Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2013 22:31:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Pyro ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ ✔ on Nov 15, 2013 22:53:54 GMT -5
...but you got sick from their antivirus. ...because that's how vaccination works, provoking an immune response. |
|
|
|
Post by Pyro ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ ✔ on Nov 15, 2013 22:54:16 GMT -5
lol wtf happened to my post.
|
|
Tails82
Lord of Terror++
Loyal Vassal
still...sipping?
Posts: 34,371
|
Post by Tails82 on Nov 15, 2013 22:54:42 GMT -5
The circumstances I gave were accurate. We also have pretty low gun violence rates as long as you stay out of the four big liberal cities who have tried gun bans.
Cost? We produce the innovations. Think other nations piggybacking our military protection. If you want to be world leader you pay the cost.
If America's missing out on socialized medicine, why do we perform better than most of those countries? Why are millions of Americans satisfied with paying for their own plans?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2013 23:57:40 GMT -5
|
|
Tails82
Lord of Terror++
Loyal Vassal
still...sipping?
Posts: 34,371
|
Post by Tails82 on Nov 16, 2013 0:05:56 GMT -5
That's not the reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by Laharls_Wrath on Nov 16, 2013 0:40:41 GMT -5
As someone who has done a lot of research on the subject and dug through specific crime rates within specific states compared to said state's gun control legislation I'm going to go ahead and say Tails is right and that's not the reason at all for dropping homicide rates
violent crime rates in states with more relaxed gun (i.e. virginia outside of the DC area) are lower than those in states with more strict gun control legislation
international comparisons are bullshit due, not only to cultural differences, but also legislation differences that have nothing to do with gun control
fuck, look at the UK and the frequency of riots compared to the US, does that mean I can say strict gun control leads to more rioting? Or that less gun legislation means riots are less likely?
and hell
obviously there will be less firearm related injuries where there are less fucking firearms, but what about other violent crimes?
argument is so skewed it's hilarious, but the fuck am I posting in this topic for
|
|
Tails82
Lord of Terror++
Loyal Vassal
still...sipping?
Posts: 34,371
|
Post by Tails82 on Nov 16, 2013 1:24:55 GMT -5
Also the different ways other countries measure things, on both guns and lives. --- Barack brings about bipartisan compromise! www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/11/15/house-charges-ahead-on-insurance-plan-vote-questions-legality-obama-fix/The House on Friday approved a bill to let insurance companies sell health plans that had previously been canceled due to ObamaCare regulations, a day after President Obama moved unilaterally to fix the problem.
The bill passed 261-157. Thirty-nine Democrats crossed over to support the GOP-backed legislation.
Republicans, in bringing the bill to the floor on Friday, raised the broader concern that Obama might not have the authority to make those changes on his own. House Speaker John Boehner said he's "highly skeptical that they can do this administratively."
Further, sponsor Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., questioned whether Obama could simply reverse course a few weeks or months down the road. Upton told Fox News that his bill is a "better answer -- because who knows how his executive order is going to be tested?"
The White House has already vowed to veto the House bill, suggesting it goes too far.online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304243904579196440800552408When the Obama Magic Died
There were no economic or cultural bonds among his coalition. He was all things to all people. Charisma ruled.
Rule by personal charisma has met its proper fate. The spell has been broken, and the magician stands exposed. We need no pollsters to tell us of the loss of faith in Mr. Obama's policies — and, more significantly, in the man himself. Charisma is like that. Crowds come together and they project their needs onto an imagined redeemer. The redeemer leaves the crowd to its imagination: For as long as the charismatic moment lasts — a year, an era — the redeemer is above and beyond judgment. He glides through crises, he knits together groups of varied, often clashing, interests. Always there is that magical moment, and its beauty, as a reference point...It's a pity we can't stay in that moment, says the redeemer: The fault lies in the country itself — everywhere, that is, except in the magician's performance.
Forgive the personal reference, but from the very beginning of Mr. Obama's astonishing rise, I felt that I was witnessing something old and familiar. My advantage owed nothing to any mastery of American political history. I was guided by my immersion in the political history of the Arab world and of a life studying Third World societies.
In 2008, seeing the Obama crowds in Portland, Denver and St. Louis spurred memories of the spectacles that had attended the rise and fall of Arab political pretenders. I had lived through the era of the Egyptian leader Gamal Abdul Nasser. He had emerged from a military cabal to become a demigod, immune to judgment. His followers clung to him even as he led the Arabs to a catastrophic military defeat in the Six Day War of 1967. He issued a kind of apology for his performance. But his reign was never about policies and performance. It was about political magic.
A leader who set out to remake the health-care system in the country, a sixth of the national economy, on a razor-thin majority with no support whatsoever from the opposition party, misunderstood the nature of democratic politics. An election victory is the beginning of things, not the culmination...
If Barack Obama seems like a man alone, with nervous Democrats up for re-election next year running for cover, and away from him, this was the world he made. No advisers of stature can question his policies; the price of access in the Obama court is quiescence before the leader's will. The imperial presidency is in full bloom.
There are no stars in the Obama cabinet today, men and women of independent stature and outlook. It was after a walk on the White House grounds with his chief of staff, Denis McDonough, that Mr. Obama called off the attacks on the Syrian regime that he had threatened. If he had taken that walk with Henry Kissinger or George Shultz, one of those skilled statesmen might have explained to him the consequences of so abject a retreat. But Mr. Obama needs no sage advice, he rules through political handlers.
Valerie Jarrett, the president's most trusted, probably most powerful, aide, once said in admiration that Mr. Obama has been bored his whole life. The implication was that he is above things, a man alone, and anointed. Perhaps this moment — a presidency coming apart, the incompetent social engineering of an entire health-care system — will now claim Mr. Obama's attention.www.frc.org/washingtonupdate/from-obama-no-assurance-on-insurancePeople say there is safety in numbers -- but they couldn't have meant the ObamaCare enrollment count. Yesterday, the President's reputation took another tumble when the administration finally pulled back the curtain on the law's miserable debut and admitted how few Americans had signed up for the law's coverage. Let's put it this way, said Rep. James Lankford (R-Okla.): more people had lunch at Sonic in Oklahoma City Wednesday than have signed up for ObamaCare in a month and a half.
Meanwhile, most Americans are less concerned about who's enrolled in the President's plan than the future of their own. For every new ObamaCare enrollee, 47 more Americans have lost their insurance...The President tried to stop the bleeding this morning by giving insurance companies another year of offering customers the plans that would otherwise be canceled. Of course, no one knows how the changes will affect the millions of customers who've already lost their plans. And while the administration is ignoring the law to give the extension, the reality is that not every insurance company can (or will choose to) take it -- especially if the industry would have to turn around and pull the plug on those same plans next year. Regardless, it's only a short reprieve (which just so happens to expire after the mid-term elections).
Making matters worse, part of that cost, as groups like FRC have argued, is a built-in abortion subsidy that policyholders may not even know they're paying! While the nation is just now waking up to the President's duplicity, pro-lifers have been painfully aware of the administration's betrayals -- which date all the way back to 2009, when the White House insisted a flimsy executive order could stop the biggest expansion of taxpayer-funded abortion in U.S. history. The President hasn't honored his promises -- but more importantly, he refuses to honor the law.www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/11/14/Obama-s-Fix-is-UnconstitutionalObama's Insurance 'Fix' Is Unconstitutionalwww.weeklystandard.com/articles/fantasy-diplomacy_767146.html?utm_campaign=Washington+Examiner&utm_source=washingtonexaminer.com&utm_medium=referralFantasy DiplomacyI would just end up quoting all of the above two articles, they're worth a read. "Those dirty whites must be engaging in racism somewhere!" online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303289904579198114270043146Your Car Dealer Must Be a Racist
The CFPB goes after a new target — auto loans — but won't share their evidence of bias.
Specifically, the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is ginning up a campaign to use "disparate impact" analysis to charge racism in auto lending. That's the theory that looks at statistics to prove bias without evidence of specific discriminatory intent. Never mind the financial or other circumstances of the borrowers beyond their race.
Especially since the bureaucrats are not alleging intent, reasonable people would want to scrub the data to understand the reported phenomena before making policy. Researchers in the field would also want to examine the bureau's methodology and attempt to replicate the results.
But the CFPB isn't too keen on the scientific method. It hasn't published its research in detail and has instead proceeded to mount a political pressure campaign to remove dealer discretion in setting loan terms... Is it now the role of regulators to outlaw negotiating? |
|
|
|
Post by Chromeo on Nov 16, 2013 10:09:41 GMT -5
I felt minorly under the weather for like a day and now I feel fine, somehow I don't think that's as bad as measles or rubella would be.
|
|
Tails82
Lord of Terror++
Loyal Vassal
still...sipping?
Posts: 34,371
|
Post by Tails82 on Nov 16, 2013 18:19:07 GMT -5
www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/11/16/newspaper-that-endorsed-obama-calls-for-obamacare-repealBarack Obama's hometown newspaper, the Chicago Tribune, endorsed the president twice for president. Friday, the same Chicago Tribune called for ObamaCare to be immediately repealed before it can do any more damage:
"Stop digging. Start over.
"As Friday dawns, here's what a health insurance crisis looks like to many millions of Americans: Barely six weeks shy of 2014, they do not know whether they will have medical coverage Jan. 1. Or which hospitals and doctors they might patronize. Or what they may pay to protect themselves and their families against the chance of medical and financial catastrophe. How much, that is, they may pay in order to satisfy the Democratic politicians and federal bureaucrats who are worsening a metastasizing health coverage fiasco. …
"We understand why the president and leaders of his party want to rescue whatever they can of Obamacare. On their watch, official Washington has blown the launch of a new entitlement program ... under the schedule they alone set in early 2010.
"What we don't understand is their reluctance to give that failure more than lip service. Many of the Americans who heard their president say Thursday that "we fumbled the rollout of this health care law" would have been pleased to hear him add: So we're admitting it. This law is a bust. We're starting over."
You can expect the calls to repeal ObamaCare to grow from non-GOP sources in the coming days. The news released Saturday that thousands of doctors have been dropped from Medicare Advantage is a likely tipping point. Destroying health care for the elderly is The Third Rail on steroids. This is Armageddon for Democrats. The only chance they have is to repeal. If they do not, they will be wiped out in 2014 and 2016.www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbY-vDZPKzQWhat's next with Obamacare online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304243904579200140834296678Now we know why President Obama was in such a hurry to announce his Affordable Care Act nonfix insurance fix on Thursday. On Friday, 39 Democrats voted with 222 House Republicans to pass Michigan Congressman Fred Upton's bill to revive the individual insurance market. Imagine how many more Democrats would have defected without Mr. Obama's offer of political cover.
The 39 defectors decided not to take any chances, perhaps figuring the latest White House fig leaf might get blown away if the cancellations keep coming. They abandoned the White House despite the promise of a Presidential veto and pressure from Democratic House leaders to stay united and not give the GOP a political victory.
Perhaps the rank-and-file remember the promises that Mr. Obama, Bill Clinton and Nancy Pelosi made in 2010 that the health law would become popular once it passed. Democrats lost 63 seats in 2010, the largest House turnover since 1938. Or perhaps they recall the assurances before October 1 that Healthcare.gov was ready to rock, not roll over.
Mr. Upton's bill isn't likely to make it through the Senate, where Harry Reid is still blocking all ObamaCare improvements on behalf of the White House. Senate Democrats running for re-election in 2014, led by Mary Landrieu (Louisiana) and Jeff Merkley (Oregon), are scrambling for cover of their own with a bill to require insurance companies to un-cancel their cancelled plans in perpetuity. This mandate on top of the other mandates merely compounds the ObamaCare damage, but the proposal is a sign of Democratic political panic.
The larger political reality is that Democrats own ObamaCare and its woes no matter how they vote, and Americans know it.washingtonexaminer.com/27-democratic-senators-who-promised-you-could-keep-your-health-coverage/article/253924527 Democratic senators who promised you could keep your health coveragewww.politico.com/story/2013/11/house-democrats-obamacare-vow-99937.html?hp=l5House Democrats made Obamacare vow, tooThere's some documentation if Democrats ever go to Holocaust-denial levels (since we know they're nothing but dirty liars) and claim they never supported Obamacare, or the parties magically switched sides, or some other BS to run from their trash record. Every single one of them betrayed their constituents and backed the train wreck. washingtonexaminer.com/fec-may-exempt-tea-party-group-from-donor-disclosure-citing-harassment-intimidation/article/2539257FEC may exempt Tea Party group from donor disclosure citing harassment, intimidation
Federal Election Commission officials may take the nearly unprecedented step of exempting a Tea Party group from disclosing its donors due to concerns its supporters could face harassment and retaliation from government officials such as the Internal Revenue Service and private citizens.
"TPLF included in its advisory opinion request over 1,400 pages of exhibits as evidence showing such harassment and hostility. The exhibits consist primarily of media reports but also include government records,” the pro-exemption draft says.
Examples include death threats, arson, "opponents covering a parking lot with nails at a Tea Party rally" and "eggs thrown at a Tea Party Express bus."Totalitarians in Wisconsin online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304799404579155953286552832Americans learned in the IRS political targeting scandal that government enforcement power can be used to stifle political speech. Something similar may be unfolding in Wisconsin, where a special prosecutor is targeting conservative groups that participated in the battle over Governor Scott Walker's union reforms.
In recent weeks, special prosecutor Francis Schmitz has hit dozens of conservative groups with subpoenas demanding documents related to the 2011 and 2012 campaigns to recall Governor Walker and state legislative leaders.
Copies of two subpoenas we've seen demand "all memoranda, email . . . correspondence, and communications" both internally and between the subpoena target and some 29 conservative groups, including Wisconsin and national nonprofits, political vendors and party committees. The groups include the League of American Voters, Wisconsin Family Action, Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, Americans for Prosperity—Wisconsin, American Crossroads, the Republican Governors Association, Friends of Scott Walker and the Republican Party of Wisconsin.
One subpoena also demands "all records of income received, including fundraising information and the identity of persons contributing to the corporation." In other words, tell us who your donors are...no one will publicly claim credit for appointing Mr. Schmitz, the special prosecutor. The investigation is taking place under Wisconsin's John Doe law, which bars a subpoena's targets from disclosing its contents to anyone but his attorneys. John Doe probes work much like a grand jury, allowing prosecutors to issue subpoenas and conduct searches, while the gag orders leave the targets facing the resources of the state with no way to publicly defend themselves.
Mr. O'Keefe says he received his subpoena in early October. He adds that at least three of the targets had their homes raided at dawn, with law-enforcement officers turning over belongings to seize computers and files.
The kitchen-sink subpoenas deserve skepticism considering their subject and targets. The disclosure of conservative political donors has become a preoccupation of the political left across the country. In the heat of the fight over Governor Walker's reforms, unions urged boycotts of Walker contributors and DemocraticUnderground.com published a list of Walker donors for boycotting.
The subpoena demand for the names of donors to nonprofit groups that aren't legally required to disclose them is especially troubling. Readers may recall that the Cincinnati office of the IRS sent the tax-exempt applications of several conservative groups to the ProPublica news website in 2012.
Another reason for skepticism is the probe's timing as Mr. Walker's 2014 re-election campaign looms. This is the second such investigation against Mr. Walker in three and a half years, following one that began in the office of Milwaukee County Democratic District Attorney John Chisholm in spring 2010.
That probe examined whether staffers used government offices for political purposes while Mr. Walker was Milwaukee County Executive, but after three years turned up nothing on Mr. Walker and embarrassingly little else.
Perhaps the probe will turn up some nefarious activity that warrants this subpoena monsoon and home raids. But in the meantime the effect is to limit political speech by intimidating these groups from participating in the 2014 campaign. Stifling allies of Mr. Walker would be an enormous in-kind contribution to Democrats. Even if no charges are filed, the subpoenas will have served as a form of speech suppression.
Mr. O'Keefe told us that the flurry of subpoenas "froze my communications and frightened many allies and vendors of the pro-taxpayer political movement in Wisconsin and across the country." Even if no one is ever convicted of a crime, he says, "the process is the punishment."online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303680404579141811376490546Libs blame another leftist shooter on the right wing JFK—Casualty of the Cold War
Lee Harvey Oswald was a communist who idolized Castro and hated America.
It has been 50 years since President John F. Kennedy was cut down on the streets of Dallas by rifle shots fired by Lee Harvey Oswald, a self-described Marxist, defector to the Soviet Union, and admirer of Fidel Castro. The evidence condemning Oswald was overwhelming.
The bullets that killed President Kennedy were fired from his rifle, which was found in the warehouse where he worked and where he was seen moments before the shooting. Witnesses on the street saw a man firing shots from a window in that building and immediately summoned police to provide a description. Forty-five minutes later a policeman stopped Oswald in another section of the city to question him about the shooting. Oswald killed him with four quick shots from his pistol as the policeman stepped from his squad car. He then fled to a nearby movie theater where he was captured (still carrying the pistol).
Yet opinion polls suggest that 75% of American adults believe that JFK was the victim of a conspiracy...James Reston, then chief political correspondent for the New York Times, published a front-page column the day after the assassination under the title, "Why America Weeps: Kennedy a Victim of Violent Streak He Sought to Curb in Nation." Chief Justice Earl Warren, who would soon head the investigation into the shooting, blamed "bigots" for the assassination. Syndicated newspaper columnist Drew Pearson wrote that JFK was the victim of a "hate drive." Sen. Mike Mansfield, in a eulogy, attributed the assassination to "bigotry, hatred, and prejudice."
On the international front, Johnson feared a dangerous escalation of tensions with the Soviet Union. As Reston wrote for the Times on Nov. 25, just three days after Kennedy's assassination: "One of the things President Johnson is said to be concerned about is that the pro-Communist background of Lee Oswald . . . may lead in some places to another Communist hunt that will divide the country and complicate the new President's relations with Moscow."
Ironically, U.S. leaders adopted a line similar to the one pushed by the Soviet Union and communist groups around the world. They likewise blamed the "far right" for the assassination. A Soviet spokesman said that, "Senator [ Barry ] Goldwater and other extremists on the right could not escape moral responsibility for the president's death."
These were the myths that grew up around the assassination and, strangely enough, they are still widely believed. A new book, "Dallas 1963," put out by a respected publishing house, traces the assassination to "a climate of hatred" created by right-wing businessmen, religious leaders and media moguls.
The facts are that President Kennedy was a martyr in the Cold War struggle against communism. The assassin was a communist and not a bigot or a right-winger. Oswald defected from the U.S. to the Soviet Union in 1959, vowing when he did so that he could no longer live under a capitalist system. He returned to the U.S. with his Russian wife in 1962, disappointed with life under Soviet communism but without giving up his Marxist beliefs or his hatred of the U.S. By 1963, Oswald had transferred his political allegiance to Castro's communist regime in Cuba.
In April 1963, Oswald attempted to shoot Edwin Walker, a retired U.S. Army general, as he sat at a desk in his dining room. Walker was the head of the Dallas chapter of the John Birch Society and a figure then in the news because of his opposition to school integration and his demand that the Castro regime be overthrown. The rifle Oswald used in the attempt at Walker's life was the one he used to shoot Kennedy.
Oswald, fearful that he would be identified for the Walker shooting, fled Dallas for New Orleans. In June 1963 he established a local chapter of Fair Play for Cuba, a national organization dedicated to gaining diplomatic recognition for Castro's regime. Oswald was filmed by a local television station in New Orleans circulating leaflets on behalf of the Castro government and was jailed briefly following a street altercation with anti-Castro Cubans. Soon thereafter he appeared on a local television program to debate U.S. policy toward Cuba.
The JFK assassination was an event in the Cold War, but it was interpreted by America's liberal leadership as an event in the civil-rights crusade. This interpretation sowed endless confusion about the motives of the assassin and the meaning of the event. The vacuum of meaning was filled by a host of conspiracy theories claiming that JFK was a victim of plots orchestrated by right-wing groups.
The widespread feeling that disreputable elements in American culture contributed to Kennedy's death—fed by liberal media figures and politicians—encouraged an anti-American attitude that was a pronounced aspect of the radical and countercultural movements of the 1960s. In the process, the real assassin, his political coloration and likely motives were airbrushed from history.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chromeo on Nov 16, 2013 20:26:11 GMT -5
I couldn't say for sure who killed JFK. But the motives for an internal military coup are there. It wouldn't honestly surprise me if chiefs at the CIA or the like had something to do with it, not like they've never done worse.
|
|
Tails82
Lord of Terror++
Loyal Vassal
still...sipping?
Posts: 34,371
|
Post by Tails82 on Nov 16, 2013 21:16:24 GMT -5
oh wow
This can be your gimmick
|
|
|
|
Post by Chromeo on Nov 16, 2013 21:27:39 GMT -5
I'd say a lot of people think that, especially non-Americans who don't have such an idealistic view of the US military machine. Do I know they killed him? No, I don't, but also keep in mind that this was an era in which the CIA proposed, and was prepared to carry out, false flag terrorist attacks against Americans just to create anger and a motive for war (a proposal which JFK denied, by the by). I don't think for people capable of that a little black op assassination is somehow beyond the pale.
|
|
Tails82
Lord of Terror++
Loyal Vassal
still...sipping?
Posts: 34,371
|
Post by Tails82 on Nov 16, 2013 21:55:13 GMT -5
Make a poll on 261.  |
|
|
|
Post by kode54 on Nov 17, 2013 4:53:33 GMT -5
There are probably too many flag waving gits flagets in the moderation team for that to work.
|
|
Spinning round and round like the deadly hands of a radium clock. 
