese, if not family. But I don't see how it's not right for a Chinese to work at a Chinese restaurant or a Mexican to work at a Mexican restaurant. I've seen plenty of Americans working at other restaurants though. And how many of the Americans really apply to work at these ethnic restaurants? You can't cry foul if virtually no Americans apply, or if it's very rare to see them working at ethnic restaurants when rarely any apply.

Do you have any proof of this, or are you basing this on what incompetent, angry Americans are telling you?

A registry would be harmless though. It would be a quick way to have homes and phones hardwired into our high capacity intelligence gathering measures that some of our next candidates hope to have in play. I think we could also track these folks and know their purchases to flag them when guns and materials to make explosions are bought. Our country would be really safe.

I don't know what you would propose to do to decrease these massacres. There are more non-muslims than there are muslim people so I think you would have an issue. I think with Muslim you could at least expand to focusing on muslims as well as nearMuslim people.

Registry should apply to everyone in the country, not just Muslims. Our country would not be safe because there would be a way to bypass this invasion of privacy. Even if you focus on teh Muslims, there won't be any change to the danger because it'll still give the Americans free reins to buy weapons and shoot people. Once again, proving that non-Muslims are far more dangerous than Muslims. I also don't get how you keep harping on about rights and freedom, but you have no problem with infringing on Muslims' rights and freedom.

Stricter gun control like better background checking, making sure people with history of violence don't get guns, and making sure households containing at least one person with mental illness or substance abuse can't get guns. Doesn't change the fact that non-Muslims are far more problematic than Muslims, given they have committed over 100 attacks since 9/11 as opposed to the Muslims's 10 attacks, max. Research said 6.

Besides, we're well protected from Muslims anyway. If we weren't, there'd probably be at least ten attacks, though still fewer than non-Muslims. Oddly enough, no republican points out that the country is in more danger from non-Muslims who have committed more attacks, or that the Muslims make up the majority of victims at the hands of extremists. So not only do the republicans lie, they also omit facts or twist facts around. I have no idea why you still support them, or why anyone supports them, but the republican candidates likely rely on their voters' ignorance and fears. A republican candidate's greatest fear is likely a republican fact checking anything they say.

But amusing to see people be proven wrong when they claim Muslims are more dangerous or commit more violent acts than non-Muslims in America.

Why would someone who is making the choice to be pregnant get a handout? I could see the usual getting general discounts for food [WIC] but anything more is excessive. Again getting pregnant is a lifestyle choice and if one is truly faced with income insecurity than getting pregnant is a bad lifestyle choice. One has to wonder why a service like "planned parenthood" isnt actually helping people plan their parenthood, another reason why this funding for this program needs to end.

Getting pregnant isn't necessarily a lifestyle choice. Even married couples with financial stability can accidentally get pregnant. I highly doubt many women who are poor want to get pregnant, which is another reason why abortion is good. The less children there are out there born to low income women, the less taxes you'll pay, and less will be spent on supporting such women and children.

You and other republicans don't deserve to have opinions on Planned Parenthood. Seeing your views of the organization proves you're all ignorant to what it does, and you've never even used it or talked to anyone who have used its services. I don't know about others, but chances are you've been lied to about Planned Parenthood, and you're believing whatever lies republicans tell you as they know you won't fact check anything. I'd rather have Planned Parenthood existing and helping. If people were really pro-life, then they would be against guns, support refugees and immigrants seeking asylum and safety here, and support welfare for kids, babies, and mothers instead of shaming them.

Im very offended by those homosexuality comments. please apologize. I dont think there is any bad lifestyle choice with homosexuality. If the same rules with marriage applied and people waited until they were financial secure, and lived healthy clean wholesome lives, then even people who are homosexual would be able to avoid making a bad lifestyle choice and have a wonderful sex life and a wonderful marriage.

What Christian law prohibits homosexuality? It is generally understood in todays times that the laws of the old testament do not apply to today and that the laws of the bible are heavily dependent upon social cues.

I'm very offended by your lack of understanding of Planned Parenthood, please apologize.

How is there no bad lifestyle choice with homosexuality? If gay or bisexual men have sex, they're more likely to get AIDS or HIV, which could be spread to other people, especially by bisexuals. Just as getting pregnant is a bad lifestyle choice, so is homosexuality. I've seen homosexual men go to parties, get drunk, go crazy, and I've heard of them having sex. Bad lifestyle choice because they're not in a relationship and are even more likely to contract HIV or AIDS.

If you want an apology, go ask the politicians to apologize. The republican candidates are the ones against same sex marriage, and most even vow to reverse the decision and ban same sex marriage. I see nothing wrong with same sex marriage, just as I see nothing wrong with Planned Parenthood or giving women the choice to get abortion or not (I see abortion as wrong though). Unfortunately, the people you side with see plenty wrong.

The Bible, apparently. It still doesn't stop people from citing the Bible when they explain why they're against homosexuality. Do you not know who Kim Davies is? Mike Huckabee? Did you not hear how Trump will reverse the decision to legalize same sex marriage? Rubio seems to be against same sex marriage. Few people have refused to provide services to same sex couples, whether marrying them or selling products. Plenty of people cite the Bible as the reason for them being against homosexuality or same sex marriage. But then again, I'm not sure if you wholeheartedly support same sex marriage despite your claims.

Pretty sure you could get tons of examples through Google. Just another reason why religion and politics should stay far away from each other.

Meaning that Bush has kept us much safer than Mr. Obama and the war on terror was very justified.

Fiscally conservative spending would dictate that we would need to defund planned parenthood and avoiding taking refugees into the country. All of these are huge black holes for money that provide little to no economic benefit in return. And why should Muslim kids enter the country, arent kids easily radicalized and used as bombers? Allowing them in leads to way too many security liabilities.

Do you interact with many people who are muslim, are immigrants, or are both? Do you ever feel frightened? Ive had roommates who were Muslims, and were immigrants, as well as another immigrant roommate, but Ive sadly fell away from talking with them. Only past roommate I talk to was partially Mexican and American. In any case, their very progressive and liberal comments have made me feel frightened.

Again, any proof of this? If Bush knew about 9/11, he caused countless of deaths. He also got lot of soldiers and civilians killed by waging wars in Middle East. The war on terror so far does not seem to be justified.

Common sense dictates funding Planned Parenthood help us because more kids to support means more taxes that goes to them. I think someone in this thread pointed that out. Funding billions of dollars into defense and warfare is far worse of a black hole than funding Planned Parenthood or taking refugees into the country.

Er, not really. If kids have parents who love them and are responsible parents, then these kids aren't goin to be radicalized. Preventing these kids from seeking safety will radicalize them though, as they would experience bad life. Apparently, that's why the "interstate" shootings happened. The shooter wanted to make it easier to radicalize kids and turn them into shooters by shooting the adults, if I recall. And again, do you have proof for these "security liabilities"? Most of the crap republicans say usually don't have any proof or anything to back it up other than racism or prejudice.

Also, hypocrisy from someone who claims fetuses have a right to live, but doesn't want to afford children the same right.

Yes I do, and I have not felt frightened by them. Why do you think I'm not a racist or prejudiced against immigrants or Muslims? None of the Muslims I've talked to have been in any way bad or dangerous, they have all been friendly and good people. better than many non-Muslims, I should say, who have been rude, broken rules, and even got violent. I've talked to homosexuals and have homosexual and bisexual friends, and they're good people. I've talked to many different types of people, so I can relate to them pretty well and understand them.

I'm not shocked. Anything good or beneficial would frighten a conservative or a republican, especially when they don't stand to benefit from anything. I'm more frightened by the fact that republicans want to take away people's freedom and rights while widenin the class gap, making the wealthy wealthier and the middle class and below poorer. I'm frightened at how easily republican voters believe the lies and deception by republicans, especially the candidates, and how the republican candidates freely lie and deceit people without an ounce of remorse or moral. I'm frightened at how republicans are against Planned Parenthood and refuse to see that it's about helpin people.

I'm frightened to watch a movie in theater, go to a mall, visit NYC, or even drive because of non-Muslim shooters. I'm frightened that people want to spend even more money on warfare and defense unnecessarily. I'm frightened that blocking Muslims and discriminating against them will turn even more Muslims against the West and make them want to attack us. I'm frightened that homosexuals, bisexuals, and transgenders get killed just because of dumbfucks who don't realize that not being straight is just as normal as being straight. I'm frightened that you're not frightened that republicans are frightened of homosexuals just as you're frightened of people who are liberal, progressive, or want the country to socially and economically improve.


Interestingly, researching has showed me this: http://securitydata.newamerica.net/extremists/deadly-attacks.html more people killed from far right wing attacks than from terrorist attacks, but I'm sure there are some attacks missing from far right wings, like Hicks killing three teenagers.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 7, 2016, Original Post Date: Feb 7, 2016 ---

Funnily, Rubio has been criticized on social media. He's an absolute dumbass just for what he said about Obama visiting a mosque, and now callin democrats "extremists" for supporting women's choice.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 7, 2016 ---

Seems like Rubio didn't do as well as you claim: http://www.businessinsider.com/marco-rubio-gop-debate-christie-new-hampshire-2016-2

 

[Claver]

Interestingly, researching has showed me this: http://securitydata.newamerica.net/extremists/deadly-attacks.html more people killed from far right wing attacks than from terrorist attacks, but I'm sure there are some attacks missing from far right wings, like Hicks killing three teenagers.

Even your own source completely contradicts your point.

Yes, right wingers have killed more people TOTAL than muslims. However, muslims have a much, much smaller share of the population. It means statistically muslims are more dangerous. Did you even check your own link.

Stricter gun control like better background checking, making sure people with history of violence don't get guns, and making sure households containing at least one person with mental illness or substance abuse can't get guns.

So if for example one of your kids had some drug problems at some point in their life it means all the persons in the house now lose the right to defend themselves? Great.

If I lived in America I would be seriously stocking on guns and ammo right now. You will need it when the federal government goes bankrupt and the entire economy collapses, which is only a matter of time at this point. What do you think those 50 million people who can't even feed themselves without the government are going to do. Starve quietly?

 

[SharkBait]

Do you have any proof of this, or are you basing this on what incompetent, angry Americans are telling you?

Do you never watch the interviews of real americans with real problems? Immigrants stealing their work is a real issue and it makes me all emotional seeing these people having to struggle to get by because someone snatched their opportunity.

Registry should apply to everyone in the country, not just Muslims. Our country would not be safe because there would be a way to bypass this invasion of privacy. Even if you focus on teh Muslims, there won't be any change to the danger because it'll still give the Americans free reins to buy weapons and shoot people. Once again, proving that non-Muslims are far more dangerous than Muslims. I also don't get how you keep harping on about rights and freedom, but you have no problem with infringing on Muslims' rights and freedom.

Ill concede on this point, since bypassing it could exist and we dont want to enrage Muslims more than they already are. The apocalyptic evil doers do not need any more reason to launch targeted home grown attacks on our soil.

We're a nation that was founded on Christianity so I think its only right that non Christian religions receive less rights than Christian ones.

Getting pregnant isn't necessarily a lifestyle choice. Even married couples with financial stability can accidentally get pregnant. I highly doubt many women who are poor want to get pregnant, which is another reason why abortion is good. The less children there are out there born to low income women, the less taxes you'll pay, and less will be spent on supporting such women and children.

How do high school students, dropouts, and low income people end up with a baby or more than one baby? I doubt there are these many accidents happening. If one gets pregnant then the baby should be born. Their friends and family can support them.

You continue to say things that make me think youre secretly a Chris Christie supporter though

You and other republicans don't deserve to have opinions on Planned Parenthood.

We do. Any private entity that receives public funding ought not do Abortions because it violates the rights promised to humans from the government. Im sorry but females just do not have a right over the babies they are carrying to end its right.

Stricter gun control like better background checking, making sure people with history of violence don't get guns, and making sure households containing at least one person with mental illness or substance abuse can't get guns.

Those are reasonable measures, but I think the last one is problematic. I dont see why someone else inhibits one from buying a gun. They just have to keep the gun in a safe location.

Yes I do, and I have not felt frightened by them. Why do you think I'm not a racist or prejudiced against immigrants or Muslims? None of the Muslims I've talked to have been in any way bad or dangerous, they have all been friendly and good people. better than many non-Muslims, I should say, who have been rude, broken rules, and even got violent. I've talked to homosexuals and have homosexual and bisexual friends, and they're good people. I've talked to many different types of people, so I can relate to them pretty well and understand them.

Isnt that what the people said of the muslim workers who shot up the healthcare facility? They just went loco one day.

You have been discriminated against? Thats unfortunate but I have too, its a sad world when some non muslims are rude in America.

 

[M3J]

Even your own source completely contradicts your point.

Yes, right wingers have killed more people TOTAL than muslims. However, muslims have a much, much smaller share of the population. It means statistically muslims are more dangerous. Did you even check your own link.



So if for example one of your kids had some drug problems at some point in their life it means all the persons in the house now lose the right to defend themselves? Great.

If I lived in America I would be seriously stocking on guns and ammo right now. You will need it when the federal government goes bankrupt and the entire economy collapses, which is only a matter of time at this point. What do you think those 50 million people who can't even feed themselves without the government are going to do. Starve quietly?

How does it contradict my point? It shows jihadists have killed fewer people than right wingers in America. Where did you even get that from from my link?

Or, it means all the person will be safer from my kid who might shoot one of us for money or drugs. or that other people will be safe from my kid who wants to use a gun to get money or drugs.

Yes because gun wars are always fun!

We're a nation that was founded on Christianity so I think its only right that non Christian religions receive less rights than Christian ones.

Apparently not http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/americas-true-history-of-religious-tolerance-61312684/?no-ist

Since Christianity seems to be the basis of the nation, you support homosexuals having less rights than heterosexuals as Christians look down on homosexuality and consider it a sin. If we take Christianity as law, then homosexuals and colored people from black people to yellow should receive less rights than white Christians who are heterosexuals.

I am disgusted. Everyone deserves to have equal rights no matter what sexual orientation, religion, race, or ethnicity. This is another reason why republican candidates do not deserve votes. Another hypocrisy from you republicans - argue about freedom and rights, but take away freedom and rights from people except your group - the wealthy, white Christian males.

You continue to say things that make me think youre secretly a Chris Christie supporter though

Chris Christie is a piece of shit who should hang himself in shame for his dirty politicking and abuse of power. He's an embarrassment to my state. I remember him saying very few things I agree with, but it'll never excuse how he and/or his aides caused a traffic jam on a bridge out of revenge, or how he treats the teachers.

We do. Any private entity that receives public funding ought not do Abortions because it violates the rights promised to humans from the government. Im sorry but females just do not have a right over the babies they are carrying to end its right.

yes they do, and they have a right over their body. if you want the baby to grow up hated or have a miserable life, then that's your issue. But I bet you don't give a shit about the life after it's born, and it seems like I'm right with your views on allowing refugee children to come here.

Isnt that what the people said of the muslim workers who shot up the healthcare facility? They just went loco one day.

You have been discriminated against? Thats unfortunate but I have too, its a sad world when some non muslims are rude in America.

So far, no Muslim I know went loco, shockingly.

Most non-Muslims seem to be rude in America. one old lady asked if I was an Arab, and when I said no, she kept saying I am an Arab. That was a weird experience. I think she was white, but white skin doesn't necessarily mean white race. interestingly, a republican Indian "friend" (India Indian) accused me of being "gay" or called me "gay" because I defended homosexuals, especially when he was mad over the backlash Firefox got. Another reason dislike republicans, and another reason to question why you wholeheartedly support republicans when they'd probably put you to death.

If Bernie didn't care about rights and freedom of people, I wouldn't even bother to vote. He's the only candidate I think is the lesser evil and have any iota of respect for. If Trump wasn't a racist, misogynist piece of prejudiced shit, he'd also probably have my respect.

 

[Claver]

How does it contradict my point? It shows jihadists have killed fewer people than right wingers in America. Where did you even get that from from my link?

Because the TOTAL number of jihadist is far far smaller compared to the TOTAL number of right wingers. But the total number of people killed is not much smaller, is only slightly smaller.

It means statistically (compared to their share of the population) jihadist are far more dangerous than any other group.

Or, it means all the person will be safer from my kid who might shoot one of us for money or drugs.

Oh yeah, banning guns totally keep people safe. Like it did in Paris...

Oh wait, it doesn't. Disarming the population only makes good people more vulnerable against terrorist and criminals. Look at Paris how it only took 3 terrorists to keep over a hundred people hostage for about two hours.

 

[Franckie]

Oh wait, it doesn't. Disarming the population only makes good people more vulnerable against terrorist and criminals. Look at Paris how it only took 3 terrorists to keep over a hundred people hostage for about two hours.

Quit making things up. Arming an entire population only serves to increase the amount of deaths from suicides and shootings by making it too easy for people like domestic abusers to get a hold of guns.

 

[M3J]

Because the TOTAL number of jihadist is far far smaller compared to the TOTAL number of right wingers. But the total number of people killed is not much smaller, is only slightly smaller.

It means statistically (compared to their share of the population) jihadist are far more dangerous than any other group.



Oh yeah, banning guns totally keep people safe. Like it did in Paris...

Oh wait, it doesn't. Disarming the population only makes good people more vulnerable against terrorist and criminals. Look at Paris how it only took 3 terrorists to keep over a hundred people hostage for about two hours.

You can't even answer how my link contradicts me. And according to that site, there were more jihadists than there were right wingers. But you don't seem to live in America, so I don't think your opinions matter at all.

And in the meanwhile, we have mass shootings and high gun violence where more people have died from guns than they have from terrorist attacks. Plus, what's to stop them from using bombs? Ironically, republicans and Obama critics are unhappy at how Obama has made US look bad, but they seem to ignore the world criticizing the US for loving guns too much and allowing gun violence to run rampant.

 

[kkck]

Obama simply hasn't made the US look bad... obama is at least reasonably popular among US allies. Sure, US enemies can and do say whatever they want about the US and obama but being fair that is never going to change regardless of who is president. Just look at every other president the US has ever had. Which has ever been immune to insults from enemies? The idea that that can be different is asinine.

 

[SharkBait]

Since Christianity seems to be the basis of the nation, you support homosexuals having less rights than heterosexuals as Christians look down on homosexuality and consider it a sin. If we take Christianity as law, then homosexuals and colored people from black people to yellow should receive less rights than white Christians who are heterosexuals.

I am disgusted. Everyone deserves to have equal rights no matter what sexual orientation, religion, race, or ethnicity. This is another reason why republican candidates do not deserve votes. Another hypocrisy from you republicans - argue about freedom and rights, but take away freedom and rights from people except your group - the wealthy, white Christian males.

If tolerance is practiced and viewing Christianity thinking in the lens of modern society then I do not think what is taught would put the rights of people based on race or ethnicity or orientation above or under others. In any case this is a nation founded on Christian thinking so I dont think its unexpected or beyond belief to think or see that Muslims would face scrutiny for practicing extremism on our soils and combined with the security liability, it is why I would see the registry and blocking of their entry as something that could be pursued, if the caveat of increasing extremism could be decreased.

I do not think the republican idea at its core is only for the wealthy white male, Im not white afterall. Maybe if one is an extremist I guess. I just think the democrats forsake the idea of empowering the self and getting rewarder is ditched for the democratic thinking of punishing the successful to take care of the lazy and also proposing tons of legislature that goes against basic truths.

yes they do, and they have a right over their body. if you want the baby to grow up hated or have a miserable life, then that's your issue. But I bet you don't give a shit about the life after it's born, and it seems like I'm right with your views on allowing refugee children to come here.

I think this is where we defer. Since every child gets to go to free public school and the current system rewards people who are in poor financial situations (and that rewards for people who do well on tests and other academics exists), just because a kid is not aborted does not mean they will be failures or face a miserable life. They have every opportunity to become success storys breaking through their condition and rising to great new heights. Everyone has equal chance to become successful.

Most non-Muslims seem to be rude in America. one old lady asked if I was an Arab, and when I said no, she kept saying I am an Arab. That was a weird experience. I think she was white, but white skin doesn't necessarily mean white race. interestingly, a republican Indian "friend" (India Indian) accused me of being "gay" or called me "gay" because I defended homosexuals, especially when he was mad over the backlash Firefox got. Another reason dislike republicans, and another reason to question why you wholeheartedly support republicans when they'd probably put you to death.

If Bernie didn't care about rights and freedom of people, I wouldn't even bother to vote. He's the only candidate I think is the lesser evil and have any iota of respect for. If Trump wasn't a racist, misogynist piece of prejudiced shit, he'd also probably have my respect.

You arent gay? Darn I was falling for you.

I dont know anyone who is heterosexual that defends homosexuals, the only people who defend rights of groups they dont belong to are politicians but thats usually just to get a quick vote or two (Sanders)

 

[M3J]

If tolerance is practiced and viewing Christianity thinking in the lens of modern society then I do not think what is taught would put the rights of people based on race or ethnicity or orientation above or under others. In any case this is a nation founded on Christian thinking so I dont think its unexpected or beyond belief to think or see that Muslims would face scrutiny for practicing extremism on our soils and combined with the security liability, it is why I would see the registry and blocking of their entry as something that could be pursued, if the caveat of increasing extremism could be decreased.

I do not think the republican idea at its core is only for the wealthy white male, Im not white afterall. Maybe if one is an extremist I guess. I just think the democrats forsake the idea of empowering the self and getting rewarder is ditched for the democratic thinking of punishing the successful to take care of the lazy and also proposing tons of legislature that goes against basic truths.

I think Christianity is as modern as it gets, and it's still bigoted and close minded. Out of all the Muslims in this country, I'm sure under 5% "practice" extremism. Again, Fox News is full of shit, and so are republican candidates. Muslims don't deserve the scrutiny they get, otherwise you might as well say Christians, white people, and Americans deserve scrutiny for what they have done.

From what it looks like, that's exactly the republican idea. they probably would deport people like you and me (born and raised in America proudly) just because we're not white after taking our money to give to the wealthy. I don't see how democrats are punishing the successful, especially when Bill Clinton made it harder for the "lazy" to get welfare or something. Also, not everyone who isn't wealthy is lazy, and that's another reason why republicans are a horrible choice to run the country - they'll likely think anyone who isn't wealthy is lazy. I also fail to see how someone who works 16 hours a day to make ends meet is lazy just because the person needs help to make ends meet.

The republican candidates want to pass bills and laws that restrict freedom and rights, if not take it away. You complain about Obama doing that, but you seem to have no problem with republicans wantin to ban same sex marriage.

I think this is where we defer. Since every child gets to go to free public school and the current system rewards people who are in poor financial situations (and that rewards for people who do well on tests and other academics exists), just because a kid is not aborted does not mean they will be failures or face a miserable life. They have every opportunity to become success storys breaking through their condition and rising to great new heights. Everyone has equal chance to become successful.



You arent gay? Darn I was falling for you.

I dont know anyone who is heterosexual that defends homosexuals, the only people who defend rights of groups they dont belong to are politicians but thats usually just to get a quick vote or two (Sanders)

No, not everyone has an equal chance to become successful. It depends on their surroundings and how they're raised. A bright person in the ghetto has less advantage than an idiot born to a wealthy, influential family.

I never said they would be failures, but that they might face a miserable life. Again, it seems you're ignorant on this subject. Obviously not all kids will have a miserable life or improve their lives, but many kids will. There also have been parents who killed their newborn babies or abandoned them as well. Plus, who's to say the parents will treat their kid that they couldn't abort well and without resentment? Or that the foster home will treat the unwanted kids well?

I am still amused that you think everyone has an equal chance to become successful. A black female has to work twice as hard, at least, to get halfway to where a white female is. A black male who is very competent may not get hired or is less likely to get hired because of his skin over a white male. There are also plenty of women who face sexual harassment at work, and they're more likely to get in trouble. Unless you're a white male born to a good family, your chances of being successful gets lower based on race and gender.

Ha.

Bernie has defended the rights of homosexuals and minorities for decades, and there are apparently pictures to prove this. That's why Bernie is popular among the young voters, they know he's not full of shit and that he's genuine. The support he gets is due to legitimately caring about issues, like when he hired a BLM protester when he could have had them thrown out like Trump did or threatened to do.

You probably don't know enough people or you're surrounded by bad people. I know countless of heterosexuals who defend homosexuals, transgenders, and bisexuals. I'm sad you don't have good people like these in your life.

 

[SharkBait]

#TeamMarco

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 9, 2016, Original Post Date: Feb 9, 2016 ---

Also articles dont need to treat him so bad, anyone who makes speeches repeats points to add emphasis. And furthermore, its not like one needs to be great speechwriter to lead the country.

 

[M3J]

He repeats the same thing over and over like a bot, and that doesn't bode well at all. Hurts his image too. If that was a democrat doing it, you'd be complaining and criticizing the democrat.

he sounds unauthentic, and it makes one wonder if he knows anything about whatever he's repeating himself on. Oh, and also shows his inexperience too. You'd have to be blind not to question Rubio repeating stuff.