Valsuelm

The author's brain is at least slightly broken is why. Disjointed thoughts lead to disjointed communication.

It's still thoughtcrime. It's still evil.

When myth meets innocent morons meets oppressive government. History repeating itself indeed.

She loses again! A dem columnist gets worried.

Woops! I posted in the wrong thread. My deepest apologies everyone. I fixed my post!

It's that anti-LBGT bathroom law that got passed in North Carolina. It's not 'anti-LBGT', it's 'anti-T' if anything. Ls, Bs, and Gs have nothing to do with it. Also, it's 'LGBT', not 'LBGT'. It works actually also against LGB part and lots of other people also http://nclawyersweekly.com/2016/03/30/hb2-eliminates-cause-of-action-for-workplace-discrimination/ See... I actually bothered to read the the Acts, rather than the inciteful BS that is most articles out there discussing the issue. It's not a long read: http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2015E2/Bills/House/PDF/H2v4.pdf It doesn't change anything for Ls, Gs, Bs, Ss (straight folks), or As (asexuals) in regards to any such folk being affected based on the fact that they are Ls, Gs, Bs, Ss, or As. Might they be affected because of something else? Sure, but very probably not. Overall it's a very innocuous piece of legislation without any real teeth. The only reason it's making the news is that it makes a point over biological sex. The issue at the national level is a red herring.

It's that anti-LBGT bathroom law that got passed in North Carolina. It's not 'anti-LBGT', it's 'anti-T' if anything. Ls, Bs, and Gs have nothing to do with it. Also, it's 'LGBT', not 'LBGT'.

Pink Floyd is one of a few bands who have created a great album that in essence is just one big awesome song. They are perhaps the only which has created a few of them. This is my personal fave, musically and thematically.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmKvM_Q4jKM

If you can tell the ideology of your history professor/teacher, they are a bad professor/teacher, if you can easily do so, they are abysmal. If you don't have a good mind of your own and a good alternative for a more neutral source of information on history (this is true of most other subjects too, but it is especially of import with history) then yes, you are going to be brainwashed. This is especially true if you are young, as the young are almost never natively equipped to question the information they are being given from an authority figure (and a significant number of adults never develop the equipment). The brainwashed almost never realize that they are brainwashed. Near the only time that ever happens is when the bubble bursts, after one bubble bursts it's easier for some to see through the others. [We all had some brainwashing in K-12, the curriculum is designed for it, and there are a number of myths that are generally taught as fact (and hence commonly believed; I used to believe some of them too)] The best history teachers and professors I ever had, I couldn't tell you to this day what their own ideology was. I was lucky in that I had a few that were great (two of my U.S. History teachers, and my professor on ancient Greece/Rome (a 3 semester venture) were particularly awesome. I also had a flaming blue Constitutional History professor once though. One of only three teachers/professors I ever had from K-College that didn't like me (I questioned him a bit too much and bluntly for his liking).

Imagine how inflamed many would be if Trump made that statement. A statement far more sexist than anything he actually has said.

1959's Grammy Record of the Year Winner:

While I personally prefer Whitney's song, as well as two of the other nominations (Warwick's and Gabriel's) to 'Higher Love', I don't think Whitney was robbed, and had I been voting I'd not have voted for the song, primarily as it was not an original song. I'd wager a bunch that many of those voting thought similarly. Either way, she did have stiff competition that year. While remakes of songs are obviously allowed to be nominated, it is quite rare for it to happen. So far as I know there are only two remade songs to have ever won record of the year, one of which was Whitney Houston's 'I Will Always Love You' in 1994 (the other Bobby Darin's 'Mack the Knife' in 1959; an entirely different era of music). It's a testament to just how talented a vocalist she was that not only was she nominated for remake of someone else's song twice, she actually won, once. And had I been voting in 1994, even though I'd have had the same reservations for voting for an unoriginal song as I would have in 1987, I'd have voted for Whitney that year. Two reasons: A) The competition in '87 was much stiffer, a good case could be made for all song but Palmer's to win in my opinion B) As awesome a song as 'Greatest Love of All' is (and I own it on cassette and CD), 'I WIll Always Love You' is better I think. It's Whitney at her best (and that's saying something), and I'd argue that if there was a Grammy award for 'record of the decade' 'I Will Always Love You' should certainly be nominated, if not win. I'm a big Whitney fan, and the below is her best methinks. It's one of the most moving song recordings ever made, and over 20 years after I first heard it, it still moves me like very few other recordings do. 1994's Grammy Record of the Year Winner:

I'm not following? Ryan is a Republican The order of succession: President --> Vice President --> Speaker of the House ... So if say President Clinton got impeached and thrown out of office, then VP Sanders becomes POTUS. But then, what if he gets a heart attack as soon Clinton is removed from office --and before he could officially name a VP? Boom. President Paul Ryan. Worry not, Hillary isn't going to be elected. When Trump is elected, I would not be surprised at all if Paul Ryan's days as speaker are cut short. Coulter may also be right in that Ryan just may follow in Cantor's footsteps this election or next. He's almost as popular as Boehner among Republicans (for our foreigners, this is to say: not that popular at all). Worry not, Ryan is not going to be President, unless something happens to Obama and Biden (extremely unlikely).

Oy vey! Ann used to always be like nails on a chalkboard to me, and normally still is. Sort of like a female version of Sean Hannity. By Jobu though, she's the smartest person at that table by far. If Ann is the most reasonable intelligent one in the room, you've got a room full of schmucks. (Of course it's been known that Nick and Bill are schmucks for awhile; no idea who the other schmuck is) Eat it up folks foolish enough to think Trump is sexist. Here we have a more intelligent than most woman supporting Trump. Also, anyone know where Trump is said to have said he would consider defaulting on the national debt? I want to see that, as if he actually said what is implied that he said, he will have my vote for certain. Unless his VP pick as abysmal, as he will have the most serious variety of assassination attempts coming his way possible.

What's been happening in Venezuela the last few decades is quite complex, and certainly what's been going on to hurt Venezuela is a bit more than Chavez's policies.There's been little in the western media about the nation other than to demonize Chavez. One should ask themselves why Chavez (or anyone for that matter ever) is demonized. That said, Chavez wasn't perfect (ie: he was a socialist and I'm no fan of socialism) but he did have his nation's best interests at heart much more than almost any current western leader does. That counts for more than a little in a world where most nations' leaders (and most major candidates who ever run to be leader) are at the end of puppet strings of globalist bankers, et al. Oh, I liked Chavez. I probably would have voted for him back in the day had I been Venezuelan. After seeing the Oliver Stone documentary on all the Chavista leaders being elected across South America in protest against US influence I really thought he was a good guy, and he very well may have been. But the policies he put in place have lead to a complete economic collapse in Venezuela, and its looking like hyperinflation. My turn to the right has only happened recently, but seeing Venezuela fall so far is one of the reasons I did so. Had Chavez been the head of state with a more right leaning head of government handing domestic issues I think he definitely would have been remembered fondly. In western media he would have just been portrayed as a 'right wing radical'. He still would been demonized, just with slightly different verbiage. He is remembered fondly by many in Venezuela, and elsewhere. One just wouldn't know that from reading/watching major western media outlets. A problem just about anyone who would stand up to the globalists have, no matter what their economic leanings, as the leader of Venezuela (or most other nations), is that at this point a variety of globalist corporations, and more importantly globalists bankers under the flag of The World Bank (and others) already have a vice grip on the economy. They can and will pull the rug out from under it if their power is threatened. There's only a few nations on earth that are above this, to varying degrees: Iran, China, Russia, North Korea, Israel, and Saudi Arabia (also formerly Libya) are among those few. This is kind of getting off topic though, and deserving of it's own thread. [Not sure I want to discuss it in depth on this forum though] I've not seen Stone's documentary, but perhaps I'll check it out.

Strangely enough, or not, yes. Have fun on the search engines. Especially the Images with 'safesearch' off part.

I don't think you understand how attacking manhood works. You attack manhood by inferring someone isn't masculine enough, and instead is the weaker feminine. The concept of manhood by existence infers that women are weak. Attacking one's manhood can take a variety of forms, many if not most of which have nothing to do with nor reflect in any way on women.

What's been happening in Venezuela the last few decades is quite complex, and certainly what's been going on to hurt Venezuela is a bit more than Chavez's policies.There's been little in the western media about the nation other than to demonize Chavez. One should ask themselves why Chavez (or anyone for that matter ever) is demonized. That said, Chavez wasn't perfect (ie: he was a socialist and I'm no fan of socialism) but he did have his nation's best interests at heart much more than almost any current western leader does. That counts for more than a little in a world where most nations' leaders (and most major candidates who ever run to be leader) are at the end of puppet strings of globalist bankers, et al.

@ the Hillary didn't willfully break the law or doesn't understand how email servers work crowd: So you think she's innocent but admit she's incompetent. Alrighty then!

I'd have taken Chavez for U.S. President over almost every person who has ran for office in the last ~30 years. And yes... the alternative is worse.