Discussion about hot topics trending today

[Falcon Horus]

So I was reading an article on MSN.com
(http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/jud...ses/ar-BBlGU30).
Anyway, I think it's so stupid! If she doesn't want to give them a license because of her beliefs, she shouldn't have to. She's being forced to go against her beliefs, and I think that's wrong, IMOHO.

What do you all think?

See answers by Gatefan, Britta and Annoyed.

Also, if you want to open that can of worms, you're welcome to. However, this will derail your idea of the thread like you have no idea.

Personally, I have issues with people who would deny me the right to marry the person I love.

Questions for those of you on the left who may be considering voting for her.

Doesn't this, and the numerous other scandals this candidate is carrying as baggage mean anything to you?

If this was someone on the right, whom I would have otherwise considered voting for, the scandals (how many are there now?) would have eliminated her from my consideration long ago.

Point out the one who has no scandal somewhere or a skeleton in his/her closet.

Were I american I would probably vote for Clinton -- or Joe Biden.

[Gatefan1976]

Spin it anyway you want it. If you wish to avoid prison, don't commit a crime. It's that simple.
You do raise a good point, however, regarding prison as a labor source. There are a number of unpleasant tasks that could be sent to the state prison systems to provide labor for the prisoners to do. We ought to use that population as a labor source in order to offset the cost of their care and feeding.

Trash separation is one example. Rather than having residences and businesses separate their trash into recyclables and not recyclable, go back to the end user dumping all trash into one container/stream, ship it to the prisons, and let the prisoners sort it.
There are many ways such as this that the prison population could be put to work.

http://atlantablackstar.com/2014/10/...trial-complex/

Well Done Massa, this is the kind of crap you are supporting with that viewpoint. Not only that, you have proved you support slavery, and don't really care about what prison is -supposed- to be about, which is rehabilitation.

[jelgate]

See answers by Gatefan, Britta and Annoyed.

Also, if you want to open that can of worms, you're welcome to. However, this will derail your idea of the thread like you have no idea.

Personally, I have issues with people who would deny me the right to marry the person I love.



Point out the one who has no scandal somewhere or a skeleton in his/her closet.

Were I american I would probably vote for Clinton -- or Joe Biden.

You wouldn't votie Jelgate? With me, you know I am a opportunistic psychotic megalomaniac

[Annoyed]

http://atlantablackstar.com/2014/10/...trial-complex/

Well Done Massa, this is the kind of crap you are supporting with that viewpoint. Not only that, you have proved you support slavery, and don't really care about what prison is -supposed- to be about, which is rehabilitation.

I don't see prison as being about rehabilitation, aside from instilling a desire to avoid being placed in one. It's about 1: removing a person who has declared he cannot live with a society's laws from that society and 2: punishment, plain and simple.

[Gatefan1976]

I don't see prison as being about rehabilitation, aside from instilling a desire to avoid being placed in one. It's about 1: removing a person who has declared he cannot live with a society's laws from that society and 2: punishment, plain and simple.

Then take them out the back and shoot them, or do you consider slavery a more palatable option than pulling the trigger?

[garhkal]

So, now it seems that her highness, Hillary Rodham Clinton is claiming that someone in her organization stripped the classified tags off of emails that landed on her private server.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015...tion-markings/

Questions for those of you on the left who may be considering voting for her.

Doesn't this, and the numerous other scandals this candidate is carrying as baggage mean anything to you?

If this was someone on the right, whom I would have otherwise considered voting for, the scandals (how many are there now?) would have eliminated her from my consideration long ago.

Heck, imo if it had been someone on the right, they would have already been hammered in court by now.

[Annoyed]

Heck, imo if it had been someone on the right, they would have already been hammered in court by now.

Quite true.

[Gatefan1976]

Quite true.

You mean like all the bankers who have been "nailed to the wall" after the conditions created by the right to destroy the economy?

Yeah................

[Falcon Horus]

You wouldn't votie Jelgate? With me, you know I am a opportunistic psychotic megalomaniac

Or you. Possibly, and very likely you indeed.

[Annoyed]

You mean like all the bankers who have been "nailed to the wall" after the conditions created by the right to destroy the economy?

Yeah................

I've opposed those bank and car manufacturer bailouts from the start. And not just the ones Bush II set up in 2008, either. Chrysler should have gone belly up in 1979, when Carter bailed them out.

The government has no business whatsoever bailing a failed private business out. If you mismanage your company to the point of failure, fine. Let it go bankrupt, someone will buy the smoking remains and do a better job of running it.

[garhkal]

You mean like all the bankers who have been "nailed to the wall" after the conditions created by the right to destroy the economy?

Yeah................

Are bankers on the right? I thought they were civilians, not politicians. That is what i was on about.

[Gatefan1976]

Are bankers on the right?

The individuals?
Perhaps not.
The conditions that allowed for such blatant money chasing certainly are however. De-regulation, removing governmental oversight, continuing to allow loopholes (sorry, Offsets) for corporate taxes are very much right wing small government ideals.
The bankers themselves may not have been right wing, but they certainly abused the law that the right wing created and defended.

I thought they were civilians, not politicians. That is what i was on about.

Really?
I thought you were on about bias in the ebil libuuural media.

[Gatefan1976]

I've opposed those bank and car manufacturer bailouts from the start. And not just the ones Bush II set up in 2008, either. Chrysler should have gone belly up in 1979, when Carter bailed them out.

Yup.

The government has no business whatsoever bailing a failed private business out. If you mismanage your company to the point of failure, fine. Let it go bankrupt, someone will buy the smoking remains and do a better job of running it.

Dude.
If you did that to the banks in 2008, the US economy would have cratered, and the US would have all but collapsed (not gone into recession, COLLAPSED)
What the Fed should have done is buy out the banks that caused the problems (rather than bail them out), charged the people who caused the problems and run a full federal banking consortium. There are some enterprises that should -never- be run by private business entirely, and some, not at all.

[Annoyed]

Yup.

Dude.
If you did that to the banks in 2008, the US economy would have cratered, and the US would have all but collapsed (not gone into recession, COLLAPSED)
What the Fed should have done is buy out the banks that caused the problems (rather than bail them out), charged the people who caused the problems and run a full federal banking consortium. There are some enterprises that should -never- be run by private business entirely, and some, not at all.

Well, the government wouldn't have to look far to find the guilty parties. To some degree, the actions of the government caused the bank failures. In decades prior to the financial collapse, the government began forcing banks to make home loans to low income people who would not have otherwise qualified for the loans.

http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/18/fan...0718brook.html

So there is a legitimate argument that since the government caused the banking crisis, it should fix it.

But that doesn't excuse Chrysler being bailed out twice, or GM being bailed out.

[imzadi35]

See answers by Gatefan, Britta and Annoyed.

Also, if you want to open that can of worms, you're welcome to. However, this will derail your idea of the thread like you have no idea.

Personally, I have issues with people who would deny me the right to marry the person I love.

I hear you. I just believe that you shouldn't be forced to do something you don't want to do. That's all.