No, really-- that stuff is in the Hadith. And in the Qur'an, in regards to making infidels pay tribute, and the ones who resist (or just being Jews) being killed. Even if in some twist of logic you believe actually following the principles set forth in the religious texts of your faith does not make one a follower, the fact is that those ideas are in there.
Insightful? We've been improving crop yields for years. That's why we've been able to actually reduce our farmland while still having a surplus. There would be 0 hunger in the world if there weren't greedy warlords and genocidal dictators to steal, kill, and destroy.
Why would you put a vague "lack of healthcare" in there, but specifically mention "somebody else's gun" and "your own gun"? What about homicides by other weapons, or poison? Why don't you split this list down into all the major diseases? Sounds like you're just repeating some political party's platform.
I usually avoid these flame-fest articles entirely anymore, but I have to point out that any texts that claim archaeopteryx as an avian ancestor (it's more like an avian uncle) or show horse evolution in an equally flawed manner need to be revised. A creationist group was involved, but the fact remains the book needs to be fixed. But let's not bother reading the article. TL;DR. Don't let a good attack on those radical fundies go to waste.
So you're implying people who refused to use tax funds-- public money-- to fund a private enterprise (a road with tolls administered by a foreign company, no less)-- some kind of cold-hearted right-wing radicals? Sound like 99%ers to me.
I hope you're female, because those "sizes" are ridiculous and arbitrary anyway. Men's trousers are based on actual measurements, although just going by waist and inseam obviously doesn't produce a custom fit. I would imagine that the problem might be in the inch-centimeter conversion?
Well, that's certainly not true. If there really wasn't public assistance, there wouldn't be a need for women to purposely have children out of wedlock.
Where's BadAnalogyGuy when you need him? This is nothing like what people like Romney (and Obama, and Soros, and Gore, and Pelosi) do. They earn income from their businesses or jobs, and INVEST that income: you know, stocks, bonds, mutual funds, venture capital. Your plumber could invest his earnings this way too-- although he obviously has an order of magnitude or two less to invest. The GP post was wrong, but your analogy is just as ridiculous.
Why should this information be excluded from transparency rules regarding government sources of income?
Because the subject of the information is a free citizen, not the government, and the only relevant information is the dollar amount of the taxes, for which a complete tax return is not needed.
What's the rationale for keeping the information secret?
Because in the USA, the federal government doesn't have the right to make it public.
I think he pointed out that the third world is also a big part of the problem. Considering how leftist keep complaining about the US throwing its weight around, do you think we should invade a few of these guys to make them comply?
And that takes 'regulation' to force change ahead of where it would naturally happen.
Why don't you just leave off the quotes, and insert "fascism"? What's with the smirking reference to the "private sector"? At least socialists are honest: they'll seize the means of production, and do what they will. Fascists set the rules, then blame the business when it fails to produce the desired result. Why not just parrot the "Occupy" line, tax all the "wealthy" and use the proceeds to build everything through the government cronies?
Slashdot Mirror
No, really-- that stuff is in the Hadith. And in the Qur'an, in regards to making infidels pay tribute, and the ones who resist (or just being Jews) being killed. Even if in some twist of logic you believe actually following the principles set forth in the religious texts of your faith does not make one a follower, the fact is that those ideas are in there.
No, we wonder why leftists fall for such obvious trolls. Oh, that's right: because your arguments work only against straw men like those.
The anti-GMO hysteria doesn't help.
I do all that, but they still want to raise my taxes and give the proceeds to "green" energy companies anyway.
Unfortunately, most of the 2 billion will be radical Muslims imposing sharia law.
Insightful? We've been improving crop yields for years. That's why we've been able to actually reduce our farmland while still having a surplus. There would be 0 hunger in the world if there weren't greedy warlords and genocidal dictators to steal, kill, and destroy.
Remind me to never invite you to a poker game.
A fool and his money are soon parted. In other news, people who are just as stupid are donating money to the actual Obama 2012 campaign site.
Brownshirts? What, do you live in Skokie?
Why would you put a vague "lack of healthcare" in there, but specifically mention "somebody else's gun" and "your own gun"? What about homicides by other weapons, or poison? Why don't you split this list down into all the major diseases? Sounds like you're just repeating some political party's platform.
Maybe so thousands of small business don't have to plunk down $500-1000 of unbudgeted funds on a currently-unnecessary certificate renewal?
I usually avoid these flame-fest articles entirely anymore, but I have to point out that any texts that claim archaeopteryx as an avian ancestor (it's more like an avian uncle) or show horse evolution in an equally flawed manner need to be revised. A creationist group was involved, but the fact remains the book needs to be fixed. But let's not bother reading the article. TL;DR. Don't let a good attack on those radical fundies go to waste.
He asked for an extension, you cretin.
So you're implying people who refused to use tax funds-- public money-- to fund a private enterprise (a road with tolls administered by a foreign company, no less)-- some kind of cold-hearted right-wing radicals? Sound like 99%ers to me.
So here we go again, just like with airlines, software piracy and firearms: let's punish the law-abiding to make it slightly harder for the criminals.
Montana ran with NO SPEED LIMITS, and overall, fatal accidents INCREASED when limits were put in again. Let's stop pseudoscience and politics from spreading death on our roads.
I hope you're female, because those "sizes" are ridiculous and arbitrary anyway. Men's trousers are based on actual measurements, although just going by waist and inseam obviously doesn't produce a custom fit. I would imagine that the problem might be in the inch-centimeter conversion?
Well, that's certainly not true. If there really wasn't public assistance, there wouldn't be a need for women to purposely have children out of wedlock.
Where's BadAnalogyGuy when you need him? This is nothing like what people like Romney (and Obama, and Soros, and Gore, and Pelosi) do. They earn income from their businesses or jobs, and INVEST that income: you know, stocks, bonds, mutual funds, venture capital. Your plumber could invest his earnings this way too-- although he obviously has an order of magnitude or two less to invest. The GP post was wrong, but your analogy is just as ridiculous.
He already released the last two years, idiot. Obviously, he's paid, despite Harry Reid's slander.
Because the subject of the information is a free citizen, not the government, and the only relevant information is the dollar amount of the taxes, for which a complete tax return is not needed.
Because in the USA, the federal government doesn't have the right to make it public.
And what does God need with a star ship?
They had another team working on their special RFC 1149 implementation.
The A/V of the moon missions were works created by the US government and therefore public domain by law.
Why don't you just leave off the quotes, and insert "fascism"? What's with the smirking reference to the "private sector"? At least socialists are honest: they'll seize the means of production, and do what they will. Fascists set the rules, then blame the business when it fails to produce the desired result. Why not just parrot the "Occupy" line, tax all the "wealthy" and use the proceeds to build everything through the government cronies?