Instead, police groups and their advocates are claiming that the mere act of criticizing a government entity is akin to declaring war on it, and that therefore, police critics are culpable every time a police officer is murdered. (And given the way they ignore and abuse statistics, those critics are also apparently culpable for a lot of murders that never happened.) They’re essentially saying that exercising constitutional rights and participating in democracy are in and of themselves acts of violence. And in many cases, this is coming from the very people that the government empowers to use actual violence.
Whats the count of killed officers so far this year? 21? Something like that? Meanwhile the number of citizens killed by police so far this year is more than 500.
Again: there is no war on police. And if there is, it is a pittance compared to the War being waged by police upon the citizenry. (and no i dont actually believe that 'that' war exists either)
merely a growing movement that wants them held accountable for when they fuck up (particularly if someone gets hurt/killed as a result), and a growing suspicion that they have been covering up past fuckups by writing false reports, as several have been caught doing in recent news.
"the terrorist in chief is already bringing him to the white house. after that he'll introduce him to his terrorist buddies" http://www.freerepublic.com/fo...
"It's a PR conspiracy between the White House and the CAIR" also note that while the article admits its a stupid incident on the public officials' parts, but the readers/commenters have already jumped to "CAIR/Obama put the kid up to it, and the town fell for the trap" http://www.redstate.com/2015/0...
You seem confused on the amount we actually spend on foreign aid. As well as precisely how many people we've allowed to immigrate. As well as a few other things.
And North Korea calls itself a Democratic Republic. your attempt at a point only further proves your ignorance.
Do we really need to cover how the Nazi party was fascist, not socialist, and the USSR was neither Socialist nor really Communist, but in fact practiced Totalitarianism? It's been done before, and requires only a cursory knowledge of historical fact. I'm sure even you could accomplish it.
that is Jane Q Public levels of bullshit, admitting the truth of things like "smaller middle class, wage stagnation, greater concentration of wealth, and greater income inequality" but completely missing the mark on their actual cause.
biology calling: plants both consume and produce oxygen.
the short version (without getting into the multiple types of photosynthesis and endless variation between plants) is that plants respire too, just like animals. and respiration is the chemical interaction of oxygen and food to create energy. This particularly happens at night, when photosynthesis isn't happening, so the plant burns sugars to produce energy.
Air guard has some nuke techs, and some units are capable. But nuke control itself is still strictly under Pentagon, and by extension Presidential, control.
Would we give him tax payer money to spew his misinformed and occasionally hateful opinions?
Yes. Getting money out of politics means getting it ALL out of politics.
No gifts. No donations. No big rich groups campaigning on someone else's behalf. And no rich guys self-financing (to prevent turning it into a rich man only game)
In fact, it's the best way to break the oligarchy's back, returning it to a game anyone can play.
How do you pick? Easy: open primary.
Everyone who wants to be considered for the General Election runs in a single Primary, regardless of party. Top 2 or 3 go the General.
and then billionaires that have more speech than anyone else can just spend a billion dollars worth of speech on their nutjob candidate? fuck off troll. your kind of idiocy is exactly what the powers that be want: morons protecting the status quo, ie, a rich/powerful man's game.
Slashdot Mirror
woops, looks like the wingnuts got modpoints today.
trying to bury posts.
upon learning the kid's name one of the cops apparently said "of course".
Instead, police groups and their advocates are claiming that the mere act of criticizing a government entity is akin to declaring war on it, and that therefore, police critics are culpable every time a police officer is murdered. (And given the way they ignore and abuse statistics, those critics are also apparently culpable for a lot of murders that never happened.) They’re essentially saying that exercising constitutional rights and participating in democracy are in and of themselves acts of violence. And in many cases, this is coming from the very people that the government empowers to use actual violence.
That is something worth worrying about.
^bingo
Whats the count of killed officers so far this year?
21?
Something like that?
Meanwhile the number of citizens killed by police so far this year is more than 500.
Again: there is no war on police.
And if there is, it is a pittance compared to the War being waged by police upon the citizenry.
(and no i dont actually believe that 'that' war exists either)
read, and become educated. you could surely use it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
there is no war on police.
merely a growing movement that wants them held accountable for when they fuck up (particularly if someone gets hurt/killed as a result), and a growing suspicion that they have been covering up past fuckups by writing false reports, as several have been caught doing in recent news.
they have since fixed that oversight
of course they are:
"the terrorist in chief is already bringing him to the white house. after that he'll introduce him to his terrorist buddies"
http://www.freerepublic.com/fo...
"It's a PR conspiracy between the White House and the CAIR"
also note that while the article admits its a stupid incident on the public officials' parts, but the readers/commenters have already jumped to "CAIR/Obama put the kid up to it, and the town fell for the trap"
http://www.redstate.com/2015/0...
and now they're going to punish the kid for their mistake
*sigh*
You seem confused on the amount we actually spend on foreign aid.
As well as precisely how many people we've allowed to immigrate.
As well as a few other things.
so now youre celebrating your ignorance and lack of education, and citing as proof of your claims?
but of course you would do that.
see? this is why you're stupid
And North Korea calls itself a Democratic Republic.
your attempt at a point only further proves your ignorance.
Do we really need to cover how the Nazi party was fascist, not socialist, and the USSR was neither Socialist nor really Communist, but in fact practiced Totalitarianism? It's been done before, and requires only a cursory knowledge of historical fact. I'm sure even you could accomplish it.
I see the sock puppets are out in force today, modding down actual facts, and modding up the crazies.
Wonderful, you've identified your problem.
The next step is correcting it.
wow.
that is Jane Q Public levels of bullshit, admitting the truth of things like "smaller middle class, wage stagnation, greater concentration of wealth, and greater income inequality" but completely missing the mark on their actual cause.
all things you said have been disproven several times already.
please do try to be original.
biology calling: plants both consume and produce oxygen.
the short version (without getting into the multiple types of photosynthesis and endless variation between plants) is that plants respire too, just like animals. and respiration is the chemical interaction of oxygen and food to create energy. This particularly happens at night, when photosynthesis isn't happening, so the plant burns sugars to produce energy.
http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/ge...
try reading the statement again, all the way to the end this time.
The South wanted slavery.
Period.
End of story.
It was so important they wrote it into their fucking secession documents.
Air guard has some nuke techs, and some units are capable.
But nuke control itself is still strictly under Pentagon, and by extension Presidential, control.
Would we give him tax payer money to spew his misinformed and occasionally hateful opinions?
Yes.
Getting money out of politics means getting it ALL out of politics.
No gifts.
No donations.
No big rich groups campaigning on someone else's behalf.
And no rich guys self-financing (to prevent turning it into a rich man only game)
In fact, it's the best way to break the oligarchy's back, returning it to a game anyone can play.
How do you pick?
Easy: open primary.
Everyone who wants to be considered for the General Election runs in a single Primary, regardless of party. Top 2 or 3 go the General.
and then billionaires that have more speech than anyone else can just spend a billion dollars worth of speech on their nutjob candidate?
fuck off troll.
your kind of idiocy is exactly what the powers that be want: morons protecting the status quo, ie, a rich/powerful man's game.
the two party 'system' comes from the First Past the Post election system we use, not the idea of voting for the lesser of two evils.