Slashdot Mirror

We have to vote agaisn't our own self interests as those guys on AM radio and Fox make seem voting for anyone who favors us as pretty scary. If we give them some more free money they will be nice to us.

Our side has been actually doing something about it.

Lots of Republican congress seats are coming up in 2018, and many of them realize that if they don't get off their butts and do something, they're going to be voted out. There's a mood running through the population right now to that specific effect: people are saying "do something or we'll kick your butt to the curb in next year's elections".

Many Republicans are worried that they'll lose to a challenger in the upcoming primary if they don't start doing things.

Some are planning to use the upcoming debt-limit deadline (end of Sept) to force the Democrats to fund building the wall(*).

And Trump is being selective with his support for certain campaigns, with the result that not having POTUS support makes it increasingly difficult to win reelection. Karma for RINOs.

All these things are putting pressure on Republicans to start making decisions that favour the American people.

You might try asking your side to do that as well. I'd *love* to see the two sides compete for the role of "best leadership".

Here's a hint: marketing tag-lines such as "a better deal" without specific policies to back them up simply won't work.

(*) But with Hurricane Harvey in Texas there's talk of putting that off a few months so that the government doesn't shut down and leave Texas in the lurch.

Bill Clinton feared the open internet in 1995

http://www.breitbart.com/big-j...

> Three years before Matt Drudge changed the world and how news
> would be consumed, President Bill Clinton's White House feared
> that the Internet was allowing average citizens, especially conservatives,
> to bypass legacy gatekeepers and access information that had
> previously been denied to them by the mainstream press.

Hillary Clinton whining about an internet "Without any kind of editing function or gatekeeping function"

http://www.freerepublic.com/fo...

Apparently CNN (Clinton News Network) wasn't winning the battle for hearts and minds, so the Democrats wanted to destroy Breitbart website... Hillary Campaign Vows To Destroy Opposition Website
http://dailycaller.com/2016/08...

So you have a doubt that Damore explicitly talks about the secret diversity hiring meeting?

You think perhaps, I'm just making up that part? :)

Here, http://www.breitbart.com/tech/...

“A month and a half ago I went to one of our diversity summits, all of it unrecorded and super secret, and they told me a lot of things that I thought were just not right,” Damore continued. “They were telling us about a lot of these potentially illegal practices that they’d been doing in order to increase diversity Basically treating people differently based on their race or gender.”

“So you mean racism,” asked Peterson.

“Yeah, basically,” Damore confirmed. “Most meetings at Google are recorded, anyone at Google can watch it, we’re trying to be really open about everything, except for this. They don’t want any paper trail for any of these things because I think it’s illegal.”

Damore elaborated to Peterson that there’s “a lot of ways in which they pressure people to ‘increase the diversity’ of their team, and there’s no way to do that besides actually choosing someone based on their race or gender.”

Now, if you doubt those quotes, please, feel free to watch the whole video :)

do you have a source that is a reputable news organization for that?

Here's a direct quote from a Finnish man on vacation who observed the situation:

I was expecting to enter a peaceful protest to protect this monument and part of United States history from utter and total rewriting. I entered with people from the United States who were aware there were going to be counter-protesters. They promised to keep me safe, which they did. But what happened was, the police force, which should have kept the protesting parties separate, in fact funneled the right-wing protesters, the people defending the monument, right into Antifa, [making them run] a gauntlet of Antifa to the monument Then – I don’t know the details of it – on dubious legal grounds, [the police] declared the gathering of right-wing protesters unlawful. We were forced to leave the venue and run another gauntlet.

Call me jaded, but I don't think we'll find accurate reporting on *anything* about this incident from the MSM.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...

The Muslim mob that didn't happen? There was the immigrant, mostly Muslim mob in Berlin last year that was widely reported but I doubt that's the one you're referring to.

I don't frequent Breitbart but I tried to find an example of them claiming Obama is a Muslim and didn't find one. They've got some quotes talking about it but it's pretty mild stuff. I did find this interesting though: http://www.breitbart.com/2016-...

The West Coast is certainly the worst, especially any company that's big enough to get into the public eye. If your company has hired a VP of Diversity, you know your company is in trouble.

Breitbart has some interviews with ex-Googlers up.

But we've seen these kinds of stories at a regular pace for several years now. Donglegate. GitHub's meritocracy clusterfuck. Intel's $300 million "diversity" push. Code of Conduct identity-politics pushing. The "progressive" agenda pushing coming out of and being forced on social media companies. Etc.

She fired the guy.

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/...

ACORN undercover videos
" the most damning words match the transcripts and the audio, and do not seem out of context." - NYT Public Editor

Shirley Sherrod
NAACP audience reacts favorably to admission of anti-white racial bias. Other non-breitbart entities overreact before seeing full video. Sources of the original article seem to be down, so can't evaluate further.

Anthony Weiner
Lol

Friends of Hamas
Surely no MSM outlet would publish anonymous claims from government insiders without independently verifying them...

Nancy Pelosi/Miley Cyrus ad campaign
Double lol

Misidentification of Loretta Lynch
Sloppy mistake quickly corrected.

Conspiracy theories about President Obama
>"According to the New York Times, Breitbart News promoted the falsehood that President Obama was a Kenyan-born Muslim."
Whoever wrote this refuses to link the original article(s), and apparently hasn't seen it himself, relying only on the NYT to tell him about their existence. Can't judge further.
>"In June 2016, Breitbart News falsely claimed President Obama supported terrorists."
The article is essentially a repost of a state department memo obtained by Judicial Watch that literally says "The West (and others) support the opposition." where the 'opposition' is described in the previous sentence as Al Qaeda+Muslim Brotherhood+Salafist.
>Obama had wiretapped Donald Trump during Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.
Unless you want to be ultra-pedantic about the definition of "wiretap", that actually happened.

Conspiracy theories about Hillary Clinton
>Pizzagate
The only citation is a dailybeast article that references a breitbart *tweet* that at most gives the story a nod.
>Roger Stone
We're judging outlets by their craziest contributors now? I heartily encourage this.

False report of Muslim mob in Germany
So it was only 50-70 people chanting Allahu Akbar - not 1000 - and the fire was only *near* the church. But it's fine when CNN spends all day trying to think of reasons Trump could be impeached for what he tweeted that morning.

Climate change denial
>In November 2016, Breitbart published an article by James Delingpole...
A bit of liberal-mocking surrounding large exerpts of a daily mail article with the real meat. If the article is wrong it's on DM not breitbart.

ACORN undercover videos
" the most damning words match the transcripts and the audio, and do not seem out of context." - NYT Public Editor

Shirley Sherrod
NAACP audience reacts favorably to admission of anti-white racial bias. Other non-breitbart entities overreact before seeing full video. Sources of the original article seem to be down, so can't evaluate further.

Anthony Weiner
Lol

Friends of Hamas
Surely no MSM outlet would publish anonymous claims from government insiders without independently verifying them...

Nancy Pelosi/Miley Cyrus ad campaign
Double lol

Misidentification of Loretta Lynch
Sloppy mistake quickly corrected.

Conspiracy theories about President Obama
>"According to the New York Times, Breitbart News promoted the falsehood that President Obama was a Kenyan-born Muslim."
Whoever wrote this refuses to link the original article(s), and apparently hasn't seen it himself, relying only on the NYT to tell him about their existence. Can't judge further.
>"In June 2016, Breitbart News falsely claimed President Obama supported terrorists."
The article is essentially a repost of a state department memo obtained by Judicial Watch that literally says "The West (and others) support the opposition." where the 'opposition' is described in the previous sentence as Al Qaeda+Muslim Brotherhood+Salafist.
>Obama had wiretapped Donald Trump during Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.
Unless you want to be ultra-pedantic about the definition of "wiretap", that actually happened.

Conspiracy theories about Hillary Clinton
>Pizzagate
The only citation is a dailybeast article that references a breitbart *tweet* that at most gives the story a nod.
>Roger Stone
We're judging outlets by their craziest contributors now? I heartily encourage this.

False report of Muslim mob in Germany
So it was only 50-70 people chanting Allahu Akbar - not 1000 - and the fire was only *near* the church. But it's fine when CNN spends all day trying to think of reasons Trump could be impeached for what he tweeted that morning.

Climate change denial
>In November 2016, Breitbart published an article by James Delingpole...
A bit of liberal-mocking surrounding large exerpts of a daily mail article with the real meat. If the article is wrong it's on DM not breitbart.

My big problem with Brietbart is that there's no way of extricating "reporting" from "comment". That means that if a given statement in a news story can't be substantiated, it can always be defended as "comment". There is no such thing as "news" on brietbart.com - it's all comment.

Example? Take a look at their top story, right now as I type. Go through the story, identify everything that can be interpreted as a verifiable statement of fact, and then check the references for it. See how far you get.

If you get your news from social media, as most Americans do [7], you are exposed to a daily dose of false or misleading content — hoaxes, rumors, conspiracy theories, fabricated reports, click-bait headlines, and even satire. We refer to this misinformation collectively as false or fake news.

The idea here is that Breitbart is misleading and thus misinforming people. Given that a recent headline of theirs is "Planned Parenthood to Spend $3M to Back Democrat in Virginia Governor Race", I would say that misleading is accurate description.

Here's something more recent: http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...
The title doesn't match the content. Calling it misleading would be an understatement.

Can someone link to a Breitbart article that's actually fake news?

Here you go: http://www.breitbart.com/londo...

The weather channel was displeased: https://weather.com/news/news/...

Nope, just corrupt and unrepresentative.

Political parties have a right to set their own standards. But both parties have a flawed primary system, and so does the presidential election itself. Not to mention the various legislative seats, which are grossly imbalanced.

I'm coming to the realization that the Democrats are actually corrupt(*).

I was reading about the DOJ slush fund(**) and it struck me just how deep and insidious the corruption has been in this country.

This is paired with the IRS selecting conservative charities for intense scrutiny, 11 California counties have more registered voters than adults, all the leaks and outright disobeying of executive orders from the WH.

And let us not forget after the election, leftists pleaded with the EC delegates to be faithless, then pleaded with the supreme court to invalidate the results, then pleaded with the U.S. military to step in and prevent the inauguration (wtf?), leaked secret and sensitive information - not to expose crimes, but for political slander, and rioted for weeks. They thought all this was OK, if it somehow got them to their goals. For example, Hillary made no statements condemning the riots, and most of the left blamed the rioting on Trump.

All this *in addition* to the Sanders thing, and getting special treatment in the press and for the debates, blocking reasonable voter registration, and suppressing the military vote.

There's a sub-conversation on the net that holds that the Democratic party *won't survive* once all the corruption has been rooted out. The Democratic ideals are so far from what people want that they require all the extra boost they get from a tilted playing field.

I'm not sure I believe that bit about the Democratic party not surviving, but after reading about the DOJ thing, and knowing the level of effort we're putting into the Russia probe while ignoring some seemingly obvious evidence on the Democratic side, it makes me wonder...

(*) Whether the Republicans are also corrupt, or have a different level of corruption, is still an open question.

(**) DOJ plea-bargains where the offending company pays its fine to charity, but the DOJ only chooses charities that promote left-wing causes.

Nope, just corrupt and unrepresentative.

Political parties have a right to set their own standards. But both parties have a flawed primary system, and so does the presidential election itself. Not to mention the various legislative seats, which are grossly imbalanced.

I'm coming to the realization that the Democrats are actually corrupt(*).

I was reading about the DOJ slush fund(**) and it struck me just how deep and insidious the corruption has been in this country.

This is paired with the IRS selecting conservative charities for intense scrutiny, 11 California counties have more registered voters than adults, all the leaks and outright disobeying of executive orders from the WH.

And let us not forget after the election, leftists pleaded with the EC delegates to be faithless, then pleaded with the supreme court to invalidate the results, then pleaded with the U.S. military to step in and prevent the inauguration (wtf?), leaked secret and sensitive information - not to expose crimes, but for political slander, and rioted for weeks. They thought all this was OK, if it somehow got them to their goals. For example, Hillary made no statements condemning the riots, and most of the left blamed the rioting on Trump.

All this *in addition* to the Sanders thing, and getting special treatment in the press and for the debates, blocking reasonable voter registration, and suppressing the military vote.

There's a sub-conversation on the net that holds that the Democratic party *won't survive* once all the corruption has been rooted out. The Democratic ideals are so far from what people want that they require all the extra boost they get from a tilted playing field.

I'm not sure I believe that bit about the Democratic party not surviving, but after reading about the DOJ thing, and knowing the level of effort we're putting into the Russia probe while ignoring some seemingly obvious evidence on the Democratic side, it makes me wonder...

(*) Whether the Republicans are also corrupt, or have a different level of corruption, is still an open question.

(**) DOJ plea-bargains where the offending company pays its fine to charity, but the DOJ only chooses charities that promote left-wing causes.

but I'm pretty sure neither Trump nor any American citizen* has any issues with LEGAL Immigration.

Yeah they do. Trump wants to severely reduce the number of LEGAL immigrants we take in and his supporters are frothing white supremacists who would completely end all immigration tomorrow.

Trump has admitted that he wants to stop all legal immigration for one or two years.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...

sounds just like a troll justifying trolling...

abuse is abuse

Sure let's go with that. Going by your own post, the above is harassment. Please send victimbux to email address next to UID.

But let's roll with some examples: Kotaku defends why they incited harassment against nintendo. Leftwing journo say's they're being harassed after lying and sicing antifa on other journalists. One of the "big name" people who claimed Gamergate=harassment engaging in harassment. Her organization engaging in targeted harassment, media gives no shits because it doesn't fit the narrative. People directly linked to her organization engage in doxing and harassment. Just remember it's okay when one ideology does it, but only one. Also remember existing is harassment. If you want more examples, try Tim Pool.

If he's bringing up fake news that basically means two things: Trump & Brexit.

And pizzagate and golden showers and Russian hacking and many, many others too numerous to list.

There's a metric buttload of less important fake news flowing around the MSM nowadays.

Just today a number of MSM outlets(*) report that Polish first lady Agata Kornhauser-Duda snubbed President Donald Trump by refusing to shake his hand during his visit to Poland on Thursday.

Of course, this is trivially debunked by simply looking at the images of the meet.

At this point I'm not even sure why they do it; I mean... is it really effective to falsely report something in an attempt to tear down Trump? Does false reporting advance them towards some goal?

Far right news outlets are calling out all the MSM fakeness, and because of this the integrity of the far right outlets has been steadily rising. That's starting to take a toll on the believability of the MSM.

Are they really going to continue this process of "just making shit up and printing it" until people simply don't believe them any more?

I would think that's a path to disaster, but then again I don't work at a newspaper. Maybe it's all part of some elaborate plan.

(*) WaPo, HuffPo, and Daily Express, among many others

throw your weight behind the 2018 mid terms. Make it clear that they'll be blood at the polls when NN gets struck down.

That is one of those plans that "sounds good, doesn't work".

1) NN is a minor issue that will be lost among much larger issues such as immigration, the economy, and health care.

2) The left, and I'm not saying this as a cheap insult, is in shambles with no obvious path to recovery and lots of potential paths to complete disaster. (Example: legislature is considering investigating Podesta's ties to Russia.)

3) The left has no one showing any sign of leadership today, which will come up in 2018 when we examine the past performances of whoever the party chooses to run. (Also true of the 2020 presidential election.)

The only positive thing I can see about the Democratic party today is the plan to choose their political positions by referendum.

The referendum thing could work, it could generate a solid foundation of positions that the people could support, but it's being presented and run in a low-class manner, and apparently the proposals won't be curated to weed out immature political emotion-baiting.

The 2018 elections will be largely in full swing a year from now, and all of Nancy Pelosi's incoherent ramblings, all of Chuck Schumer's self-victimizing, all of CNN's arrogance (and loss of viewers), and every stupid thing the left does between now and then will be put on display for the entire country to see.

Pity that - I'm all for having the parties compete with each other for effective leadership ideas.

Net Neutrality will get another article or two on Slashdot, nerds will feel a brief sense of outrage at the click-bait headline.

And then we'll move on to something else.

It takes a certain level of stupid to still think the ACA is not the most misleadingly named law in existence. Sadly, not only does the above poster exist in a world so devoid of facts and personal observation that he doesn't understand this, but someone else of equally limited analytical ability modded him up. Since like most posts supporting liberal ideology on these forums, it contained emotion, pejoratives, and NO LINKS BACKING UP THE ARGUMENTS, I will provide some.

1. Then President Obama told the people that his plan would save them on average $2500 and allow them to keep the same level of care. In fact, they new this to be a lie, as was admitted at a fund raiser where the speaker basically is laughing at how stupid people like you are. Personally, that would bother me, but you may like it when your leaders lie and ridicule you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

2. The cost of medical insurance has more than doubled since AFC was enacted. In 2013, families typically paid $2784. Now, they pay $5712. http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...

3.This year is going to be even more devastating. Here is a link from the liberally biased Politico so you don't think it is just "evil" conservatives making things up:

http://www.politico.com/story/...

4. At no point does Trump say that he wants to remove ACA taxes from the rich. This is simply a deluded fantasy on your part, or something that you read from a basement blogger with this fantasy. In fact, he wants to try to keep many protections for the poor and infirm. I know honesty is hard for you, but try to read first. http://thehill.com/policy/heal...

BTW, yes, I am being harsh and yes I am annoyed. I am sick of slander being modded up in these forums. Lets keep the debates honest and not make shit up. Lets have more reason and less emotion. Or, are you simply scared that if you are honest and analyze facts, you may have to change your world view?

CNN coerced him to apologize by threatening to dox him, and now is claiming that he called them to apologize first. Check the timestamps and archive links here.

Which has caused a whole big pile of new anti-CNN memes. My favorites are the ISIS apology video ones. example here. And another. Also, this guy showed up. Even the theater in the park got involved.

Looks like pretty much everyone is now piling on. Here is Julian Assange, Donald Trump Jr., the Washington Times.

It is pretty much the only topic now on The_Donald and has numerous threads on /pol/ (warning, NSFL). Front and center on Breitbart News and Drudge.

Oh, and the guy's identity is pretty much out there already, making their threat moot.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-j...

> Three years before Matt Drudge changed the world and how news would be consumed,
> President Bill Clinton's White House feared that the Internet was allowing average
> citizens, especially conservatives, to bypass legacy gatekeepers and access
> information that had previously been denied to them by the mainstream press.
>
> The infamous 1995 "conspiracy commerce memo" tried to demonize and discredit alternative
> media outlets on the right to mainstream media organizations and D.C. establishment figures.

President Kennedy made Bill Clinton look like a saint. He was fucking women all over the place, e.g. Marilyn Monroe. But there was no internet back in the early 1960's, and the MSM lapdogs were all protective of a Democrat president. Compare that with Bill Clinton in 1998. The MSM were still protecting their Democrat president. But there was now a thing called "the internet" or "the web". Along came a lowly store clerk (Matt Drudge) with a modem

http://australianpolitics.com/...

> Web Posted: 01/17/98 23:32:47 PST -- NEWSWEEK KILLS STORY ON WHITE HOUSE INTERN
>
> BLOCKBUSTER REPORT: 23-YEAR OLD, FORMER WHITE HOUSE INTERN, SEX RELATIONSHIP WITH PRESIDENT
>
> **World Exclusive**
> **Must Credit the DRUDGE REPORT**
>
> At the last minute, at 6 p.m. on Saturday evening, NEWSWEEK magazine
> killed a story that was destined to shake official Washington to its foundation: A White House
> intern carried on a sexual affair with the President of the United States!

Hillary Clinton's response was to lament the lack of "internet gatekeepers". http://www.freerepublic.com/fo...

Well, let's just see where your liberal policies have gotten us, shall we? I was just now reading an article on immigration, which lists 6 quick facts(*) from the immigration report Trump asked for.

I've learned to not trust breitbart as a source until I've verified what they say from a primary source. Even when there is a kernel of fact in their articles, they often misinterpret it, and usually do some heavy-duty quote mining to pick just one part of a long sentence, even if quoting the whole sentence in context would state the opposite.

So: quote the original report, not the breitbart "interpretation" of the report.

(*) There will be the inevitable idiot claiming that Breitbart isn't a credible source. You may note that the idiot doesn't discredit the story, or the information from the story, or (heavens!) the *source* of the information on which the story is based. Take that as you may.

Correct. And I note that you didn't quote "the *source* of the information on which the story is based".

75% of the US population and GDP lay in urban areas

Best recognize. And the rest of you just sit your civil war memorial protecting oxycontin using bring back our coal jobs Toby Keith listening asses down.

We got this.

Well, let's just see where your liberal policies have gotten us, shall we?

I was just now reading an article on immigration, which lists 6 quick facts(*) from the immigration report Trump asked for.

This was information largely hidden by the Obama administration, and Trump made it public.

From that report:

.) The US gets one new immigrant for every four Americans who are born.
.) The US gets one temporary foreign worker for every five new (turns 18 and enters the workforce) American workers.
.) 50 percent of foreign temporary workers are white-collar professionals (about 35,000 per month, of 70,000 incoming per month)
.) Trump won by getting 80,000 more votes than Hillary in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. The 264,533 new [immigrants who became citizen] voters in the first six months is basically three times the number of 2016 voters who gave Trump his victory. New citizen immigrants are changing the political landscape of the country.

Note that this information was basically hidden by Obama: no one knew what was happening, and no one knows how long it was went on (and we probably never will).

To put this simply: When your two kids turn 18 and are trying to get jobs, there is also one immigrant competing for those same jobs.

And it's white collar jobs as well as low-level ones.

So tell me - how will that GDP work out for you, when you're out of a job?

(*) There will be the inevitable idiot claiming that Breitbart isn't a credible source. You may note that the idiot doesn't discredit the story, or the information from the story, or (heavens!) the *source* of the information on which the story is based. Take that as you may.

Of course, "inflaming hate versus others" can easily be interpreted so widely that it can be used by the government to censor speech No it can't as told you now several times. The government has no influence on judges and police.

Wrong again. Yes it can, as I've told you many times now. Need yet another example of out of control "hate speech" laws being used for political censorship? Well look no further than the recent case of the 62 year old German woman fined 1,000 Euros for a meme, a harmless joke on Facebook:

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/06/04/62-year-old-german-woman-fined-1000-euros-sharing-anti-migrant-joke-online/

http://www.snopes.com/german-woman-fined-facebook-meme-refugees/

And by the way, Judges and the Police are actually government entities, so of course the government has influence over them. In Rotherham, England the Police knew for at least 10 years of the mass, organized, systematic raping of children by Pakistanis and Afghans but refused to stop it because they were under government pressure to avoid the perception of being racist. So the government's policy of political correctness won over protecting children. Any country that makes that choice has no future, nor deserves one.

There is nothing happening in that regard. There are not even protests against her politics. 90% of the germans stand fully behind it.

It only seems that way because the German news media has been in full pro-migrant propaganda mode for years now and most Germans are too afraid to say how they really feel, lest they end up fired from their jobs, "interviewed" by the police, fined, arrested or have their homes raided. So go on and live in that 90% fantasy world of yours

You would not be arrested, why would you? Are you really that stupid? What you say is wrong, but who cares? You would be arrested after you had hunted them down. Here, and in your country. And then convicted. Here and in your country.

Are you really that stupid? If a 15 yr old can be arrested in Europe for an offensive tweet aimed at a football player who scored a goal against his favorite team, anything goes. No violence threatened, just offensive. And as for the theoretical American AR15 armed Father, he's likely thought out the consequences and found them worth taking for his hunting expedition since neither the police nor the justice system will protect his children. Furthermore, he's likely to find a sympathetic ear or two on an American jury for his temporary rage driven insanity, not necessarily convicted at all.

Can't be so hard to grasp what "hate speech" is ... your examples are none.

Again, "hate speech" is whatever the government and prevailing political correctness/thought police culture wants it to be. I've provided numerous examples and could provide many more. The example of the 62 yr old German woman makes it clear. Why is it so hard for you to grasp that "hate speech" is whatever the German/English/Swedish..government wants it to be?

So: you have hate speech "case law".

Regarding the First Amendment all State and Federal law is subject to the U.S. Supreme Court's interpretation which requires "imminent lawless action" which means it is both imminent action (right now) and likely to actually happen, in order to restrict speech. Anything else goes including advocating that at some point in the future it would be a good idea for some people to take some illegal action, even if that "good idea" is violent. Any attempt to suppress that speech w

What they lack are real free speech rights Europe, especially germany, has the same free speech rights than you have. The stuff we are talking about here had nothing to do with government, but with idiots inflaming hate versus others, that is a legal crime here. Prosecuted by the state attorney, not the government.

Obviously you don't have the same free speech rights that we have in the U.S. as evidenced by the fact the police in Germany are raiding homes for "inflaming hate versus others", apparently a crime in Germany but legal speech in the U.S.

Of course, "inflaming hate versus others" can easily be interpreted so widely that it can be used by the government to censor speech where the government feels most vulnerable, like Merkel's migrant policy, which is exactly what is happening. In other words, political censorship. And it has a chilling effect on speech. Maybe you want to write on Facebook about the rising crime rate attributed to migrants in the country but don't because you don't want an interview with the police or to end up on some government watch list. Maybe you won't get arrested but censor yourself as you don't want to worry if government pressure or being on such a list will affect your ability to earn a living.

U.S. Supreme Court has said over and over again that it is the most controversial speech that is most in need of 1st Amendment protection and has long recognized the chilling effect on speech that censorship can have. So NO, we don't have the same free speech rights as Europeans, idiot. What we have is far better, hence original point.

There are no murdering, thieving, raping thugs running around in Europe. We are in Europe, not in the USA ... idiot.

Obviously you do...moron. We are in the U.S.A, not Europe and if they tried the stuff you see in the (very short, could be infinitely longer) list below, very well armed U.S. citizens would defend themselves.
Something on the scale of Rotherham would never happen here because enraged Fathers, AR15 in hand, would hunt them down like the animals they are. Good thing I'm not in Europe, I'd arrested for saying that....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploitation_scandal/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4546450/Rochdale-horror-goes-abuse-rife-10-years-on.html/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/06/03/grooming-scandal-200-sex-crimes-town/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/22/timeline-twelve-years-terror-attacks-uk/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/02/belgian-police-moroccan-raped-230-women/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/09/24/swedish-police-admit-loss-control-55-no-go-areas/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/06/13/sweden-50-per-cent-rise-no-go-zones/
http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/sverige-har-fatt-fler-problemomraden-krisstamning-inom-polisledningen/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/23

What they lack are real free speech rights Europe, especially germany, has the same free speech rights than you have. The stuff we are talking about here had nothing to do with government, but with idiots inflaming hate versus others, that is a legal crime here. Prosecuted by the state attorney, not the government.

Obviously you don't have the same free speech rights that we have in the U.S. as evidenced by the fact the police in Germany are raiding homes for "inflaming hate versus others", apparently a crime in Germany but legal speech in the U.S.

Of course, "inflaming hate versus others" can easily be interpreted so widely that it can be used by the government to censor speech where the government feels most vulnerable, like Merkel's migrant policy, which is exactly what is happening. In other words, political censorship. And it has a chilling effect on speech. Maybe you want to write on Facebook about the rising crime rate attributed to migrants in the country but don't because you don't want an interview with the police or to end up on some government watch list. Maybe you won't get arrested but censor yourself as you don't want to worry if government pressure or being on such a list will affect your ability to earn a living.

U.S. Supreme Court has said over and over again that it is the most controversial speech that is most in need of 1st Amendment protection and has long recognized the chilling effect on speech that censorship can have. So NO, we don't have the same free speech rights as Europeans, idiot. What we have is far better, hence original point.

There are no murdering, thieving, raping thugs running around in Europe. We are in Europe, not in the USA ... idiot.

Obviously you do...moron. We are in the U.S.A, not Europe and if they tried the stuff you see in the (very short, could be infinitely longer) list below, very well armed U.S. citizens would defend themselves.
Something on the scale of Rotherham would never happen here because enraged Fathers, AR15 in hand, would hunt them down like the animals they are. Good thing I'm not in Europe, I'd arrested for saying that....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploitation_scandal/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4546450/Rochdale-horror-goes-abuse-rife-10-years-on.html/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/06/03/grooming-scandal-200-sex-crimes-town/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/22/timeline-twelve-years-terror-attacks-uk/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/02/belgian-police-moroccan-raped-230-women/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/09/24/swedish-police-admit-loss-control-55-no-go-areas/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/06/13/sweden-50-per-cent-rise-no-go-zones/
http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/sverige-har-fatt-fler-problemomraden-krisstamning-inom-polisledningen/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/23

What they lack are real free speech rights Europe, especially germany, has the same free speech rights than you have. The stuff we are talking about here had nothing to do with government, but with idiots inflaming hate versus others, that is a legal crime here. Prosecuted by the state attorney, not the government.

Obviously you don't have the same free speech rights that we have in the U.S. as evidenced by the fact the police in Germany are raiding homes for "inflaming hate versus others", apparently a crime in Germany but legal speech in the U.S.

Of course, "inflaming hate versus others" can easily be interpreted so widely that it can be used by the government to censor speech where the government feels most vulnerable, like Merkel's migrant policy, which is exactly what is happening. In other words, political censorship. And it has a chilling effect on speech. Maybe you want to write on Facebook about the rising crime rate attributed to migrants in the country but don't because you don't want an interview with the police or to end up on some government watch list. Maybe you won't get arrested but censor yourself as you don't want to worry if government pressure or being on such a list will affect your ability to earn a living.

U.S. Supreme Court has said over and over again that it is the most controversial speech that is most in need of 1st Amendment protection and has long recognized the chilling effect on speech that censorship can have. So NO, we don't have the same free speech rights as Europeans, idiot. What we have is far better, hence original point.

There are no murdering, thieving, raping thugs running around in Europe. We are in Europe, not in the USA ... idiot.

Obviously you do...moron. We are in the U.S.A, not Europe and if they tried the stuff you see in the (very short, could be infinitely longer) list below, very well armed U.S. citizens would defend themselves.
Something on the scale of Rotherham would never happen here because enraged Fathers, AR15 in hand, would hunt them down like the animals they are. Good thing I'm not in Europe, I'd arrested for saying that....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploitation_scandal/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4546450/Rochdale-horror-goes-abuse-rife-10-years-on.html/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/06/03/grooming-scandal-200-sex-crimes-town/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/22/timeline-twelve-years-terror-attacks-uk/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/02/belgian-police-moroccan-raped-230-women/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/09/24/swedish-police-admit-loss-control-55-no-go-areas/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/06/13/sweden-50-per-cent-rise-no-go-zones/
http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/sverige-har-fatt-fler-problemomraden-krisstamning-inom-polisledningen/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/23

What they lack are real free speech rights Europe, especially germany, has the same free speech rights than you have. The stuff we are talking about here had nothing to do with government, but with idiots inflaming hate versus others, that is a legal crime here. Prosecuted by the state attorney, not the government.

Obviously you don't have the same free speech rights that we have in the U.S. as evidenced by the fact the police in Germany are raiding homes for "inflaming hate versus others", apparently a crime in Germany but legal speech in the U.S.

Of course, "inflaming hate versus others" can easily be interpreted so widely that it can be used by the government to censor speech where the government feels most vulnerable, like Merkel's migrant policy, which is exactly what is happening. In other words, political censorship. And it has a chilling effect on speech. Maybe you want to write on Facebook about the rising crime rate attributed to migrants in the country but don't because you don't want an interview with the police or to end up on some government watch list. Maybe you won't get arrested but censor yourself as you don't want to worry if government pressure or being on such a list will affect your ability to earn a living.

U.S. Supreme Court has said over and over again that it is the most controversial speech that is most in need of 1st Amendment protection and has long recognized the chilling effect on speech that censorship can have. So NO, we don't have the same free speech rights as Europeans, idiot. What we have is far better, hence original point.

There are no murdering, thieving, raping thugs running around in Europe. We are in Europe, not in the USA ... idiot.

Obviously you do...moron. We are in the U.S.A, not Europe and if they tried the stuff you see in the (very short, could be infinitely longer) list below, very well armed U.S. citizens would defend themselves.
Something on the scale of Rotherham would never happen here because enraged Fathers, AR15 in hand, would hunt them down like the animals they are. Good thing I'm not in Europe, I'd arrested for saying that....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploitation_scandal/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4546450/Rochdale-horror-goes-abuse-rife-10-years-on.html/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/06/03/grooming-scandal-200-sex-crimes-town/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/22/timeline-twelve-years-terror-attacks-uk/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/02/belgian-police-moroccan-raped-230-women/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/09/24/swedish-police-admit-loss-control-55-no-go-areas/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/06/13/sweden-50-per-cent-rise-no-go-zones/
http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/sverige-har-fatt-fler-problemomraden-krisstamning-inom-polisledningen/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/23

What they lack are real free speech rights Europe, especially germany, has the same free speech rights than you have. The stuff we are talking about here had nothing to do with government, but with idiots inflaming hate versus others, that is a legal crime here. Prosecuted by the state attorney, not the government.

Obviously you don't have the same free speech rights that we have in the U.S. as evidenced by the fact the police in Germany are raiding homes for "inflaming hate versus others", apparently a crime in Germany but legal speech in the U.S.

Of course, "inflaming hate versus others" can easily be interpreted so widely that it can be used by the government to censor speech where the government feels most vulnerable, like Merkel's migrant policy, which is exactly what is happening. In other words, political censorship. And it has a chilling effect on speech. Maybe you want to write on Facebook about the rising crime rate attributed to migrants in the country but don't because you don't want an interview with the police or to end up on some government watch list. Maybe you won't get arrested but censor yourself as you don't want to worry if government pressure or being on such a list will affect your ability to earn a living.

U.S. Supreme Court has said over and over again that it is the most controversial speech that is most in need of 1st Amendment protection and has long recognized the chilling effect on speech that censorship can have. So NO, we don't have the same free speech rights as Europeans, idiot. What we have is far better, hence original point.

There are no murdering, thieving, raping thugs running around in Europe. We are in Europe, not in the USA ... idiot.

Obviously you do...moron. We are in the U.S.A, not Europe and if they tried the stuff you see in the (very short, could be infinitely longer) list below, very well armed U.S. citizens would defend themselves.
Something on the scale of Rotherham would never happen here because enraged Fathers, AR15 in hand, would hunt them down like the animals they are. Good thing I'm not in Europe, I'd arrested for saying that....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploitation_scandal/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4546450/Rochdale-horror-goes-abuse-rife-10-years-on.html/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/06/03/grooming-scandal-200-sex-crimes-town/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/22/timeline-twelve-years-terror-attacks-uk/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/02/belgian-police-moroccan-raped-230-women/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/09/24/swedish-police-admit-loss-control-55-no-go-areas/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/06/13/sweden-50-per-cent-rise-no-go-zones/
http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/sverige-har-fatt-fler-problemomraden-krisstamning-inom-polisledningen/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/23

What they lack are real free speech rights Europe, especially germany, has the same free speech rights than you have. The stuff we are talking about here had nothing to do with government, but with idiots inflaming hate versus others, that is a legal crime here. Prosecuted by the state attorney, not the government.

Obviously you don't have the same free speech rights that we have in the U.S. as evidenced by the fact the police in Germany are raiding homes for "inflaming hate versus others", apparently a crime in Germany but legal speech in the U.S.

Of course, "inflaming hate versus others" can easily be interpreted so widely that it can be used by the government to censor speech where the government feels most vulnerable, like Merkel's migrant policy, which is exactly what is happening. In other words, political censorship. And it has a chilling effect on speech. Maybe you want to write on Facebook about the rising crime rate attributed to migrants in the country but don't because you don't want an interview with the police or to end up on some government watch list. Maybe you won't get arrested but censor yourself as you don't want to worry if government pressure or being on such a list will affect your ability to earn a living.

U.S. Supreme Court has said over and over again that it is the most controversial speech that is most in need of 1st Amendment protection and has long recognized the chilling effect on speech that censorship can have. So NO, we don't have the same free speech rights as Europeans, idiot. What we have is far better, hence original point.

There are no murdering, thieving, raping thugs running around in Europe. We are in Europe, not in the USA ... idiot.

Obviously you do...moron. We are in the U.S.A, not Europe and if they tried the stuff you see in the (very short, could be infinitely longer) list below, very well armed U.S. citizens would defend themselves.
Something on the scale of Rotherham would never happen here because enraged Fathers, AR15 in hand, would hunt them down like the animals they are. Good thing I'm not in Europe, I'd arrested for saying that....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploitation_scandal/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4546450/Rochdale-horror-goes-abuse-rife-10-years-on.html/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/06/03/grooming-scandal-200-sex-crimes-town/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/22/timeline-twelve-years-terror-attacks-uk/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/02/belgian-police-moroccan-raped-230-women/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/09/24/swedish-police-admit-loss-control-55-no-go-areas/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/06/13/sweden-50-per-cent-rise-no-go-zones/
http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/sverige-har-fatt-fler-problemomraden-krisstamning-inom-polisledningen/
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/03/23

The left considers violence wrong except in very specific circumstances.

Of course (Vol. IV)!

From John Hawkins

16) “But, you know, the NRA members are the current incarnation of the brownshirts from Germany back in the early ’30s, late ’20s, early ’30s. Now, of course, there came the Night of the Long Knives when the brownshirts were slaughtered and dumped in the nearest ditches when the power structure finally got tired of them. So I look forward to that day.” — Mike Malloy

17) "Or pick up a baseball bat and take out every f*cking republican and independent I see. #f*cktrump, #f*cktheGOP, #f*ckstraightwhiteamerica, #f*ckyourprivilege." -- Orange is the New Black star Lea DeLaria responding to a meme about using music to deal with violence

18) “I wish they (Republicans) were all f*cking dead!” — Dan Savage

19) “Sarah Palin needs to have her hair shaved off to a buzz cut, get headf*cked by a big veiny, ashy, black d*ck then be locked in a cupboard.” — Azealia Banks advocates raping Sarah Palin over a fake news story

20)” Yes, I’m angry. Yes, I’m outraged. Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House, but I know that this won’t change anything." -- Madonna

The left considers violence wrong except in very specific circumstances.

Of course (Vol. IV)!

From John Hawkins

16) “But, you know, the NRA members are the current incarnation of the brownshirts from Germany back in the early ’30s, late ’20s, early ’30s. Now, of course, there came the Night of the Long Knives when the brownshirts were slaughtered and dumped in the nearest ditches when the power structure finally got tired of them. So I look forward to that day.” — Mike Malloy

17) "Or pick up a baseball bat and take out every f*cking republican and independent I see. #f*cktrump, #f*cktheGOP, #f*ckstraightwhiteamerica, #f*ckyourprivilege." -- Orange is the New Black star Lea DeLaria responding to a meme about using music to deal with violence

18) “I wish they (Republicans) were all f*cking dead!” — Dan Savage

19) “Sarah Palin needs to have her hair shaved off to a buzz cut, get headf*cked by a big veiny, ashy, black d*ck then be locked in a cupboard.” — Azealia Banks advocates raping Sarah Palin over a fake news story

20)” Yes, I’m angry. Yes, I’m outraged. Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House, but I know that this won’t change anything." -- Madonna

The left considers violence wrong except in very specific circumstances.

Of course (Vol. III)!

From John Hawkins

11) “Cheney deserves same final end he gave Saddam. Hope there are cell cams.” — Rep. Chuck Kruger (D-Thomaston)

12) “If I had my way, I would see Katherine Harris and Ken Blackwell strapped down to electric chairs and lit up like Christmas trees. The better to light the way for American Democracy and American Freedom!” — Democratic Talk Radio’s Stephen Crockett

13) “May your children all die from debilitating, painful and incurable diseases.” — Allan Brauer , the communications chair of the Democratic Party of Sacramento County to Ted Cruz staffer Amanda Carpenter

14) “Violence solves nothing. I want a rhino to f*ck @SpeakerRyan to death with its horn because it's FUNNY, not because he's a #GOPmurderbro.” – Joss Whedon

15) “I hope Roger Ailes dies slow, painful, and soon. The evil that man has done to the American tapestry is unprecedented for an individual.” — Think Progress editor Alan Pyke

The left considers violence wrong except in very specific circumstances.

Of course (Vol. I)!

From John Hawkins

1) "Michele (Bachmann), slit your wrist. Go ahead... or, do us all a better thing [sic]. Move that knife up about two feet. Start right at the collarbone." -- Montel Williams

2) “F*ck that dude. I’ll smack that f*cker’s comb-over right off his f*cking scalp. Like, for real, if I met Donald Trump, I’d punch him in his f*cking face. And that’s not a joke. Even if he did become president — watch out, Donald Trump, because I will punch you in your f*cking face if I ever meet you. Secret Service had better just f*cking be on it. Don’t let me anywhere within a block.”– Rapper Everlast on Donald Trump

3) “I have zero doubt that if Dick Cheney was not in power, people wouldn’t be dying needlessly tomorrow.I’m just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That’s a fact.” — Bill Maher

4) “I know how the ‘tea party’ people feel, the anger, venom and bile that many of them showed during the recent House vote on health-care reform. I know because I want to spit on them, take one of their “Obama Plan White Slavery” signs and knock every racist and homophobic tooth out of their Cro-Magnon heads.” — The Washington Post’s Courtland Milloy

5) “F*** God D*mned Joe the God D*mned Motherf*cking plumber! I want Motherf*cking Joe the plumber dead.” — Liberal talk show host Charles Karel Bouley on the air.

That is great you can say Trump has been inciting violence but 90% of violence has been coming from the left, not only that the left has gone out of their way to try to frame the right as violent, here are 22 cases after the election http://www.breitbart.com/big-g.... That doesn't even count the left wing nut jobs going to Trump rallies to start riots.

Fakenews much? 22 of the post election attacks were false flags by liberals, many have been arrested for filing false police reports. http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...

Oh boo hoo hoo, milo yogurt and ann coulter couldn't speak on a college campus because of protests. A republican student murdered another student for being black. If you're upset about liberals shutting down free speech but not the massive rise in right-wing hate crimes across the country, are you even fooling yourself? You hate liberals, you don't have a fucking reason other than they're not like you.

During the Milo riots, leftist rioters beat Milo attendees with flagpoles and fists. [MMA fighter] Jake Shields pulled a victim from a crowd of beaters and protected him from harm. When asked, the victim had no idea why he was being beaten. Some of the rioters had simply started calling him [the victim] a nazi, for apparently no reason, and the beatings began from there.

This is why the left keeps saying things about the right that aren't true. They say it because once you've established that someone is a nazi, or islamaphobe, or racist, or so on... once you've established that they are despicable then it's OK to attempt to murder them.

I suppose it's a form of virtue signalling, in the manner of "she's a witch! Burn her!" You are such a good and virtuous person that you actively stamp out evil. It starts by labelling the other person as something despicable.

I've *never* seen the right do that to the extent that the left has done, in the last several months. Apparently holding the bloody, severed head of the president is OK, knifing him to death as part of "Shakespeare in the park" is OK, and putting up disgusting nude statues of him in cities across the nation is considered OK.

The left says a lot of things about the right that simply aren't true, for a reason: it's to justify breaking laws and trampling rights. They want to get their way in any manner possible, and the ends justify any means.

The left says a lot of things about the right that simply aren't true.

Don't believe them.

Oh boo hoo hoo, milo yogurt and ann coulter couldn't speak on a college campus because of protests. A republican student murdered another student for being black. If you're upset about liberals shutting down free speech but not the massive rise in right-wing hate crimes across the country, are you even fooling yourself? You hate liberals, you don't have a fucking reason other than they're not like you.

During the Milo riots, leftist rioters beat Milo attendees with flagpoles and fists. [MMA fighter] Jake Shields pulled a victim from a crowd of beaters and protected him from harm. When asked, the victim had no idea why he was being beaten. Some of the rioters had simply started calling him [the victim] a nazi, for apparently no reason, and the beatings began from there.

This is why the left keeps saying things about the right that aren't true. They say it because once you've established that someone is a nazi, or islamaphobe, or racist, or so on... once you've established that they are despicable then it's OK to attempt to murder them.

I suppose it's a form of virtue signalling, in the manner of "she's a witch! Burn her!" You are such a good and virtuous person that you actively stamp out evil. It starts by labelling the other person as something despicable.

I've *never* seen the right do that to the extent that the left has done, in the last several months. Apparently holding the bloody, severed head of the president is OK, knifing him to death as part of "Shakespeare in the park" is OK, and putting up disgusting nude statues of him in cities across the nation is considered OK.

The left says a lot of things about the right that simply aren't true, for a reason: it's to justify breaking laws and trampling rights. They want to get their way in any manner possible, and the ends justify any means.

The left says a lot of things about the right that simply aren't true.

Don't believe them.

Nah, that's an easy one, hating Trump is always king. Supporting Trump immediately invalidates all your oppression points.

For instance, LA just canceled their gay pride parade and replaced it with a "Resist" march because gay Trump supporters from North Carolina wanted to participate.

You know what the difference between today and the 1980's were? That the attack in San Bernardino and Pulse Nightclub both could have been stopped. What happened?

Omar got reported, and yet the authorities ended up doing nothing.

But then, the same goes for others.

I suppose we could live in the Draconian Police State you want, but I suspect you'd hate that.

And how about more in the UK, with those girls raped and being sold as sex slaves(just a fyi it's happening in the US too).

Yes, yes, West Texas is full of it.

And the muslims trying to take over schools to turn them into extremist breeding grounds(see trojan horse scandal).

No, that's Christians.

Well what do you know? In those dozens of cases it was all the same thing too.

I think we've got a problem. You know what it is? People are too politically correct and afraid of being labeled racist/islamophobe/etc.

Nope, it's the other way around. People are obsessively racist, islamophobic, and otherwise unable to see the problems are all over.

So afraid that they'll turn a blind eye to people preparing to carry out a terrorist attack. Until that changes this isn't going to change either. We could, avoid the whole "implement internet agenda thing." The answer is in this paragraph. And you know as well as I do that the left has a very long history the last decade of going after people for daring to say "that muslim looks like they're going to blow people up."

Yeah, that's because you say it so much, then you attack some Sikhs.

After all, that's what happened in Rotterdam and why 1000+ girls were raped and used as sex toys after all....for over a decade.

Clean your own closet first.

You don't really care though, that's why you won't even bat an eye at the stuff in your own backyard.

You'll do nothing but scream and pout in a tantrum.

Apparently you are, not only that you're an idiot to boot. The "line that I'm pushing" is people are afraid of doing something and being labeled racist for doing it.

To make it very simple for you: They're willing to look the other way because of fear, and they're willing to look so hard in the other direction that people are dying because of it.

Yes, the FBI is unable to investigate right-wing terrorism because of that attitude.

Some of

http://www.breitbart.com/londo...

Nobody tried to ban Milo

https://www.change.org/p/ban-m...
https://www.theguardian.com/te...
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/...
http://www.breitbart.com/milo/...
http://www.dailyuw.com/opinion...

Look, I could keep going but I think that presents extensive proof that you're full of shit.

But since you apparently stopped reading after my first sentence, you don't know how your post actually PROVED my point.

I didn't stop reading. I merely went back and highlighted that you lied in your opening sentence, and since the rest of your illogical rant ridden with falsehoods was based on that lie I couldn't be arsed to go through and point out where you're full of shit.

Milo is offensive and a lot of people have tried to ban him. Many of those identify as 'left' on the political spectrum.

It's clearly too complex an issue for you as you can't properly articulate it. You're too busy throwing around labels like 'left' and 'right', and misrepresenting even those arbitrary positions, and you're operating from a bigoted ignorant base that will prevent you finding any answers, simple or otherwise.

Now fuck off and watch how adults do it.

Wonder what might have (not) happened if the UK had a similar travel ban.

http://www.breitbart.com/londo...

Thing is, there was never any actual evidence of Russian hacking.

Look dude, even President ManBaby himself said the information he's seen convinced him.
The one guy with the most reason to deny the russians hacked the Clinton campaign and the most access to any proof otherwise has said he thinks the Russians did it.

Trump: "As far as hacking, I think it was Russia"

The claim by Trump follows incoming Chief of Staff Reince Priebus stating on Fox News that he thinks Trump “accepts the finding. He’s not denying entities in Russia are behind these particular hackings.”

No evidence supporting claims of the attack's origins was ever presented.

Look dude, even the Resident ManBaby himself said the information he's seen convinced him.
The one guy with the most reason to deny the russians hacked the Clinton campaign and the most access to any proof otherwise has said he thinks the Russians did it.

"As far as hacking, I think it was Russia"

The claim by Trump follows incoming Chief of Staff Reince Priebus stating on Fox News that he thinks Trump “accepts the finding. He’s not denying entities in Russia are behind these particular hackings.”

In the spirit of Saint Reagan

Oh, be fair.

The regulations were many, and often at odds with each other and at odds with the goals of School Nutrition Association. It was pushed by Michelle Obama with little or no input from nutrition experts or the aforementioned group, and caused so much anger with it's one-sided dictates that Michelle's "food policy czar" was asked not to speak/hand out awards at the SNA association dinner.

School regulations are the purview of state, not federal. It's much *much* better when the local population has a say in how their kids get schooled. Common core and "no child left behind" was a disaster.

Schools are better off managed at the local level.

Everyone knows that.

Alex Jones is the real deal. Do not believe the fake news coming out of his own testimony.

Perception is reality.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...

Really - the same Google who manipulated their search engine to bury news that were damaging to the Clinton campaign is now promising to protect us from fake news?

Frankly with Google's record of integrity, I don't trust them to decide for me what is fake news.