Total posts: 2,799
-->
@Swagnarok
Correct
Created:
Interesting. The only major candidate who gets off Scott free is Biden. I'm honestly not too upset about that.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
or cultural origins
You must have missed this part of your definition, so I am highlighting it for you.
How did I know you'd like South Africa?
Are you unaware that apartheid ended decades ago?
No. I'm saying that Israel is not an ethno state because ethics relates to race.
Your second definition includes culture..... so tell me, is religion part of culture?
Every muslim country is a self-admitted enemy of Israel. Your argument here is just a variation of the loony antisemitic idea that America is controlled by Jews.Israel did not make America go to war, and it wasn't Israel's war. America did what it wanted. In fact, Israel was attacked during the Gulf war and did not respond.
Ok, so for you to consider it us fighting their war, what do they have to do? Do they have to say: "America, there is this very bad guy that scares us very much. Go fight them now." Or can they simply lie to get us involved to take out a threat to them?
This belief can be held for several reasons. Some of those reasons are perfectly valid to hold, and some of those reason are antisemitic.So the problem is not in believing that Israel is a bad ally and doesn't deserve billions of dollars, but in the reasons why one believes this.
There are plenty of reasons why they shouldn't receive aid. These are just a few.
The reasons are your comments. Dredging up incidents from decades ago, calling Israel an ethno state, openly claiming only Europe and South Africa are "worthy" allies, insinuating that Israel controls America enough to "lead" it into war with Israel's "enemies"Your reasons for your position is indistinguishable from that of an anti-semite targeting Israel only on emotional hate.That is my impression, I may not be correct.
I was showing that since they became a nation they were doing scummy things and they still are as recently as Iraq War.
You for some reason are ignoring two definitions of "ethnostate", one of which you provided.
I also included Japan and Brazil.
They gave us false intelligence. Didn't say they control us, they misled us. Gave our neo-con president more justification to go to war. Netanyahu said he had no doubt about WMDs and that taking out Saddam would have "positive reverberations" on the entire region. That went swimmingly.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Lol, classic
Created:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
It was more the fact that from the second he became president, they were intent on impeachment. They made up the whole Russian collusion business that they said was an impeachable offense. "He stole the election". Then they were going to impeach him for obstruction of that investigation. When that didn't work out, they moved onto the Ukraine story.
Created:
-->
@SirAnonymous
You're going to prison, boyo.
Created:
-->
@SirAnonymous
lmfao
I died when they quoted McConnell as saying "Pence is a swell guy, but he is no Trump".
Created:
-->
@Vader
Socialism is great
No doubt. Look at all of the oil Venezuela has. Look at those tanks they use on protesters!
You conservatives love oil and the military. Why are you against us?!?
Created:
-->
@Vader
We don't want Hillary. She won't pay for my gender studies PhD. Bernie Bros 4 life!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
Created:
-->
@Vader
Yes, crying is our secret liberal weapon. That and lies! We will spread so many of those things!
>:D
Created:
-->
@Vader
Man conservatives are vicious ;(
Maybe I'll change my pic back to Nixon. I can't take the hate!
Created:
-->
@Vader
Don Lemon is the best African American, homosexual news anchor that CNN has to offer.
Created:
-->
@Vader
Maybe I will!
Created:
-->
@Vader
Keep that locker room talk out of here!
Go watch Fox news, you commie! I mean fascist!
Created:
-->
@Vader
Pelosi big stupid
Oh yeah?
Well....well...Orange man bad!
Got you there.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
He said he has changed his mind since then. Agreed, though. I don't know why he would have singled out drink drivers. They are just negligent.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
I don't know the extent of what he released exactly. There may be some things I don't support. But I 100% support exposing that the government is violating our rights.
Created:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
The blue wave will now be a blue puddle.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Probably should have done 2/3. But honestly, impeachment doesn't even accomplish anything. It just starts hearings in the Senate.
Luckily, removal from office reduces partisan influence with the 2/3.
Created:
-->
@Barney
Removal form office isn't going to happen for the same reason impeachment was destined to happen:
A hyper majority of Democrats support it
A hyper majority of Republicans are against it
It is political suicide to not follow those numbers from your base
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Like my new look?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Lmao, that is a good pic. Might have to change mine :P
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
I never thought I would believe that Pelosi was one of the more rational Democrats....
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Like, even independent voters were less than half in favor.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
All they accomplished was pissing off conservative voters. When less than half the country wants impeachment, that is a really stupid move.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
From death penalty to harvesting humans is a rather large shift.
:)
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
USA should absolutely divest Saudi Arabia before they divest Israel.
I agree. But for some reason he thinks that I am targeting Israel when I believe that most foreign aid should be curtailed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
How would he have been able to prove the government overreach without using illegal means?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
He showed that the NSA was doing unconstitutional invasions of privacy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
I don't think this is true. Otherwise, people on welfare would have like a dozen kids. They may have 3 which isn't too much but if they continuously made kids just for fun, they would have like a dozen kids, which very few people do.
35.5% of households receive government assistance.
51.7% of kids in 2017 lived in housing receiving government assistance.
So, no. Poor people have a lot more kids. They don't have to have a dozen. They just have like 5 or 6 while rich people have none or 1.
Rich people produce less kids, but they adopt more kids, since most people like having kids around. These foster kids would be raised by rich people and would end up being successful themselves. My logic is:If having only 1 parent is bad for kids because it´s hard for 1 parentAnd if having 2 parents is good for kidsThen wouldn´t having 3+ parents be even better for the kid because they have more parents?
A few things:
Rich people adopt more kids because they are able to. Your financial situation is considered before they let you adopt a kid.
You wanted people with smart genes raising kids, but these rich and smart people are adopting instead. Would there be less kids adopted with polygamy or would nothing change and they continue to adopt?
Are we assuming that they are all cohabitating? Because the father would have to divide his time among his different wives and children. Won't the mothers be distracted by caring for their own child, anyway? How would it be 3 parents in that case?
Created:
-->
@ethang5
One in Asia, one in South America, and none in Africa. Hmmm.
I am not saying that people in those countries are our enemies, just that they are mostly neutral. Except for maybe South Africa, and that is a big 'maybe', the rest are either openly hostile or don't really have any effect on us thus being neutrals.
Ethnicity is a racial thing.
eth·nic·i·ty
noun
- the fact or state of belonging to a social group that has a common national or cultural tradition.
Nope.
By religion yes, but not by ethnicity.
I see. Are you saying that religion isn't part of their cultural tradition?
No. It's just too ridiculous an argument to debate without insulting you. I rarely address arguments that are obviously silly because most Gentle Readers see the silliness without my comment.I don't think you're being fully transparent about your position on Israel. But that is an avenue it is not profitable to go down.
They wanted Saddam Hussein gone. They lied about him having WMDs, which would make them a threat to us now. This false intelligence helped sway opinion to let us go to war. We took out Israel's enemy, bu they were in reality no threat to us. I don't know what more I need to say.
I'm being fully transparent. They are a bad ally and don't deserve billions of dollars. Let them provide for their own defense.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
People know their limits. If your barely struggling to provide for children (the wife would probably help too), then you wouldn't take on more children.
That's just not true. People on welfare in the US continuously have kids, even when they don't get extra benefits for doing so.
I think the main reason why smarter people produce smarter kids is because of how they are raised. A smart person raising 4 kids would be produce better offspring than a smart person raising 2 kids and a dumb person raising 2 kids because smart people can raise them better.I don´t know how many people would be polygamous if it were allowed.
Well, rich people have less kids than poor people. Rich people are generally smarter than poor people, so I am not sure this will encourage them to have more kids.
I want this and making polygamous people get their STDs treated. I don´t think you should have sex unless you are free of STDs.
Yeah, but who pays for it?
Created:
-->
@ethang5
They aren't currently an ethnostate. I didn't say it was a racial thing in Israel, either. Were they Ethiopian Jews?
I see you have ignored the whole "fighting their wars" argument. Do you concede?
Created:
-->
@ethang5
Which country do you consider to be a worthy ally of America now?
Most of Europe. Japan. Brazil. A few others.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
Then tell me, why has America continued to treat them as an ally through successive governments?
Honestly that is beyond me.
During the Cold War, I could see why, but after that, it should have been over.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Correct. as cited in the Brookings study, not having 2 parents present is a far, far better indicator of poverty and making poor choices that perpetuate poverty than skin color.The breakup of minority families is closely related to bad government policies replacing the father as a provider and cultural pressures where the father is marginalized, and the mother is glorified.
Yes, some of the biggest indicators of poverty are based on whether or not you finish high school, if you have kids before or within marriage, and if you work full time.
Well, black people have higher drop out rates, have kids out of wedlock, and have higher unemployment rates than other races and, oddly enough, higher poverty rates.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
That would be almost impossible to calculate.
Some minorities may actually benefit, while many others are hurt by it. It would be very subjective to say that an Asian going to a worse college has it worse than a Hispanic that is going to a really tough, yet prestigious college that they may fail at.
The only thing overtly racist about it is the fact that you look at someone's skin color when making the decision to let them in or not.
Intent: racist
Results: not racist
Nobody is directly hurt by intent, but people are hurt by results. The actual bill was built around racism, but they failed in targeting a specific race.
Get rid of bills with racist intent and everyone will be better off.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
By actual results, it hurts everyone of every race.
Groups that, as a whole do worse in school are underrepresented in colleges. They are then given preferential treatment based on race. They go to colleges they aren't prepared for. This hurts them.
Asians and whites have the best SAT scores and are "overrepresented" in colleges. They are given harsher treatment for admissions. This hurts them.
Nobody gains from this, everyone suffers. Since it doesn't target a specific racial group, it isn't racist based purely on the results.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
;)
Get rid of the crap and stop whining about not getting ahead when you have the ability to do so.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I think we should get reparations.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Because you said that it was systemically racist because it hurt minorities. I said that this frame of logic was false because it didn't just hurt minorities.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Well, are we going by intent or by actual results?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Why would I do that when you are correct?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I switched up my wording a bit. I realized after I posted. The intent behind the bill was anti-white, which was racist.
You talked about the bill being systemic racism because it hurts minorities. I said that, in effect, it was not racist because it hurt everyone involved.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I'm not going to defend your liberal policies.
The only systemic racism involved in that policy is anti-White and anti-Asian in intent.
However:
It hurts them by taking away the privilege of attending a school they deserve to be at.
It hurts other minorities by putting them in prestigious schools that they cannot excel in.
It is a bad policy that hurts everyone, therefore it isn't a racist policy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
But those kids don't even have to put their race on applications, either, so.....
Created: