The RNC Just Gutted the DNC Again - Sarah Palin as VP

[Gibonius]

Originally Posted by Xayd

that's what the rules say.

That's a lousy definition. Up until fairly recently, there was no money in practically any sport, including all the track and field sports and swimming. Did they suddenly become sports and not hobbies when a few elite people could make money off them?

[Escaped Gorilla Genitals]

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

How is telling then a story saying "some believe this is truth" harming them? Should we ban fantasy books?

Legitimizing religious propaganda in science classrooms is harming children the same as teaching them the Earth is flat is harming them. Everytime a child is taught something that is wrong or ignorant it hurts their future and in turn hurts society.

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

Well, seeing as you're dismissing an Olympic sport as nothing but hobby, surely there is consistency with the rest of the events.

I don't really care either way.

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

And what's the difference between them and us? Here's a hint: Invasions.

The UK was never invaded, nor was Sweden, Norway, or Spain (well not a couple of centuries anyway). What exactly is your point anyway? Nations get invaded because their military was defeated (or in Russias case it was just part of the plan) not because there wasn't widespread small arms distribution among civilians.

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

Yes, because Saddam using capital punishment for dissension and poisonous gas wasn't a deterrent at all.

I'm not sure what you're point is. Saddam doesn't count because he used capital punishment and poison gas or something? Dictators have no problem ruling over an armed population if they're willing to be ruthless enough.

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

They made no exception for blacks in the founding documents of this country. It just took people to stand up and point out the hypocrisies in the documents and society, and the Dred Scott decision ignited the fuse of it.

Yet many of them where slave owners and none of them viewed blacks as having the mental capacity to match Whites, even when presented with evidence to the contrary, and while it's true white supremacy was a widespread ideology even among the "enlightened" classes it only proves that the founding fathers could and did have wrong opinions. Are you really going to claim that they weren't racists and didn't benefit from and enforce a system of slavery?

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

If states can defy one section of the Bill of Rights, they should be able to defy all of them, right?

They shouldn't defy it, they should pass a new amendment nullifying the second amendment.

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

They owe me reparations.

lmao, it's funny how trivialize the problem of racism and reconciliation in this country...no wait I mean it's stupid.

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

Exactly, which is why AA (Racism in itself) is not something that will cure the cure of racism.

Try again.

But it has been effective in helping integrate minoritys and tear down racial barriers so your claim cannot be true?

[Escaped Gorilla Genitals]

Originally Posted by Rang3find3r

the only irony here is that you want to take away RIGHTS that were given to us by our founding fathers.. oh wait, that's not irony, it's just fucking retarded

Yes, I just can't get enough of destroying American freedoms, which is why I'm voting Republican this fall.

[Trailblazer]

Originally Posted by Jim Morrison

Yes, I just can't get enough of destroying American freedoms, which is why I'm voting Republican this fall.

Keeping gun rights while losing your right to privacy, protection from illegal search/seizure, and the freedom of information.

AWESOME

[Enygma]

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

Oh? Please, point out which ones those are, will you?

so, what exactly are you contesting here. that palin does not support bush's policies, or that bush's policies do not involve crossing out inconvenient parts of the constitution?

[jubjub]

Originally Posted by DruggedOutShitty60'sFuckingMoron

The UK was never invaded, nor was Sweden, Norway, or Spain

Norway was never invaded ?

[Mr. Greg]

Originally Posted by Jim Morrison

Legitimizing religious propaganda in science classrooms is harming children the same as teaching them the Earth is flat is harming them. Everytime a child is taught something that is wrong or ignorant it hurts their future and in turn hurts society.

They wouldn't be taught it as truth, of course. You're telling me a child old enough to learn and understand the evolution process that would be told what "some people" believe will harm them? What happened with acceptance of other cultures? I recall learning about the Egytpian gods in middle school history class, even before science class started teaching evolutionary theory, and I didn't come home thinking that they were all real. Your argument would work if kids were told it was true when they learned it, but that obbiously won't happen.

The UK was never invaded

Thanks to a prosperous country that had, and went on to have, looser gun laws then that police state. They also had rockets launched at them daily for nearly a year.

nor was Sweden

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-switzerland.htm

Norway

Norway?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Norway

Also, http://magweb.n1uro.com/sample/sconflic/co03wese.htm

What exactly is your point anyway? Nations get invaded because their military was defeated (or in Russias case it was just part of the plan) not because there wasn't widespread small arms distribution among civilians.

Theres a reason why a land invasion of the US has never been undertaken. Remember what Admiral Yamamoto said?

I'm not sure what you're point is. Saddam doesn't count because he used capital punishment and poison gas or something? Dictators have no problem ruling over an armed population if they're willing to be ruthless enough.

Saddam had a police state, and wasn't afraid to use lethal force on a whim against dissidents. Why don't you name me more of these "plenty" besides him that you say exist?

Yet many of them where slave owners and none of them viewed blacks as having the mental capacity to match Whites, even when presented with evidence to the contrary, and while it's true white supremacy was a widespread ideology even among the "enlightened" classes it only proves that the founding fathers could and did have wrong opinions.

...and yet, you won't find anything against Blacks in the founding documents of our country. I think they knew that the emancipation of blacks was inevitable, and wrote the documents to represent that. Perhaps they weren't ready themselves to live in that world, but they wanted it to happen in the future. I'd rather believe that than they envisioned a country where Slavery will exist forever, but conveniently left that out of the founding documents of their new nation.

Are you really going to claim that they weren't racists and didn't benefit from and enforce a system of slavery?

If they would of wanted to enforce it, it would of been in the founding documents. It says "All men" instead. Try again.

They shouldn't defy it, they should pass a new amendment nullifying the second amendment.

Christ, you're more like Bush than I realized. First you insist the Constitution is just a "piece of paper," then you want to take away the basic rights affirmed to us by that document like Bush has been so fond of doing. Are you sure you aren't a neoconservative in disguise?

lmao, it's funny how trivialize the problem of racism and reconciliation in this country...no wait I mean it's stupid.

If I have to sacrifice a job position that I'm more qualified for for the sole purpose of "diversity" because my ancestors weren't forthcoming in accepting minorities, then they owe me some repirations for how they treated my ancestors back across the pond as well.

But it has been effective in helping integrate minoritys and tear down racial barriers so your claim cannot be true?

Ever been to one of the major urban metropolises lately? Milwaukee has been trying so many forms of racial integration, and all it's doing is pushing whites into the suburbs and segregating the races throughout the city, while crime rates continue to climb in those inner-city areas. AA was a decent experiment, but it's not working, and needs to end. Telling minorities that their performance takes a second place to their race is not the answer.

[Mr. Greg]

Originally Posted by Enygma

so, what exactly are you contesting here. that palin does not support bush's policies, or that bush's policies do not involve crossing out inconvenient parts of the constitution?

What's so hard to understand? I'm asking you to show me which policies exactly those are. if they aren't found on that page, please, find me them at some other source.

[Free_Willy]

Originally Posted by joemama

remember everyone thought Cheney wouldn't even last one term with his bad ticker?

Yeah because satan sustains him. When it doesnt he just shoots a lawyer or an ammendment to get back in its good graces.

[Escaped Gorilla Genitals]

Originally Posted by jubjub

Norway was never invaded ?

Why don't your links ever work jubjub? And yes I had actually forgotten about the invasion of Norway, but nobodys perfect.

[Bradd]

How can someone who's not ready to answer media questions in September be ready for office in January?

[Opajew]

I have no idea how or why anyone can say the RNC gutted the DNC for picking sarah palin.

heres a good video you should watch.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/in...in-Gender-Card

[jubjub]

Originally Posted by DruggedOutShitty60'sSinger

Why don't your links ever work jubjub?

this link to your self portrait works just fine.

Originally Posted by DruggedOutShitty60'sSinger

And yes I had actually forgotten about the invasion of Norway, but nobodys perfect.

from the looks of your self portrait , I would have to disagree--you are the perfect asshole.

[Escaped Gorilla Genitals]

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

They wouldn't be taught it as truth, of course. You're telling me a child old enough to learn and understand the evolution process that would be told what "some people" believe will harm them? What happened with acceptance of other cultures? I recall learning about the Egytpian gods in middle school history class, even before science class started teaching evolutionary theory, and I didn't come home thinking that they were all real. Your argument would work if kids were told it was true when they learned it, but that obbiously won't happen.

Because people do believe creationist stories, whatever their religious origin, are real and having them legitimized in science classes does hurt the education of children. Evolution is and has been for a long time poorly taught or sometimes in the case of human evolution skipped altogether, and the result is a more ignorant and regressive society.

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

Thanks to a prosperous country that had, and went on to have, looser gun laws then that police state. They also had rockets launched at them daily for nearly a year.

They where never invaded because Hitler decided to hit the SU first.

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-switzerland.htm

Uh Switzerland and Sweden aren't the same country and that site is in favor of gun control?

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

Norway?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Norway

Also, http://magweb.n1uro.com/sample/sconflic/co03wese.htm

I admittedly made a mistake there.

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

Theres a reason why a land invasion of the US has never been undertaken. Remember what Admiral Yamamoto said?

The US was never invaded because the Japenese navy never came close to being able to land large numbers of forces in the US and there was no way to sustain a Japanese offensive halfway around the world against 100+ million people.

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

Saddam had a police state, and wasn't afraid to use lethal force on a whim against dissidents.

Yeah? Is your idea that whatever dictator would take over in the US presumably using the might of the US military is going to play nice? Dictators don't get to be dictators by being nice guys.

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

Why don't you name me more of these "plenty" besides him that you say exist?

Saddam is a sufficient example, perhaps there aren't plenty I'm too lazy to lookup the numbers.

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

...and yet, you won't find anything against Blacks in the founding documents of our country. I think they knew that the emancipation of blacks was inevitable, and wrote the documents to represent that. Perhaps they weren't ready themselves to live in that world, but they wanted it to happen in the future. I'd rather believe that than they envisioned a country where Slavery will exist forever, but conveniently left that out of the founding documents of their new nation.

That does not excuse their profit from and enforcement of a slavery system. You can't believe that slavery is wrong on the one hand and run a plantation worked by slaves on the other. Why can't you just admit they where wrong and had immoral stances on some things?

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

If they would of wanted to enforce it, it would of been in the founding documents. It says "All men" instead. Try again.

No, if they wanted to enforce it they would have done exactly what they did do: Own slaves and let slave owners like themselves carry on as they had been doing all along.

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

Christ, you're more like Bush than I realized. First you insist the Constitution is just a "piece of paper," then you want to take away the basic rights affirmed to us by that document like Bush has been so fond of doing. Are you sure you aren't a neoconservative in disguise?

This circular reasoning and childish comparisons to Bush are stupid. I don't believe gun ownership is a right and you haven't given me any arguments that it is besides it being in the constitution so it must be a right, I haven't mentioned any other part of the bill of rights.

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

If I have to sacrifice a job position that I'm more qualified for for the sole purpose of "diversity" because my ancestors weren't forthcoming in accepting minorities, then they owe me some repirations for how they treated my ancestors back across the pond as well.

What you don't seem to understand is that isn't about revenge for what happened in the past it's about fixing the current major disparities between ethnicities in the US and the history of blacks and other minoritys is only important so far as understanding how the problems of modern society came to be. You can't exist in and participate in society without making some compromises and sacrifices to it, helping the underprivileged is necessary and to pretend that ethnicity is not one of the major factors that predicts and results in being on the lower end of the spectrum in American society is silly.

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

Ever been to one of the major urban metropolises lately? Milwaukee has been trying so many forms of racial integration, and all it's doing is pushing whites into the suburbs and segregating the races throughout the city, while crime rates continue to climb in those inner-city areas. AA was a decent experiment, but it's not working, and needs to end.

No one ever claimed it was a panacea for racial problems in the US and it's very dishonest to say things like White flight (or gentrification of formerly black neighborhoods as is increasingly becoming the trend) are mostly the result of racial integration policies. More than anything that's a result of the perception of the Black community by Whites and the reality that Black neighborhoods are going to be poorer and have higher crime rates in general. In reality AA is not very widespread and certainly isn't responsible for the large scale movements that have taken place in population centers. AA isn't going to fix the problems within the black community but it is going to help some disadvantaged blacks and work towards racial equality but it won't succeed on its own. To say it's failed as an experiment is also dishonest- statistics for black communitys as a wholes has not improved that much (nor could you expect it to with the relatively limited scale of AA) since its implementation but there have been improvements in the number of blacks in the professional working class and academia, which was the goal of AA and largely owed to its existence.

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

Telling minorities that their performance takes a second place to their race is not the answer.

Except that's not what AA is doing, it's helping the disadvantaged by providing them with opportunities they probably would not have had otherwise.

[Gibonius]

Originally Posted by Mr. Greg

They wouldn't be taught it as truth, of course. You're telling me a child old enough to learn and understand the evolution process that would be told what "some people" believe will harm them? What happened with acceptance of other cultures? I recall learning about the Egytpian gods in middle school history class, even before science class started teaching evolutionary theory, and I didn't come home thinking that they were all real. Your argument would work if kids were told it was true when they learned it, but that obbiously won't happen.

People are already fucking clueless about science, and adding religious to the agenda is going to make that worse and not better. If they want to teach that shit in a philosophy or comparative religion class, fine, but keep it the hell out of a science classroom. Too many morons already think that they're competing "theories."