Over 12,000 people have been shot in that city since 2010, but the Democrats decide that the most pressing issue facing the city is Netflix.
In a way this is a pressing issue for the city... since its so unsafe to leave your home after sunset, you need in-home entertainment since your family can no longer go to a restaurant or theater without risk of being shot and killed... so clearly this is a key issue... how messed up is that joke! |
|
|
|
On one hand liberals are saying making the minimum wage isn't a livable wage, on the other hand how can it be livable when what it buys is taxed to the hilt? This 9% tax will hit families where their only or primary source of entertainment is internet based. This tax also raises the cost of these internet services far more than the rate of inflation and far more than most people can expect to get in a raise.
How can liberals push for subsidies for poor people but then tax them when they use what's subsidized - the internet.
out of curiosity... is this an additional 9% on top of the recently raised sales tax up to 10.25% for city of chicago residents? or had they simply not been charging sales taxes on these "internet" style related purchases, so now they are equal to any other vendor in the local municipality? |
|
|
|
|
The point is, he's our Commander in Chief of the armed forces and he's supposed to be ontop of these things. Furthermore, not only is it a sign of respect but a sign of solidarity. It tells our enemies: You won't break our morale, you won't break our spirit. We won't stop doing what we believe is right, so screw you and screw your 72(or whatever) virgins.
We are at war, a war is a conflict of ideology. Surrender is NOT an option for the USA and our forces.
Arm our forces. Not only in the US, but abroad. Arm them not only with weapons, but with the greatest intelligence we have. Advance on the enemy, now is not the time for retreat!
|
|
|
|
I agree with this sentiment, for very different reasons. It isn't that people are worth only what they can contribute to Capitalism and that those who cannot contribute enough are less worthy of a family, it's that those are harsh conditions. They aren't suitable for raising children.
But at the same time, the Black population needs to be maintained in order to resist white supremacy and to eventually topple the Capitalist system that forced them into a position as a lower class in the first place.
Are blacks just unable to compete against whites, Asians, and other groups? If capitalism is responsible for it, then it must be that blacks simply aren't competitive in open markets. Thanks for admitting that blacks are antithetical to capitalism, though. That supports several of my arguments. Your end goal has already been actualized in Zimbabwe. Why not move there? |
|
|
|
1. Force millions of people to a country and make them work as slaves
They were already slaves. 2. "Free" this group, but continue oppressing them with laws that prevent their success or mixing.
3. Eventually drop those laws but continue oppression through implicit bias and reduced opportunity.
4. Use the resulting poverty to deny them children.
I call this disorder “Passover Syndrome.” Almost exclusively, it afflicts relatively affluent Caucasians and is characterized by an array of cognitive delusions that ultimately may prove dangerous for its sufferers and those around them. Passover Syndrome’s most prominent behavioral feature consists of whites projecting historical blame onto other whites and hoping that nonwhites will see them as not-so-white for doing so. Just as the ancient Israelites smeared sacrificial lamb’s blood over their doorways in order to escape the Angel of God’s vengeance, these delusional Caucasians smear bright red anti-racist graffiti—or, in extreme cases, the literal blood of “rednecks” and any “right-wing white” who refuses to get with the program—over their doorways in the hope that when the Dark Angels finally come en masse seeking “justice,” they won’t accidentally notice that the people with the bright red anti-racist paint over their doorways also happen to be white. What drives this syndrome is the delusion that collective historical ethnic guilt is a real thing rather than a pseudo-religious abstraction. Passover Syndrome’s sufferers tend to believe that all whites, by dint of skin color alone, are indelibly stained with guilt for unsurpassed historical atrocities and that their debt to nonwhites won’t be repaid until the very concept of “whiteness” ceases to exist—if not white people themselves. What’s most curious about this syndrome is the delusion that by merely acknowledging this imagined historical debt, they are able to somehow transfer it onto other whites—the “unenlightened” ones who don’t acknowledge it—without having to make any sacrifices or installment payments of their own. A consistent feature of Passover Syndrome is an eagerness to offer up a whole other group of whites as sacrificial collateral for their own perceived debt. It’s fundamentally irrational and unethical to believe that one can atone for one’s guilt, real or imagined, by transferring it onto a family member, yet this delusion is surprisingly strong among those with the disorder. Indeed, guilt-projection is one of Passover Syndrome’s most consistent features. Although the malady almost solely attacks Caucasians in high-income brackets, sufferers tend to blame lower-class “rednecks” and “white trash” for slavery and its after-effects. In truth, it’s far more probable that affluent Caucasians are descended from slaveowners than are low-income whites, who are more likely to count indentured servants among their progenitors. This constant finger-pointing of others as “racists,” all while exhibiting an unceasing obsession with racial matters, also strongly suggests projection. http://takimag.com/article/diagnosing_passover_syndrome_among_white_liberals/print#axzz3gZ1gJzppHow much do you personally give to black minorities in the form of charity? Is there currently any black person unemployed who is able to work your job? Why not help set things right and offer it to him/her? |
|
|
|
So you support eugenics?
People who can't afford to pay for themselves without a monthly Government stipend shouldn't be having children. |
|
|
|
Have you even read the paper, googled the news? Have you heard lately of this thing called isis? Dude, you can wave your white flag all you want, but the killing is not gonna stop. These people are for real and they play on guys like you that indirectly stand up for them by calling those that are tired of watching our American brothers and sisters getting beheaded, set on fire, shot in the open, or detonated in a crowd of innocent people. The only thing that will stop this, is going after them. Singing coombaya and appeasement is a joke.
lol!!!!! all Muslims in the USA are ISIS? does that mean all Jews are Mossad? |
|
|
|
This citizen should be forced by the government to sell guns to people he deems extremists, but the government should ban anyone from purchasing guns they deem extremist?
Wow, bizarre.
Deeming anyone of the Muslim faith a "dangerous terrorist", is absurd and bigoted. |
|
|
|
So I'm correct, Obama is going to force this gun store owner to sell guns right before he takes the guns away.
No he won't force anyone to do anything. Gun store will be sued and ordered to not discriminate by Florida state court. |
|
|
|
The guy owns a store that surrounds him in the 2nd Amendment.
Next?
The 2nd Amendment doesn't allow infringements based on ethnicity or religion. Refusing sale of a firearm simply due to religion, violates the clear principles and values of the 2nd Amendment. |
|
|
|
|
wow, guess this guy hates the 2nd Amendment.
|
|
|
|
Just so I have this right, Liberals are cheering the fact that a President is making treaty like decisions unilaterally without the U.S. Senate as ascribed by the U.S. Constitution?
Wow... that's pretty up.
If you'd ever read the Constitution, you'd know the Executive Branch has that power. Wow. |
|
|
|
You mean like Clinton did with N. Korea? LOL Amazing how democrats fail and continue to brag about it. Obama is just another brick in the wall.
I have no idea what you're talking about again. Are you speaking English? |
|
|
|
Obama, with both hands tied behind his back, head butts the GOP out of the ring.
UN Security Council has endorsed the Iran deal which now renders the decision of USA congress as irrelevant because trade with Iran is now permissible.
This will be a big boost for world trade, although USA is not likely to gain from the trade boost because of residual hostility of Iran to USA.
The big gain Obama received form this was to have the GOP-led Congress rendered impotent consequent to UNSC declaration.
Obama smashes GOP out of the ring again.
This is really fun to watch. The GOP just keeps digging that gigantic hole. Again a ham sandwich could beat any of the clowns in the 2016 GOP circus |
|
|
|
All one has to do is look. I'm 58 years old and the the jails are full or "little fish" used to pad the conviction rates of DA's with loftier aspirations.
You are right to a point. BTW I'm 50, so I'm not a youngster. I live in a small rural conservative town and I like it this way. No this town will not allow pot dispensaries and does not condone the growing of it within the city limits. And I understand why. I'm also ok with that. That being said no one gets busted for 2 plants in their garden. I think part of that is the attitude of mind your own business and if it's not affecting your life let it be. In the city there are many more rules and people trying to run your life. Yes I've lived in Vallejo ca for 18 years and I do know the difference. |
|
|
|
There's no evidence suggesting permanent brain damage to adults who use cannabis.
February 7, 2011 Cannabis May Influence Onset of Psychosis Research to be published this summer finds that the use of cannabis is associated with the early onset of psychosis. Christie Nicholson reports. This particular study found that marijuana use is associated with early development of psychosis. Scientists analyzed 83 studies involving over 8,000 subjects who used pot and over 14,000 subjects who did not. They compared the age of onset for psychosis between these groups. And they found that those who used cannabis developed psychosis nearly three years younger than those who did not use any pot. http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/cannabis-may-influence-onset-of-psy-11-02-07/Don't Rule Out Marijuana as Trigger for Schizophrenia By: RICHARD HYER, Clinical Psychiatry News Digital Network 09/21/11 CHICAGO – The idea that cannabis use might trigger a patient’s first psychotic episode is one that needs to be taken seriously, Dr. John Csernansky said at a seminar on "Reinventing Inpatient Psychiatry." "Are there patients out there who have schizophrenia who would not have had it without substance abuse? There may be," said Dr. Csernansky, chairman of the department of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Northwestern University, Chicago. "This is a very hot topic and one that is genuinely frightening." Cannabis use is frequent within 1-2 years before the first psychotic break. A variety of epidemiological studies suggest that cannabis use in adolescence (15-18) increases the risk for development of schizophrenia, even years later. The connection between cannabis use and early psychosis is particularly concerning because substance abuse is common in schizophrenia. Cannabis, in particular, has a severe effect on the thalamus of the person with schizophrenia. This effect is worse than the effect of alcohol. "It looks as though alcohol makes schizophrenia worse, whereas cannabis damages a part of the brain that maybe otherwise would have not been [damaged]," Dr. Csernansky said. http://www.clinicalpsychiatrynews.com/single-view/don-t-rule-out-marijuana-as-trigger-for-schizophrenia/df0b545c0b.htmlGrowing Evidence Of Marijuana Smoke's Potential Dangers ScienceDaily (Aug. 5, 2009) — In a finding that challenges the increasingly popular belief that smoking marijuana is less harmful to health than smoking tobacco, researchers in Canada are reporting that smoking marijuana, like smoking tobacco, has toxic effects on cells. Scientists know that marijuana smoke has adverse effects on the lungs. However, there is little knowledge about marijuana's potential to cause lung cancer due to the difficulty in identifying and studying people who have smoked only marijuana. The new study begins to address that question by comparing marijuana smoke vs. tobacco smoke in terms of toxicity to cells and to DNA. Scientists exposed cultured animal cells and bacteria to condensed smoke samples from both marijuana and tobacco. There were distinct differences in the degree and type of toxicity elicited by marijuana and cigarette smoke. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/08/090805110741.htmThe evidence is mounting. |
|
|
|
Are you part of law enforcement or have you been involved in illegal activity enough to know this for a fact. I've seen both sides and it may all depend on where you live not what state you live in.
All one has to do is look. I'm 58 years old and the the jails are full or "little fish" used to pad the conviction rates of DA's with loftier aspirations. |
|
|
|
See that's about money again. Know one needs electricity to grow any plant. Haven't you guys ever seen a tree? If a person grows 2 plants in the back yard no one will even know. Not even the DEA, or the guy next door. But the smart thing to do is talk to your neighbors ask them if they are ok with it. Many are. They don't want you growing $50,000 worth but a plant or two, no biggie. The feds got not time for a $500 bust, or bug your phone, or follow you around.
The little guys have less money to fight the charges with and therefore make the more desirable targets. Plus they add to the bust/conviction numbers. |
|
|
|
No pot does not require all that. Big indoor pot businesses do, but again we are talking about money. Anyone can grow a few plants right next to there tomatoes.
Marijuana bust shines light on utilitiesGood luck! |
|
|
|
Again you are right, but your really talking about money. If you make alcohol and grow weed for your own use not money the likelihood of getting in trouble is very low. I can get both within 10 min if I want it. The government creates criminals.
Yes, I am talking about money. Property seizure is quite lucrative for the Government, just another great revenue stream. That won't change, they'll take everything you have. If you make alcohol and grow weed for your own use not money the likelihood of getting in trouble is very low.
One can get away with it with alcohol, but Pot requires electricity hogging grow lights. That shows up on your electricity bill. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
