Slashdot Mirror

Democrats concerned about secure and honest voting? That's rich!

Dems are against voter ID laws
Dems racism exposed in their anti-Voter-ID crusade
Dem caught commiting voter fraud
DeBlasio cans whistleblower on Dem voter fraud
Illegal aliens voting
Pelosi wants voter age lowered to capture recently indoctrinated youth

It goes on and on with these traitors.

Read All About It!

More!

Extra! Extra!

These smart guys already did the math: Odds Hillary Won Without Widespread Fraud: 1 in 77 Billion Say Berkeley, Stanford Studies (If you don't like this link, there are several other copies of this article floating around on the web.)

The available voting data from the 2016 democratic primary shows significant statistical abnormalities, in the last half of the data, that favor Hillary at the expense of Bernie. It appears that a voting machine exploit was in place in several districts, that only triggered in real time when someone or something detected that Hillary was about to lose to Bernie.

That's just the election itself. Stepping back in time to the pre-election Hillary vs. Bernie campaign trail, there's also the obvious issues of stealing campaign money from Bernie's campaign, and installing Imran Awan, a Pakistani spy as the IT manager of the DNC's computer network, subverting the DNC 'VAN' computer network that Bernie, a democratic candidate, was forced to use for official campaign business. Meaning that Hillary was secretly in control of the Bernie campaign's network, and even revoked access at one point during his campaign. (We discovered Hillary's DNC network subversion through a Wikileaks publication.) Then we have a secret joint fundraising agreement that DNC bosses signed with Hillary Clinton, giving her nearly full control of the DNC, BEFORE she was nominated. (alternate link.)

If that's too technical for you, then let me remind you that, defending against the DNC fraud lawsuit, a DNC lawyer Bruce Spiva said in court: "We could have voluntarily decided that, 'Look, we're gonna go into the back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way." This is in reference to the whole Hillary-biased democrat super-delegate debacle that was all over the news at the time. Hillary bribed those super-delegates with laundered money through one of her crooked 'charities' to secure her nomination over Bernie.

This is just the easily cited stuff Hillary's done to screw Bernie. I'm not saying that Hillary's crimes only include screwing Bernie, or that Bernie's a perfect candidate. And I sure as hell didn't vote for Trump.

In all the "look at all the shit that's not working because of Trump" stories, I have yet to read anyone express the slightest question about - should the Federal government really be running all this stuff?

I sincerely doubt anyone in government has the balls after this shutdown to say "Yeah, y'know, we can probably get along without that, that, and that. Nobody really missed them."

http://thefederalist.com/2014/...

By saying "the mainstream media" it sounds like you think a broad spectrum of them are doing it on command or something. Is that what you are suggesting?

Uh, yeah. They have been caught doing it and have talked about doing it. Many media outlets are owned by the CIA NGO network which controls $150 billion in foundation funds and uses its own NGOs to manufacture news while denying that there is a Deep State.

It doesn't take a genius or an extremist to see that there is something with the corporate news media.

You misinterpreted the results. The real meaning of the committee's vote is to confirm that accusation is still NOT the same as guilt. You wouldn't want to be accused of doing something you didn't do and get kangarooed by the media, would you? Consider what happened to 10 Duke Lacrosse players who were accused of rape by a stripper. They were ejected from the team, expelled from the college and labeled as "sexual predators" before they had even a single day in court. Read about it:
https://thefederalist.com/2016...
and how much it hurts 10 years later, even though the three players were exonerated by an honest DA, not the scumbag DA who withheld exculpatory evidence to win a conviction and further his political career.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com...
"The media’s coverage of the case inflamed race, gender and class divisions locally and nationally. But upon further investigation by North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper, Mangum’s allegations were deemed false. Cooper exonerated the students, saying in April 2007, “We have no credible evidence that an attack occurred.”

So, considering how unfair equating accusation with guilt is, wouldn't we all be better off if we let the judicial system work without putting a wrench into the gears? In Kavanaugh's case, he been the subject of SIX previous FBI investigations in the past yet some people believe that a SEVENTH would somehow, someway, uncover what six previous teams did not find. Only if one believes the FBI is totally incompetent, biased, or is part of the "Deep State".

But, did you notice the report released today that Dr Ford is NOT a licensed psychologist and in calling herself a psychologist has violated California law?

"Just one sentence into her sworn testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee regarding allegations of sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford may have told a lie.

After thanking members of the committee on Thursday, and while under oath, Ford opened her testimony saying, “My name is Christine Blasey Ford, I am a professor of psychology at Palo Alto University and a research psychologist at the Stanford University School of Medicine.”

The issue lies with the word “psychologist,” and Ford potentially misrepresenting herself and her credentials, an infraction that is taken very seriously in the psychology field as well as under California law.

Under California law, as with almost every other state, in order for a person to identify publicly as a psychologist they must be licensed by the California Board of Psychology, a process that includes 3,000 hours of post-doctoral professional experience and passing two rigorous exams. To call oneself a psychologist without being licensed by a state board is the equivalent of a law school graduate calling herself a lawyer without ever taking the bar exam.

According to records, Ford is not licensed in the state of California. A recent search through the Department of Consumer Affairs License Bureau, which provides a state-run database of all licensed psychologists in California, produced no results for any variation of spelling on Ford’s name. If Ford at one time had a license but it is now inactive, she would legally still be allowed to call herself a “psychologist” but forbidden from practicing psychology on patients until it was renewed. However, the database would have shown any past licenses granted to Ford, even if they were inactive.

Ford also does not appear to have been licensed in any other states outside California. Since graduating with a PhD in educational psychology from the University of Southern California in 1996 it

CNN deceptively edited a rioter's speech. What she did was call for the rioters to move their rioting.

> Burnin down shit ain't going to help nothin! Y'all burnin' down shit we need in our community. Take that shit to the suburbs. Burn that shit down! We need our shit! We need our weaves. I don't wear it. But we need it.

Citation: https://twitter.com/DeeconX/st...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-8Cn6boqcA

CNN apology:

> We shorthanded sister's quote. Unintentionally gave the impression she was calling for peace everywhere.

Unintentionally my ass.

CNN Cuts Live Interview When Facts About Refugees Are Brought Up https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Fake protest staged by CNN film crew at London Bridge terrorist attack scene https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

CNN gets caught red-handed telling their focus group what to say https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

CNN conducts fake interview in parking lot https://www.theatlantic.com/na...

Top 10 Times CNN Reported Fake News https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

CNN reporter's response when asked why CNN hadn't corrected false gun article: "not playing your game man." http://thefederalist.com/2017/...

CNN threatens man into silence with threats of doxxing https://i.redd.it/jyw161j3wntz...

CNN on family leave before and after Trump backed it https://imgoat.com/thumb/e296a...

Media shows why it's so mistrusted after falsified Trump fish-feeding 'story' http://thehill.com/opinion/whi...
CNN: Trump feeds fish, winds up pouring entire box of food into koi pond

The CNN example includes edited video that zooms in on Trump to only show his face and prevents the viewer from seeing what Japanese Prime Minister Abe was doing at a key point of the short event.

Why was Abe edited out? Perhaps because he took his entire box of fish food and dumped it into the pond. Trump followed Abe's lead and did the same seconds later.

But with the zoom edit cutting Abe out, the viewer or reader - with an assist from the caption Â-- is led to believe only Trump dumped his box. The media was not only blatantly overt, but intentional in its deception.

The greatest danger to our nation comes from a free press that chooses sides in the political process. And that has openly and unapologetically taken place.

What you mean is

Drink! AmiMojo telling other people what they're thinking!

Give us an example of bias from any of these left leaning orgs.

https://cmpa.gmu.edu/study-med...

Study shows PolitiFact rates Republicans lie more than Democrats. This could mean Republicans lie more... or PolitiFact is biased against Republicans

And here's one person doing his own study and analysis to support the latter idea:

http://thefederalist.com/2016/...
http://thefederalist.com/2016/...

What you mean is

Drink! AmiMojo telling other people what they're thinking!

Give us an example of bias from any of these left leaning orgs.

https://cmpa.gmu.edu/study-med...

Study shows PolitiFact rates Republicans lie more than Democrats. This could mean Republicans lie more... or PolitiFact is biased against Republicans

And here's one person doing his own study and analysis to support the latter idea:

http://thefederalist.com/2016/...
http://thefederalist.com/2016/...

The "Russians are in our systems" is a nice misdirect that hides what's really going on.

There's no evidence any votes were changed in the last election, but by making unsubstantiated claims and going from hackers to Russian hackers to state-sponsored Russian hackers they can gin up enough fear and outrage to justify censorship aimed at affecting the midterms.

For example, Facebook recently banned [conservative blogger and political candidate] Avi Yemini for ‘Hate Speech’, won't tell him why he was banned, and denied his appeal. (You can view the banned page here.)

Lots and lots and lots of conservative viewpoints are being purged online in the runup to the midterm elections, and really scary things are coming up in the news every day.

Two terms that frequently come up in discussion are "midterm meddling" and "street fight". The first refers to all the suppression of conservative viewpoints, the second refers to the mob-mentality of striking back at people who don't toe the Liberal line.

(For example, the judge in the Manafort case has received threats, and because the jury hasn't reached a verdict yet the MSM filed a motion to reveal the identities and home addresses of the jury members. Yikes!)

We live in a scary time, reminiscent of the run-up to nazi Germany.

Dissenting opinion is being suppressed, sometimes violently.

After an extremely successful IndieGogo campaign,

That's great! They're successful independents. They got enough money to do the thing they wanted to do.

eftist comic book stores colluded to refuse carrying Jawbreaker

Sounds like you're saying "I got money you have to like me now!!!"

Those "leftist" comic book stores can carry whatever they like.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Oh good grief youtbe links. No thanks. I've sat through far too many videos by the sort of people who complain about SJW back in the gamergate days and without exception they were awful and a colosal waste of time.

Even conservative publications it appears don't agree with your description of the situation:

http://thefederalist.com/2018/...

Something that readers clearly want is being denied to them by the SJW cancer in the industry.

It got funded on indegogo. I'm sure theycan manage to print and distribute to the funders. I've seen successful campaings do that without ever engaging a publisher.

German Army trains with broomsticks instead of rifles and vans instead of tanks.
http://thefederalist.com/2018/...

German Air Force grounded.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2018...

Few NATO members carrying their share of mutual defense obligations, Germany is leading in this trend.

And when Berlin decides it will not pony up the promised 2 percent of GDP for its NATO contribution, other laggard countries follow its example. Only six of the 29 NATO members (other than the U.S.) so far have met their promised assessments.

https://www.realclearpolitics....

I was going to post more but it was depressing to see the land of my ancestors in such a sorry condition. If you want me to believe that Europe has enough mineral oil and erdgas for Germany on top of what they produce for themselves then I need to see that. I'm not finding it, they are buying erdgas from Russia too. Russia doesn't just provide 40% of erdgas that Germany burns, they supply 40% of erdgas that all of Europe burns.

You think the USA will provide you erdgas? Our Democrat Party blocked the Keystone XL pipeline that was supposed to expand our ability to export oil and gas. Like the democrats in Germany they think we should stop drilling for erdgas and use windmills to power heat pumps for warming our homes and heating our water.

Especially when you consider the "boogeyman" that the Democrats now attack, was dismissed by the same Democrats as "irrelevant" in the 2012 election. And that all these supposed attacks/hacks/collusion happened with 100% knowledge - and effectively explicit blessing (via commands to "stand down" and not attempt to stop) - of the Obama Administration.

Democrats ridiculed Romney over his concerns about Russia. And President Obama told the cyber chief to stand down with regards to Russian interference in the 2016 election. And now suddenly it's all bad Russia and it's all President Trump's fault?

I generally hate it, when people claim, the US "is just as bad" as some totalitarian shithole and openly compare McCarthy with the likes of Beria. But American colleges are already in the world of next Tuesday, where the "progressives" want the rest of the country to be. Ruining one's "social score" can already cost one a college-admission.

Routinely, getting into a good college in the US today — especially for some racial minorities — requires some combination of:

• volunteer work;
• sports participation;
• other "extra-curricular" activities, such as, for example, ballroom dancing;
• demonstrated leadership abilities — my personal favorite.

These colleges are ostensibly private, so they should be able to do whatever they please... But the same freedom is not afforded to other businesses, and, when politically expedient, even these private colleges have been arm-twisted into compliance with the government's demands.

It's by definition not racist given that it happens to anyone that attempts it at the border. It's not a racial decision -- it's an immigration decision.

People that call it racist, or want it to be considered racist, to demonize it and particularly to demonize Trump while pretending that this idiotic policy was not in full effect under Obama as well. In reality it's just one of the dumbest policies ever written, and it needs to be fixed by Congress. Democrats have collectively cosponsored a bill in the Senate that will prevent this, but by making the crime unenforceable rather than returning the child to the family, which is a backdoor way to make illegal immigrants, with children only, unprosecutable. As a similarly idiotic side effect, it would also make other parents of children that commit crimes immune to prosecution because their children would otherwise need to go into the foster system.

Here's a couple common sense ideas:

- Amend the law so that when turning a family around at the border, their children go on with them. How this even became a part of any agency's practices is beyond me and wreaks of big government bureaucracy ("think of the children" taken so far that it forgot about their parents).
- Amend the law so that births by people not legally present on US soil means that their children do not automatically become US Citizens, thus avoiding a lot of the draw to begin with (and the ridiculous scenario where we have to keep the parents because they happened to make it past the finish line before pumping out a child, whose medical bills were / are most likely covered by tax payers, and possibly face this exact same issue at a later date).
- Do not break the law as your first act of coming to a country.

Or, we can all continue to cry and complain like this just started happening in May / June of 2018 and point to it as more evidence that Trump is a racist while doing nothing or even doing something that makes things much worse like the proposed bill.

The so called, "Gun Show loop hole" is a myth. The legal requirements on sellers and buyers are the same as they would be at other times and places.

The 2nd, like the 1st and other Amendments to the US Constitution protects RIGHTs, not suggestions. And I think it is HILARIOUS that you reference " Bureaucracy®" as if it doesn't exist, or that it can't act in ways contrary to the law, regulation, or rights of citizens. (Do the recent years of abuses by the IRS ring a bell? How about #Resist?)

Do you have anything to back up that "claim" regarding "it's just a big 'ole loop hole to let anyone have a gun or a concealed carry permit"?

The So-Called Gun Show Loophole: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics
7 Gun Control Myths That Just Won’t Die

Where are exactly are these toxic masculinity articles you're reading all the time?

A selection of the first google results page:

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/...

https://www.huffingtonpost.com...

https://www.politico.com/magaz...

https://www.care2.com/causes/w...

https://www.refinery29.com/201...

http://thefederalist.com/2018/...

https://www.usatoday.com/story...

https://www.them.us/story/beyo...

Mass shootings are blamed on toxic masculinity, male entitlement, male fragility, "boys are broken", "its us or them [men]", "toxic masculinity is killing us", "end men", the list is hundreds of thousands long.

Also, let us know when there's another female shooting like this to support your article. You need at least 2 to start I think.

Women aren't called mass shooters for whatever reason. They are called rampage killers or mass killers.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/art...

The reason there are so few women that kill many people? Same reason why there are so few successful business women, female CEO's, and female prisoners: risk aversion. Both good and bad risk taking brings radical success or failure. Men do it more and reap the consequences for good or ill.

A massive carbon tax would do a much more effective job at accelerating our transition off fossil fuels

Because history has shown us that making an entire population poor greatly enhances care for the environment. Why, look t what a model for environmental protection East Germany was under communist rule! A large enough carbon tax, and everywhere gets to be East Germany. Fun times!

It's almost like the expansive ornate buildings that work there have an agenda or something.

You missed my point.

  If someone who has gone through the training to "serve and protect" wilted in the face of danger, do you think people who have been trained to teach kids are going have better reactions?

Maybe there is another way to go.

Kendra St. Clair: Oklahoma Girl, 12, Shoots Intruder During Home Burglary
Girl, 11, scares off home intruder with shotgun
Armed With Her Dad’s Gun, This 17-Year-Old Girl Fended Off A Wanted Man Who Broke Into Her Home

I recognize you and some teachers don't feel up to it, but apparently there are people who manage.

Police carry guns. Is your thinking that they are all cowards? (Even if a few actually are?)

Soldiers carry guns. Is your thinking that they are all cowards?

Are young girls that don't get assaulted, raped, or murdered because they used a gun "cowards"? Or do you think they should be assaulted, raped, or murdered?

Girl, 11, scares off home intruder with shotgun
Kendra St. Clair: Oklahoma Girl, 12, Shoots Intruder During Home Burglary
Armed With Her Dad’s Gun, This 17-Year-Old Girl Fended Off A Wanted Man Who Broke Into Her Home

Maybe the problem isn't that any of them are cowards, but that you believe and wrote something foolish. What will people think if you do that often enough? Perhaps that you are a ..... ?

Stopping discussion still seems to be overwhelmingly the province of the left.

Here you have a bomb threat directed at the FCC meeting on net Neutrality
https://www.theverge.com/us-wo...

There's at least one Democrat that didn't care about "Sensible Gun Laws" when he opened fire on the congressional baseball team

http://thefederalist.com/2017/...

And lets not forget Rand Pauls neighbor who is doing time now over a "Gardening Dispute"

None of this even touches on the day in and day out insanity of the snowflakes on college campuses.

https://thefederalist.com/2018...

It turns out this 'officially' the 18th mass shooting this year

I'm not saying you aren't sincere in what you've heard, but it's also difficult to have a sensible conversation when one side is constantly spreading lies and propaganda. There haven't been 18 shootings this year, unless you count things like an accidental discharge from a cop's pistol which hurt no one.

The reality is that the U.S. Homicide rate is at a 51-year low, gun homicides are down 49% in the last 20 years and gun crime has also been cut in half over the last 20 years.

@Anonymous Coward: "Yes, wouldn't want them to grow up to be insane, right-wing shitheads who will never feel the touch of a woman. Your inadequacies are literally steaming off your post history."

Dear anonymous gutless fuck, thank you for that brief extract from your autobiography, now why not fuck off back to Reddit and fap off over furries, an expansive ornate building or yellow-scaled wingless dragonkin :]

It is harder to trick college educated people into believing false statements.

Aside from the indoctrination they've already received in college.

The liberals on the other hand are led by college educated people that disbelieve and fight against the fake news.

Unless it comes from the mainstream media. There are bountiful examples.

I don't like Trump, and I didn't vote for Trump but the way the mainstream media is covering him shows a complete lack of journalistic integrity. If what is being done to Trump with the whole Russia investigation was initiated under a Republican administration to support a Republican presidential candidate and the Democrat won, the mainstream media would be calling for heads to roll. Instead, they're calling the whole thing a "nothingburger".

no, average cost of birth is less than $9,000

no, we don't have highest MMR in the developed world either.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/...

I am shocked and appalled [...] States rights is also racist. Why are all these [...]

Oh racism - is there nothing it can't be applied to?

In this case, you can't unapply racism. The original rallying cry about states' rights was explicitly about racism. In fact, it was about slavery, and southern states' rights to force northern states to not just accept it, but actually protect it.

Likewise - Devin Nunes has nothing to do with Democrats or even Obama.

The reason to bring up Obama in this context is the last President's willingness — nay eagerness — to unmask US Citizens tangled in the surveillance for political reasons. The former Administration officials remain evasive about the process and procedures — they really are to blame for the actual privacy deterioration that took place.

After all, the worry is not so much that the NSA will know, who said something. It is what the rest of the government may do, when they learn about it.

If we aren't willing to block NSA from surveilling the foreigners, we better codify how to treat the cases of US citizens getting recorded incidentally — and not simply leave it up to the Executive, who has and will continue to abuse this power himself or by delegating to low-level unelected flunkies.

Wait -- so some Buzzfeed editor's twitter feed ...

I offered two links, not one. And there are lots more. Communism is cool again — even if not everyone at Buzzfeed think so.

Heck, most of the "Antifa" are not-so-crypto Communists...

... is how you find out what is socially acceptable?

Make an experiment — walk through Greenwich Village in a Che Guevara T-shirt. Then change and walk back in a Trump one. Keep track of the number of middle-fingers and other expressions of hostility.

I'll see your gunman in a pizza place and raise you an actual shooting of Republican congressmen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... by a leftist

Back in 1996 Bill Nye was saying, correctly, that sex is determined by chromosomes

http://thefederalist.com/2017/...

By 2017 he was teaming up with Rachel Bloom for this masterpiece about gender fluidity

https://genius.com/Rachel-bloo...

The 1996 chromosomes was removed from the version of the show on Netflix, who claim it was delivered that way by Buena Vista. Basically it wasn't politically incorrect to say that sex is determined by chromosomes then, but it is now.

http://freebeacon.com/culture/...

A segment saying that chromosomes determine one's gender on an episode of the educational children's show "Bill Nye the Science guy," is cut out on the Netflix version.

Netflix did not edit Bill Nye The Science Guy. The series was delivered that way by Buena Vista TV, according to a Netflix spokesperson.

In the original episode, titled "Probability," a young woman told viewers, "I'm a girl. Could have just as easily been a boy, though, because the probability of becoming a girl is always 1 in 2."

"See, inside each of our cells are these things called chromosomes, and they control whether we become a boy or a girl, " the young woman continued. "See, there are only two possibilities: XX, a girl, or XY, a boy."

But in the version of the episode uploaded to Netflix, the segment has been cut entirely. While noncontroversial at the time, the 1996 segment appears to contradict Netflix's new series "Bill Nye Saves the World."

The new show endorses a socially liberal understanding of gender, under which gender is defined by self-identification rather than genetics and there are more than just the two traditional genders.

Other science that liberals want removed from TV and the Internet includes race differences in mean IQ or indeed anything, or anything that casts doubt on the catastrophist view of global warming.

Serious question here. What's the difference between these arguments?
1. You shouldn't ban BitTorrent. It's just a protocol. Just because some people use it to steal digital content doesn't mean BitTorrent is inherently bad.
2. You shouldn't ban guns. It's just a device. Just because some people use it to kill innocents doesn't mean guns are inherently bad.

This is what you get when you break the rules.

The existing net neutrality law was a) an overreach by a federal department that didn't have the authority, and b) didn't implement net neutrality, as normally understood.

Which is more important: fixing this one issue, or allowing federal departments to make rules outside their jurisdictions?

I love it when people bemoan how bad things are when this one narrowly-defined problem is thrown up as proof - positive proof, I say! - that everything about our government is bad.

Because it's *so* much easier to carp and complain than it is to a) draft a suggested net neutrality law, b) petition congress to pass that law, and c) bring the issue up during the elections.

We had a previous article about how the big players (Google, Facebook, and others) were bemoaning the loss of neutrality, that the "request for comments" wasn't a vote (and that 7 million bot entries with exactly the same text weren't considered significant), and how the internet is going to hell and a handbasket, but...

...we don't see those big players getting consensus on what net neutrality actually means, drafting common-sense legislation that could be voted on, and advocating for the issue to be resolved.

Your president did a whole bunch of crap moves that shouldn't have been done in the first place, including ordering the killing of American citizens without trial, making up immigration law out of whole cloth by executive order (contradicting existing laws), and political profiling by the IRS.

The real issue, beyond this “net neutrality,” is the Federal Communications Commission’s manufacture of authority to regulate the internet despite clear congressional instruction that the internet remain unregulated. In 2014, courts struck down the FCC’s 2010 self-aggrandizement under the 1934 Communications Act and 1996 Telecommunications Act, so the agency doubled down by writing a new rule that equated the internet with telephony.

That creative interpretation allowed the FCC to claim the sweeping discretion it had used to manage the AT&T phone monopoly throughout the 20th century. Moreover, while the FCC touts the regulation as ensuring that the internet remains free of censorship, the rule impinges on the First Amendment rights of internet-service providers.

This is nothing more than your chickens coming home to roost.

If you want this fixed, do it right next time.

Take for instance: Yes, Violent Crime Has Spiked In Sweden Since Open Immigration Germany: Migrant Crime Spiked in 2016

Well, whatever you are babbling about seems popular. Its a load of bull, but popular bull, apparently.

Oh forget massacres happening because other bad things happen and no where that isn't a literal fucking utopia has any business criticising.

So, do you think the amount of people getting shot in America is;
A)Too many
B)Just right
C)Too few

Or was there some other set of "rights" or policies you think are backfiring? Take for instance: Yes, Violent Crime Has Spiked In Sweden Since Open Immigration Germany: Migrant Crime Spiked in 2016

Well, whatever you are babbling about seems popular. Its a load of bull, but popular bull, apparently.

It's always a bit sad if people believe their own propaganda. There are many reasons why the rate of reported rapes in Sweden is high. But as far as we can tell, an unusually high incident of rape as defined in other countries is not among them. Sweden has a much more expansive definition of rape, a different definition of what count as a single incident of rape, a very comprehensive collection and reporting system, and a very low cultural bar to reporting rape.

I'd also be very sceptical of everything the Gatestone Institute reports - quite apart from their political bias, it should be a warning that they run advertisments that promise beautiful Russian women who just want to take your out, and presumable sell you thousand's of iPhone 8s for only US$1 per piece....

This.

Some people go to any length to prove their bigotry has a basis in reality.

Crime has seen an uptick in Europe of late, but is this due to immigrants or the more rational explanation that economic conditions have worsened over the last year. You'll notice that the a worse uptick in crime is occurring in the UK whilst the immigrants are leaving (which might have something to do with the UK's economic conditions worsening faster than Europes).

Nah, must be the immagrunts, right? Not like crime and poverty have a demonstrated relationship.

Also, serious crimes like stabbings are a rare thing over here, the massive increase over 4 years is something like 50 extra cases a year in a city the size of London (8.7 million people).

I'd also be very sceptical of everything the Gatestone Institute reports - quite apart from their political bias, it should be a warning that they run advertisments that promise beautiful Russian women who just want to take your out, and presumable sell you thousand's of iPhone 8s for only US$1 per piece....

If you're seeing "advertisments that promise beautiful Russian women ..." at the Gatestone Institute, which I doubt, it is probably due to the profile the advertising services have for you, not what the Gatestone Institute selects and presents. You fancy Russian women much?

And really, it isn't a question of you disliking "bias", but their viewpoint. They are discussing questions of fact and what they mean.

It's always a bit sad if people believe their own propaganda.

I often enjoy the ironic.

There are many reasons why the rate of reported rapes in Sweden is high. But as far as we can tell, an unusually high incident of rape as defined in other countries is not among them. Sweden has a much more expansive definition of rape, a different definition of what count as a single incident of rape, a very comprehensive collection and reporting system, and a very low cultural bar to reporting rape.

The problem with your claim that there are significant increases purely in a Swedish context.

Yes, Violent Crime Has Spiked In Sweden Since Open Immigration

Looking at rape by itself, from 2006-2015 there was a 40 percent increase in the number of reported rapes. It is true that the number of rapes declined from 2014 to 2015, from a high of 6,697 to a still-high 5,918; but, even so, the overall upward trend is clear.

Other Swedes, namely Ingrid Carlqvist and Lars Hedegaard, argue these trends are much sharper if one takes a longer view:

In 1975, the Swedish parliament unanimously decided to change the former homogeneous Sweden into a multicultural country. Forty years later the dramatic consequences of this experiment emerge: violent crime has increased by 300%.

If one looks at the number of rapes, however, the increase is even worse. In 1975, 421 rapes were reported to the police; in 2014, it was 6,620. That is an increase of 1,472%.

Or was there some other set of "rights" or policies you think are backfiring? Take for instance: Yes, Violent Crime Has Spiked In Sweden Since Open Immigration Germany: Migrant Crime Spiked in 2016

Well, whatever you are babbling about seems popular. Its a load of bull, but popular bull, apparently.

It's always a bit sad if people believe their own propaganda. There are many reasons why the rate of reported rapes in Sweden is high. But as far as we can tell, an unusually high incident of rape as defined in other countries is not among them. Sweden has a much more expansive definition of rape, a different definition of what count as a single incident of rape, a very comprehensive collection and reporting system, and a very low cultural bar to reporting rape.

I'd also be very sceptical of everything the Gatestone Institute reports - quite apart from their political bias, it should be a warning that they run advertisments that promise beautiful Russian women who just want to take your out, and presumable sell you thousand's of iPhone 8s for only US$1 per piece....

Well, you have to admit, nobody really bothered defending the important ones that protect your freedom and privacy, but the one that can actually backfire gets defended like it's the only important one.

That is kinda odd, don't you think?

It would be odd if it were true, but it isn't, . . . at least for the United States. In fact it is a load of utter rubbish. Or are you really going to try to claim that you've never heard of civil liberties organizations like the ACLU, EFF, Alliance Defending Freedom, The FIRE, .... Or are you referring to something else?

Europe and Canada certainly seems to believe free speech can backfire, hence there are many restrictions. Was that what you were referring to?

Or was there some other set of "rights" or policies you think are backfiring? Take for instance:
Yes, Violent Crime Has Spiked In Sweden Since Open Immigration
Germany: Migrant Crime Spiked in 2016

Well, whatever you are babbling about seems popular. Its a load of bull, but popular bull, apparently.

>"Hell, most US gun-owners haven't formed a militia or neighbourhood watch, which is what the second amendment really guarantees. "

Scholars, historians, legal experts, and the supreme court of the USA have, by majority, agreed that what you just said is wrong. The wording of the 2nd Amendment is odd, for sure, but it means an INDIVIDUAL'S right to [buy, make, keep, and carry] arms. That is what was said, that is what was meant. The "militia" part was an explanation of WHY not who.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/...

http://www.nationalreview.com/...

A third of millennials would rather own bitcoin than stocks.

Forty-three percent of millennials prefer socialism to capitalism.

Discuss.

https://thefederalist.com/2017...

https://legalinsurrection.com/...

My interests have not been represented in quite a few years. I am white, heterosexual, have medical insurance provided by my employer(s), college educated with BS and MS degrees in my chosen professional field, widowed, no kids, make too much money to claim lower bracket tax deductions and not enough money to take advantage of the higher bracket tax deductions, and practice no denomination of religious beliefs.

In fact, you are exactly the demographic that the Democratic party represents. Sure, they give some lip service to progressive ideas and identity politics, but that's because that's what people like you want to hear. But the establishment Democrats do nothing to support policies to actually help the poor and working class - they help people like you. It's why urban centers on the costs are so blue.

Uh, I'm not sure where you get your information however the Democrats haven't supported the middle class and especially the white, male middle class for years. They emphasize support for minorities and the working poor who are abundant in the urban centers on the coasts.

Yea, I'm calling bullshit on that. As I said, they pay lip service to it, but these days, the party really represents the well-to-do.

In the past, Democrats could support progressive, redistributive policies knowing that the costs would fall largely on Republicans. That is no longer the case. Now supporting these policies requires the party to depend on the altruistic idealism of millions of supporters who, despite being relatively well off, often feel financially pressed themselves.

The Democratic Party’s pursuit of well-off whites undermined its ability to deliver gains for all workers.

So no wonder Democrats are enamored with all of that rhetoric about inequality and class warfare. Their constituents, the audience they are addressing, are far more likely to live in the American equivalent of Rio de Janeiro, a class society starkly divided between squalid, hopeless, crime-ridden favelas and safe, beautiful downtown playgrounds for the rich. The Democrats are arsonists posing as the fire brigade, offering to solve a problem they created.

The Democratic party once represented the working class. But over the last three decades the party has been taken over by Washington-based fundraisers, bundlers, analysts, and pollsters who have focused instead on raising campaign money from corporate and Wall Street executives and getting votes from upper middle-class households in “swing” suburbs. Democrats have occupied the White House for 16 of the last 24 years, and for four of those years had control of both houses of Congress. But in that time they failed to reverse the decline in working-class wages and economic security. Both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama ardently pushed for free trade agreements without providing millions of blue-collar workers who thereby lost their jobs means of getting new ones that paid at least as well.

Can you cite some, or indeed any, examples?

Here's an article listing ten recent instances where CNN reported fake news. With citations for everything.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/10/23/10-times-cnn-told-us-an-apple-was-a-banana/

I couldn't find anything quite as convenient as the above story for MSNBC, but here's a wikipedia page about MSNBC controversies. Multiple of the controversies are related to fake or dishonest news, such as a video of Mitt Romney edited in a deceptive way by MSNBC news itself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC_controversies

P.S. Here's a story from February listing 16 fake news stories. Some were CNN, some other outlets.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/02/06/16-fake-news-stories-reporters-have-run-since-trump-won/

Can you cite some, or indeed any, examples?

Here's an article listing ten recent instances where CNN reported fake news. With citations for everything.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/10/23/10-times-cnn-told-us-an-apple-was-a-banana/

I couldn't find anything quite as convenient as the above story for MSNBC, but here's a wikipedia page about MSNBC controversies. Multiple of the controversies are related to fake or dishonest news, such as a video of Mitt Romney edited in a deceptive way by MSNBC news itself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC_controversies

P.S. Here's a story from February listing 16 fake news stories. Some were CNN, some other outlets.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/02/06/16-fake-news-stories-reporters-have-run-since-trump-won/

In related news, Google abuses it's power in advertising. And Google abuses it's power in video. And Google bullies a leftist think tank.

Read the links now, while you still can. If you have Google Fiber, maybe read them on your phone. (Of course you can't read one of the articles in question -- Google made sure of that.)

The relationship between taxes and quality of civilization is not necessarily a linear, positively-correlative relationship.

That wasn't my linear thought, that was the GP linear thought. S/He didn't properly apply bounds and did no sanity checks on their argument. I applied the logic of "taxes = civilization" to its logical conclusion based on no assumptions on my part ;)

We have water, most of it drinkable, available. Very close to ... 100% . Drinking fountains are convenience. Taxes are not a convenience, nor should taxes be nearly 100% . Wrong analogy. Nice try though.

To be a modern day first world nation, some amount of taxation is necessary and it must be compulsory.

Compulsion is slavery. There is a constitutional amendment against compulsory indentured servitude. And the fact that we haven't ever applied my view of taxation on a society, you can't actually say it won't work. My idea of taxes would mirror Cigarette Taxes. High tax rate, completely avoidable by everyone; voluntary. Lets legalize all sorts of things, tax the crap out of them, we gain two things by doing so, free people are free to do whatever, and the societal costs of those things are paid for by taxes, and we reduce prisons to actual criminals (Murder, theft, rape etc).

Norway, Sweden, and Denmark disprove your assertion. Taxes are not necessarily regressive. They are only regressive to the extent that government is incompetent and corrupt.

"This heavily progressive tax rate stunted economic growth, and Sweden fell from the fourth-wealthiest country in the world to the fourteenth-wealthiest country in just 23 years." http://thefederalist.com/2015/...

crony capitalism.

Fully agree there. But that isn't free enterprise, more fascist (true Italian kind) than anything. And for the biggest example you can look no further than ObamaCare, which is pure Fascist Healthcare, wrapped up in Crony Capitalism.

They openly advocate violence, they've openly called whites sub-human. That right up makes them black supremacists, and no different then any other racist. Pretend all you want that what those links show are fairy tails, there's a reason why their support evaporated like morning dew.

That's not how it works anymore. You don't have to "play the part" anymore to make that determination (otherwise that would be prejudicial stereotyping, remember?). This is why conservatives have gone ape over the newer bathroom policies. Before, someone who dressed the opposite gender generally could use the bathroom of their choice. All the new bathroom policies do is make it so that a plain-clothed dude can walk into a women's restroom without being questioned.

http://www.thegetrealmom.com/b...
https://www.lifesitenews.com/n...
http://thefederalist.com/2015/...

So the GP is absolutely right, and the way the politics are set up, someone being denied a job on the basis that the employer "didn't believe" a candidate's gender story is probably enough to get their pants sued off. If not, then we have some actual systematic discrimination happening, because literally the only people who wouldn't be allowed gender fluidity would be white men.

But we do not bear him any ill-will, we are not out to shut him up or cause him harm.

So all those death threats to trans people are writing themselves?

There is a large segment of society which disapproves of or questions that lifestyle yet tolerates it peaceably. If there are "all those death threats" and if indeed they are not hoaxes, it in no way contradicts that assertion. It would show that there exists some other group which is intolerant.

The leftists are a small minority with all the power.

Which is why democrats received a plurality of the popular vote in the last three presidential elections.

No. You need to evaluate overall trends, not consider a single election. That single election is not representative of nationwide electoral trends because Donald "Grab them by the pussy" Trump was an uncharacteristically miserable candidate. Republicans are taking over everywhere else: Congress, state legislatures, state governorships.

Leftists are especially unpopular within the Democrat party. Blacks are ideological enemies pro-homosexuality progressives and black children suffer terribly in failing Democrat-controlled unionized public schools. Working-class Democrats are flipping over to Republican.

The leftist, progressive ideologues are extremely unpopular with most of the public. But they are entrenched in positions of power in profitable mega-corporations, in the schools, in the universities, in federal bureaucracies, non-profits and the news media.

They destroy careers by firing and blacklisting.

Like how Trump wanted to fire all the DoE employees that believe in climate change?

Fake news generated by union propagandists. Look it up. Trump never said that and there is no evidence that he tried to do it. The sole basis for that accusation is innuendo from public employee union officials reported credulously by left-wing newspapers.

They use the force of law to arrest, fire and harass dissenters.

This one is extra insane. I don't even know what you are talking about here. Are you under the impression that law enforcement, a current major target of liberal outrage, is somehow under the control of leftists? Literally wtf.

Leave it to a leftist to decree that facts are "insane."

When leftists control law enforcement they they corrupt it.

Oh, and there is this.

Then there was Obama's IRS illegally attempting to sic the FBI on tea party groups.

Followed by your allies in the media pronouncing that we "hate government," "oppose education" and "deny science" because we are incensed by corruption of those institutions and endeavors to serve your own ideological and political ends.

Isn't that what every group in power tries to do?

No.

Your guys are doing it right now, and have done it before.

The announced plan is to shut down large sections of government and fire the officials so to prevent abuses, not to redirect abuses to the other party. "Drain the swamp," as the guy said. The fewer government bureaucrats, the fewer government bureaucrats who can abuse their authority for political ends. Given that Trump is an idiot, it seems unlikely that he will achieve much reduction in government. Though he has made some progress in firing VA employees.

That is seemingly the entire point of government.

You need some historical perspective.

I don't know the percentage but they have been blathering on and on and it's getting tiring.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/...

Kurt

Remember, science is sexist! We must make sure that all science first respects the opinions of any and all minorities. THEN we can concern ourselves with if it is accurate science or not...