Why don't we ever see peaceful protests by the left?
You're kidding, right?
Unfortunately, no. He is obsessed with violent leftist incidents, like the Berkley riots and The attack in Stanford with a bike lock. He has chosen to ignore the Women's march on Washington, most of the BLM demonstrations and the march on earth day. There are of course, extremists on both sides and bad eggs who get riled up and commit crimes of violence.
I left this here HOPING that there would be a political angle, as promised.
Also, I'm not a paid employee, so I have to work to feed myself. I can't be here 24/7.
I know you volunteer your time and it is a thankless job. At least from yours truly, it is appreciated.
Less Twitter trolling and I will be happy.
Less CNN.
Hey guys, I was trying to be bipartisan. Let's not ruin the thread by rehashing issues that have already been discussed ad infinitum elsewhere.
Raphjd lives in England, which is 5 hours ahead of Eastern time. He usually does log on around this time. Be patient.
I live in Scotland. >:D
Sorry, I should have said Great Britain. I was just going by the flag in your profile.
Re-read the threads.
I'm not talking about the other threads, I'm talking about this thread.
While it may reduce your carbon footprint, Veganism is not a political issue and not conducive to debate.
Do you even realize you just claimed that an issue affecting carbon footprint/climate change is not political? Even without that connection, the claim that veganism isn't a political topic clearly doesn't pass the smell test:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK396510/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism_and_animal_rights
https://www.quora.com/Is-veganism-a-political-choiceI believe mhorndisk is completely sincere in his beliefs, and I respect him for that, but he often uses this board as a soapbox, with not intention of listening to others.
Mhorndisk is unique among users here in that regard, is he?
Well actually, he is. I think raphjd is open to debate. I think Frederick likes to bait and troll primarily. The politics is only a means to that end. I don't know you long enough to judge. I haven't been around the board long enough to know Drwas either, but I can see by reviewing the past topics that he was guilty of spamming the board.
If the board deteriorated into two platforms where each side proclaims their beliefs without listening to the other, and simply hurls endless epithets, then we'd might as well merge it with Rants and Raves.
They have requested, names, addresses, partial SSN, party affiliation and voting history
Unless the states are doing something illegal, then they have no idea who you voted for.
Australia has mandatory voting and your voting record (not who you voted for) is shared within the government because you are denied benefits and can be sent to jail for not voting.
I don't care if anyone knows I normally vote Democrat.
Liberals love that CNN is threatening to dox a person over a meme, but hate the idea of illegal voters being faux doxed.
I never meant to imply that voting history meant who you voted for. It just means what elections you did cast votes. How does that history relate to vote fraud beyond the information if the person in question ever voted. Actually, I don't that voter suppression, even the suppression of illegal voting is the prime motivator in seeking this information. They are looking to use it politically, and develop a huge database of party affiliation, who are the most motivated voters, who votes in primary elections, etc. This will put them on firm footing going into 2020 to direct their campaigns ans spend their advertising dollars efficiently.. I have a strange feeling that they will not share the raw data with the Democrats. It is just conjecture on my part, but even if it is partially true, it would mean the federal government is being used to further the cause of one political party.
One of the cases of illegal voting in Texas came about through a random check of voting records. An ex wife had her son vote as the dad, because she didn't want to waste his vote. The son was 17yo. Anyway, turns out the dad does vote. So voter records caught an illegal vote.
Same thing with the illegal woman who voted, also in Texas. She got caught through the same random voter record check. The same woman voted in several places. Turns out the real woman was a victim of identity fraud and illegal women were using her name/identity.
Let's flip this and say it was Obama or Hillary who wanted to do it. I'm sure you'd support it and claim that everyone who disagreed was a conspiracy theorist.
Also, like with the EPA, there are plenty of regulations and laws surrounding voter's rights and records, so nothing bad will happen. :blind:
Your examples are notable for the singular case in each. The concept that these types of violations will add up to millions of votes has been challenges by almost every Secretary of State and those that study the problem. And again, you are making that "show on the other foor" assumption. I would object if Hillary, Obama, Bernie or the Pope asked for this information. There already is far too much personal information stored centrally. This will only confound the problem.It will also make Russian mischief easier.
Liberals see nothing wrong with using violence to prove they are the good people. This is why they are such fans of the "religion of peace".
Every group has its troublemakers. You can't besmirch the entire group for the actions of a few. I know that there were some Antifa members who got into a fight with other Trump supporters and police, also inexcusable. Those people were arrested and charged right away. In this case, however, I find it strange that it has been 5 days since the attack and no one has been charged with the attack,, even though the police caught three suspects.
You guys are sick. You see a post by a particular user and can do nothing but attack him for it. Want to talk about his other posts, which I agree some are crossing the civility line? Sure. But there was literally nothing offensive in this post whatsoever.
By the way, I agree with you mhorndisk on this topic. We should all strive to eat less meat, because it is just the right thing to do. A diet without meat has a much smaller carbon foot print (which is clearly a connection to political issues btw), is healthier, and reduces the suffering of animals.
It's hilarious that people claim to be liberal in here, but attack mhorndisk on a topic where he is liberal and politely professes a liberal perspective.
This should've been a thread used to find common ground. Instead, you guys just attack him because of Tribalism. Sad!
Re-read the threads. No one was attacking mhorndisk personally, they were just protesting that the post was on this board at all and not moved to rants and raves or cooking. While it may reduce your carbon footprint, Veganism is not a political issue and not conducive to debate. I believe mhorndisk is completely sincere in his beliefs, and I respect him for that, but he often uses this board as a soapbox, with not intention of listening to others.
Sometimes I get pimples around my mouth. I'm worried they might be herpes.
So called "cold sores" are actually caused by the herpes virus. But this board is no place to seek a diagnosis. Go see a doctor.
The director of the independent Office of Government Ethics, who has been the federal government’s most persistent critic of the Trump administration’s approach to ethics, announced Thursday that he is resigning nearly six months before his term is scheduled to end.
Walter M. Shaub Jr. repeatedly challenged the Trump administration, publicly urging President Trump to fully divest from his business empire and chastising a senior Trump adviser for violating ethics rules. His outspokenness drew the ire of administration officials and earned him near-cult status among Trump’s opponents. Fans started a Facebook page in his honor, and his name has occasionally appeared on posters at anti-Trump protests.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/federal-ethics-chief-who-clashed-with-white-house-nnounces-he-will-step-down/2017/07/06/4732c308-624c-11e7-a4f7-af34fc1d9d39_story.htmlVirtually nobody ever heard of Walter M. Shaub Jr. until AFTER he announced he was stepping down. The moonbats detect a drop of blood in the water and they react like piranhas.
I don't think there is even a drop of blood in the water. He left 6 months early to pursue a career in the private sector. I don't think anyone is blaming Trump for that. From that WaPo artice, " In an interview, Shaub said he was not leaving under pressure, adding that no one in the White House or the administration pushed him to leave. "
Residents of most G-20 countries ― including the United States ― have more faith in German Chancellor Angela Merkel than in U.S. President Donald Trump to handle world affairs, according to newly released data from Pew Research.
Fifty-six percent of Americans say they have some or a lot of confidence in Merkel to do the right thing regarding foreign affairs, according to the poll published Wednesday. Just 46 percent have a similar level of confidence in Trump.
Merkel also received significantly higher ratings than Trump in a dozen other countries, while Trump fared substantially better in only two of the countries surveyed, India and Russia.
Link to Pew Research: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/07/05/on-world-affairs-most-g20-countries-more-confident-in-merkel-than-trump/
Just what percentage of Americans do you think know who Angela Merkel is? Not many people do in the USA. Merkel's biggest problem is that she has been the Chancellor of Germany for 17 years.. and that is too long. She should have packed her bags long ago.
Putin has been president of Russia for the same amount of time, but then again he doesn't have to worry about being re-elected. When the Germans tire of her, they will vote her out. And given the resurgence of nationalism in Europe, that probably will be sooner than later.
She certainly has more experience. i just found out today that she holds a doctorate in quantum physics. Very impressive.
A rare bureaucrat who actually took his responsibility seriously.
Don't let the OP see this, he just might lose his support for Trump.
oDon't worry. he has already forgiven him in another thread. https://forum.gaytorrent.ru/index.php?topic=51108.msg278190#new
Should I feel bad having read this post while eating a chicken leg? Nah. It's not like the animals we eat will rise up and fight back….
You don't understand. Mhorndisk is worried about those cow farts leading to global warming.
I am not a lawyer and I doubt you are, but that colon, together with the word regarding in the subpoena modifies the phrase that precedes it, so that it means "all emails from 2011 to 2012 regarding the Libya investigation. It certainly does not mean "all emails from 2011 to 2012, including those regarding the Libya investigation" because such a request would be unconstitutional.
How did she violate the law by permanently deleting the emails that were not work related? If she has a set of love letters to Bill in her office and decided to burn them, would that be a crime. And if deleting the emails was criminal what law did she break?
The FBI declined to prosecute. If there still was a case, believe me, Trump would be all over it. I do not buy for one minute his line that "she has suffered enough."
There were not hundreds of thousands or millions of emails on that server. There were 62,000. She had a private email server. She was not running her own ISP.
I will agree that using a personal server instead of a state.gov address was against State Department policy, but to call it illegal is a stretch. Again, show me the law. If it is true, the laws she violated should be readily found on the net. I looked. I couldn't find them.
The whole email thing was a big political mistake, but it was not criminal.
But more importantly, why are we talking about this? Are you guys still threatened by her? I don't see how.
P.S. Forgot to add the reference: http://www.factcheck.org/2016/07/a-guide-to-clintons-emails/
:police: Only Joker out ranks me. :police:
I am sorry for aasking for a more vocal response. I did not notice the warnings given. I am closing the thread and will try to put the issue behind me. Thanks.
Nice to see some posters have been warned, and it's the typical rule breakers.
What does warning even mean anyways? Is it to inform us of the alt-right? ;D
You confused me with your first reply. To what warning are you referring? i don't see it in this thread. Did I miss it somewhere else? And now you make a joke about it. Definitely feel like I missed something. Please tell.
I DID MISS THAT!!
I think I owe Raphjd an apology.
Nice to see some posters have been warned, and it's the typical rule breakers.
What does warning even mean anyways? Is it to inform us of the alt-right? ;D
You confused me with your first reply. To what warning are you referring? i don't see it in this thread. Did I miss it somewhere else? And now you make a joke about it. Definitely feel like I missed something. Please tell.
