Page #21
Pages: #1... #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22 #23 #24 #25 ...#200|
Started by #610414 [Ignore] 14,May,20 02:51
New Comment Rating: 3 Similar topics: 1.Food stuff 2.STUFF, JUST STUFF 3.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF 4.A Forum Topic 5.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF II Comments: | ||
You must be logged in to post here. Log in
So much for rules and laws. The atf claims the man shot at them, says 1 was wounded and they shot the man that was a gun salesman.
BUT no video cams on the officers ,A direct violation of their own policy's. How convenient. BUT we are expected to trust our government. This is just another case that indicates you have good reason NOT to when they don't even follow their own rules..
Walls don't keep undesirables out. 🤣🤣😈
only registered users can see external links
"Orgasms are pretty great, but for men it turns out ejaculating very regularly could also significantly reduce the risk of prostate cancer.
In fact, if you ejaculate once every day you really limit the chances, while another study suggests that a staggering 21 orgasms a month reduces the likelihood of prostate cancer by 20%"
🤣🤣
The Canadian Cancer Society had an advertising campaign for men and prostate cancer and their tagline was “Don’t die of embarrassment”.
"Orgasms are pretty great, but for men it turns out ejaculating very regularly could also significantly reduce the risk of prostate cancer.
In fact, if you ejaculate once every day you really limit the chances, while another study suggests that a staggering 21 orgasms a month reduces the likelihood of prostate cancer by 20%"
Looks like trump's 175 million dollar bond may be fake!
only registered users can see external links
How cool would that be if it were true? Let's pray it is.
--------------------------------------- added after 8 hours
“Incomprehensible”: Experts say Trump’s $175 million bond makes no sense
only registered users can see external links
Trump’s $175 Million Fraud Bond Could Be Invalidated If Insurance Company Doesn’t Prove It Can Cover It
only registered users can see external links
Great verdict: European court rules human rights violated by climate inaction. It's time that governments and companies started paying big time. When they start losing money they may realise they have to do something.
I've heard of the European court ruling against climate inaction, but it's only applicable to Switzerland in this case. It is however a good sign for governments and companies to do more, but they can also interpret it as doing enough, until they get reprimanded by the courts. The courts won't save us, until the voters demand change. Unfortunately, they keep voting for politicians who do the absolute minimum, even when the courts tell them to do more.
Here's the correct link.
It's a start.
only registered users can see external links
I hadn't heard about her for a while. Everyone's favorite angry teen.
If she was supporting right-wing causes, they would carry her around on a throne.
only registered users can see external links
She is a real role model aint she? Can't stay out of trouble Why can't she go get a fucking job and shut the fuck up already? Her parents taught her what to say and how to act just a damn dancing monkey or a parrot .She aint old enough or educated enough to make any knowledgeable statements about anything.
If she would get a college education, and have some years under her belt and stop squeaking like a little tiny toy when she talks more people might listen.
Two fully grown adults, making even more noise, but then without knowledge.
You would think they are old enough or educated enough to make any knowledgeable statements about anything, but they are just parroting a political agenda from their wealthy donors and conspiracy theories from Breitbart.
The US Constitution clearly states I have the right to pursue happiness. How can I when fuel and transportations cost are being inflated beyond affordable?
How can I be happy if i can't buy the food I want because it happens to be meat?
"Is the 9th Amendment life liberty and pursuit of happiness?
THAT all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent natural rights, of which they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; among which are, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety."
I know leo would be happy if he never had to walk, work and had free food and housing and all the pussy he could handle . but other peoples happiness involves different things.
Why infringe on my freedom just so you can be happy?
there is no right answer.
All this climate change stuff is brought about to gain control of the people.
Control their movements, their diets, their lifestyles.
Remember, when the Constitution was written, the modes of transportation were walking, riding a horse or a horse drawn wagon. If you don’t like the cost of gas, walk.
“Is the 9th Amendment life liberty and pursuit of happiness?” Not quite, it means that there are other rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution that are just as valid like the right to travel, the right to vote, the right to keep personal matters private and to make important decisions about you private life.
That has nothing to do with you being too poor to afford Ribeye steaks. The only
right you have, in that case, is your right to seek help so you don’t starve.
However, following your reasoning, then I say that women wanting to follow their pursuit of happiness should be allowed to have an abortion.
"All this climate change stuff is brought about to gain control of the people.
Control their movements, their diets, their lifestyles."
Stuff? Are you such an ostrich like person that you can say that? Unbelievable
IF the right is not written in plain english in the constitution, where is it written that it is "implied". that sounds like interpretation, not facts.
Remember, when the Constitution was written, the modesty of transportation were walking, riding a horse or a wagon. If you don’t like the cost of gas, walk.
“Is the 9th Amendment life liberty and pursuit of happiness?” Not quite, it means that there are other rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution that are just as valid like the right to travel, the right to vote, the right to keep personal matters private and to make important decisions about you private life.
That has nothing to do with you being too poor to afford Ribeye steaks. The only
right you have is your right to seek help so you don’t starve.
All this climate change stuff is brought about to gain control of the people.
Control their movements, their diets, their lifestyles.
My question is, “How?
You have enough sense to know fuel could be cheaper in the US, it is the regulations on drilling and building refinerys that control supply and thus price.
Now tell me please, where does it say that rights not mentioned are valid?
Or, at least, no one is forces to do that YET. Waiting longer in enacting sufficing climate actions WILL force humanity to resort to climate actions that WILL violate our rights to pursue happiness. When you ar trying to stop an out of control train speeding to a collapsed bridge, it becomes harder to save the passengers the longer you wait.
Meanwhile, your right to pursue happiness is already violated, by a culture of hating poor people and worshiping money and wealthy people, which you support yourself.
The impact of climate actions need to be balanced with the impact of inaction. My right and your right to pursue happiness is not more important than the right to pursue happiness of children who deserve a similar future that we had when we were children.
There is more than enough wealth in your country to protect your right to pursue happiness from the actions that are needed to protect the children's and future generations' right to pursue happiness.
When climate inaction spares our remaining years of our right to pursue happiness, it will take away many decades of those children's right to pursue happiness. And their right to pursue happiness will be much more violated than your worst fears of how your right to pursue happiness might be violated.
The only way to deny that is to deny science or hang on to some slither of doubt that has been wildly exaggerated for political purposes. You are talking about the law, which should make decisions based on evidence and science, not on your weak arguments.
The plan is not to send them billions of dollars in cash.
Russia invaded a sovereign nation.
Biden should step down from being the CEO of OPEC and let Trump Jr take over
🤣🤣
Gas jumped from 3.14 to 3.49 over night. bastards. right about the time people are able to get out and TRY to fucking enjoy life a bit
Imagine if the US was 3 worldish, we would just kidnap a few oil exec's and the price would drop to pennys.
only registered users can see external links
"An NPR editor blowing the whistle on the left-leaning outlet's biased coverage says voter registration records showed an astonishing disparity between Democrats and Republicans in the newsroom: 87 to zero."
Now, please help me and others out here, just how are we to have faith in NPR giving us unbiased information?
NPR Fires Back at Staffer’s Missive About Left-Wing ‘Miscues’
only registered users can see external links
Chapin, NPR’s top editor, fired back at Berliner’s dismissal of the outlet’s diversity initiatives, saying in her memo that “exploring the diverse perspectives that drive world events is necessary to our public service mission.”
“That’s why we have built in processes to verify accuracy and why we adhere to the highest editorial standards,” she wrote. “It’s why we have a standards and practices editor as well as a public editor to stand-in for the audience. It’s why we track sources—so we can expand the diversity of perspectives in our reporting. We have these internal debates, enforce strong editorial standards, and engage in processes that measure our work precisely because we recognize that nobody has the ‘view from nowhere.’”
Phart, this organization has always told the truth. The way they tell it may sound biased, especially the MAGA crowd, but, ask yourself why is it that way? If you base your political and national views on one organization, even if it’s one like NPR, then you will never have the whole picture.
Regardless of this editor whistle blower, his position is flawed because of one truth. Biased or not, the articles or reports by NPR can be verified in many other news sources and only a hard right news outlet like FOX NEWS, a proven news outlet heavily leaning toward Trump, would bring this to the light of day. Why? To discredit truthful reporting.
Now, you, Phart, can do whatever you like. No one is forcing you to listen to what NPR has to say, but, don’t come here and tell us your choice of news outlets are not biased.
only registered users can see external links
soro's, owning American media sources? you don't see a problem?
That is the fox buying controlling stock in your hen house.
only registered users can see external links
and uh how about passing this along to the muslims that shouting they hate us? thanks
I know,you could spread these words like butter on toast, but neither of those 2 groups would pay any attention.
he has a couple details a bit off but for the most part, most of the world does need to hear that message.
in the first place. First and foremost, because most black people succeed in life,
despite white people still aggravating their challenges.
I have not ever seen any post from any black person blaming white people here,
for anything wrong in society. I have only seen white people blaming black people
or immigrants or anyone else besides themselves, but especially the most powerless people in the world, for whatever is wrong in society.
You're doing exactly what Arnold is talking about.
I only ask that the message be passed along to those that need to see it.
We both understand hate is a bad thing. But so is dishonesty.
Who writes history? Who tells us what is happening each day?
People with bias and anterior motives on all sides.
How can we stop the hate,if we can't even get the truth about what the hate is based on??
in society?
The world is controlled by powerful people. Everyone else only has a tiny impact on the world. Sure, if all of those people chose to do the best they can, the world improves a lot, but their impact is still reduced by an incredible amount by the powerful people.
You say it yourself, that you don't have the money to buy an electric car, buy a heat-pump and eat healthy and tasty plant-based food. That's applicable to a majority of the people. It's up to the powerful people to change what's causing that problem, by changing the priorities away from providing almost unlimited profits to a few wealthy people, to making sure everyone has money to make the right choices in life.
That's why I'm blaming the wealthy powerful people for a lot that is wrong in society. Those people actually have the power and thus the responsibility to change those things.
You just keep blaming people who are, just like you, limited by the system from doing the best they can. They are surely not all doing the best they can, but even their best wouldn't be enough of what we need. Moreover, you are asking people to do their best, while they are reduced to struggling for survival.
I know that I am not doing the best I can, but almost no one is.
That's because we all have other priorities in life than sacrificing our lives for everyone else. No one should be expected to do that. It only requires some of the wealth and power from those wealthy people, still leaving them with much more than all the rest of us, to change the world enough, so everyone else can make that change more easily.
Thursday morning Elon musk has to do the same,put a 100 bucks into every bank account on earth.
and so on until it comes down to YOU and ME having to give up 3/4th of our fortunes and deposit equal amounts of it into every bank account on earth.
Ok, so once this process is complete. What would the changes be?
The dollar would be worth about 2 cents for about 6 months as demand for everything from new Hannes underware to Boeing 747s' would increase 400 fold.
At the end of that 6 months, or le'ts be generous and give it 6 more,make it a year, I am willing to bet Jeff Beso's, Elon musk,and others like them would be nearly back to where they were. Even with different laws and regulations in place.
Why, Because they would sell the products and services people wanted,and profit from it,and reinvest it. Those that didn't have shit before,probably would have a bunch of shit they couldn't pay taxes on the next year.
Wealthy people are not wealthy just because they are evil,it is because they take the time to get educated and take risk you would be scared shittless to take.
The whole idea that an Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk should control like a dictator all those people putting in their labor for the profit of people who don't do a day of work, IS WRONG.
They don't EARN their money they TAKE that money. Some of them once had a good idea or have actual talent, but it's never valuable enough to justify their piece of the pie. Your idea of that risk is nonsense, most wealthy people risk the money of investors and shareholders and stand to lose nothing or little, when they fuck up. That's only applicable to small business owners.
Not most wealthy people are evil, but most of them are sick from greed.
They are just taking what they can, you are the dumb-ass that support the systems that allows them to do that.
if there were no wealthy people,there would be few jobs and not much of a living to be made.Poor people don't own companys, poor people can't afford 20 bucks a hour to flip burgers.
Capitalism is a system where wealthy people own everything,
so of course in that system, everyone is working for wealthy people.
In medieval feudalism everyone was 'hired' by the king, because that was
the system then. In ancient Egypt everyone was working for the Pharaoh, because that was the system then.
If the capital is socialized, we would all be working to enlarge the public capital,
so we'd publicly invest in companies who provide the jobs. Then we all get to vote for representatives who make the best investments in OUR NAME, to create the companies who add the most value FOR US and for humanity, instead of to further enrich a few selfish people, who were born with a silver spoon in their mouth.
Poor people are a result of inequality, which is a result of authoritarian ownership. Democratically controlled public ownership doesn't support that inequality. People would get paid for the need of their labor. Without burgerflippers, you don't have a burger restaurant, so they are essential. The CEO of McDonalds isn't essential; there are many better restaurants without a CEO.
It’s unbelievable. I never imagined this would be so popular.
Total Votes: 70
Total Voters: 54
Oh, yeah, stay out of my page too.
--------------------------------------- added after 5 hours
BTW, Phart, now that MONGOloid is gone, my blacklist has a total of two and one is Pitbull, so, I don't think it's excessive.
New Comment Go to top