Dbqgolfer

Not to sidetrack the discussion, but did anyone see where a VP/top legal consul of CBS posted on Facebook that the feels no sympathies for the victims because they are country music fans who are probably republican gun toters....nice.   By the way, she has since been fired.

15 minutes ago, commando said:

apparently there is a loophole in the law that allows people to buy a part that changes the semi auto to full auto.  and what about the large clips?  i asked earlier about that but didn't get any answer.   a clip of 7 rounds is still deadly and too much when a crazy takes aim at innocent people...but what i heard sounded like a large clip or belt feed when i saw video of the attack last night.   might have saved a few hundred people from being injured or killed if there was a smaller limit on how many can be loaded at a time.

Personally, I think people should have the right to have a 30 round clip.  The last thing I would want to do is take another life; so if someone is breaking into my home to do harm to my family, I may want to squeeze off 5 or 6 warning shots to give them a chance to rethink their decision, and still have some rounds left in case they don't.

Just now, commando said:

fwiw....on the right wing radio talk shows today the thought was running that this was a planned attack by the liberals to get gun control back on stage.   i am not making this s#!t up.

To be clear, not my position or belief

9 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

That’s seriously what you got out of that?

Yes, that is what I got out of that.  I thought you were responding to the second part of my post.  Upon rereading, perhaps you were responding to the first part.

2 minutes ago, commando said:

you are fine with people owning military grade weapons...why not the other stuff?  or could we maybe consider that maybe a sane limit on such weapons could be considered?

My opinion is that we have that sane limit on such weapons now.....semi-automatic weapons legal, fully automatic weapons liked the one apparently use in Las Vegas, not legal.

1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

 

Wrong. I’m a gun owner and take that right very seriously. 

 

Im so sick of the crap spewed by the NRA and constantly repeated by other gun owners. 

 

Thus us is exactly why nothing will change on this issue. People just spewing political crap without thought. 

So, brutal regimes don't disarm the citizenry first?

1 minute ago, commando said:

 

you are right.  we need to give tanks, bombers, and missiles to our citizens to keep them well armed.  heck...maybe even some nukes.   we have the right to be fully armed dad gummit. 

I guess I don't remember saying that.

2 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

Good thing nobody is talking about doing that and also that what you just said makes no sense.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh I dont' know, I think part of the reason is because the NRA has made it impossible to study this, and for an entire half of our government to carte blanche reject anything that would go against gun profits. 

Disarming the citizenry is exactly what people are talking about; and if you didn't get my point,  regimes that brutalize/commit mass murder agains all or part of their citizenry, first disarms them.

Disarming the citizenry did wonders for the citizens of Nazi Germany, Soviet Union, Cuba and North Korea etc...

I think if we get to six wins  (5-4 in Big 10), Riley keeps his job for another year, but Cav is gone.

1 hour ago, zoogs said:

 

Questions should be punctuated with the '?' mark.

I was hoping no one would notice that.

On 9/24/2017 at 10:37 PM, Moiraine said:

 

 

Yep... that's what I just said...

I've said probably more than 10 times in this topic that it's often misused and that's one of the major problems with it.

In your scenario, the woman thinks she has a clue but after talking to her about it, the man realizes she doesn't and explains it. That isn't "mansplaining." He's not explaining because he thinks she's ignorant due to her being female. He's explaining because she's made him aware that she doesn't understand - by talking to her, or at the very least he disagrees with her understanding of it - because he talked to her.

People misuse words incorrectly all the time. This particular word has the potential to be used incorrectly a lot. But that doesn't make any of the scenarios you've presented examples of what the word means. None of them have been what the word refers to.

Just curious, is it mansplaining to point out what horrible grammar this is.  One either misuses words or uses words incorrectly.  One does not misuse words incorrectly.

1 minute ago, teachercd said:

I think it is actually 10 days but I could be wrong.

Yep, I just read that it is 10

1 hour ago, huskerfan120889 said:

administrative leave? are you kidding me. what's a guy got to do to get fired?

I heard on ESPN Radio that Pitino's contract requires 4 days notice before he can be fired for cause.  My guess is, the administrative leave will be for 4 days, then he is gone.

It looks to me that the Republicans have joined the Democrats and have even stopped pretending that deficits and a $20 Trillion debt are important issues to them......when our dollars become worthless, it's going to be a very big issue to all of us.

10 hours ago, Cdog923 said:

Wait, did you actually break any laws, or did they just send you a ticket for actually driving through their city?

How would I know, tough to remember how fast one was driving through a city six weeks after the fact.  

I received the same type of ticket from Cedar Rapids about a year ago.  I, too, was on the interstate (I-380).  The one I received called it a civil infraction, meaning it doesn't count against your driving record or insurance rates.  Just a little tax for driving through their city.

To get to 8-4 , we have to go 7-2 in BIG 10, which  means we have to beat either Ohio St., Penn St. or Wisconsin plus everyone else.  If that happens, and I don't think it will, there is no way we make any changes.

On 7/26/2017 at 8:39 AM, Fru said:

Guy in charge of the nukes, everybody.

 

I asked several times for a GOPer (especially all those 100% Pro life, heart beats, every life matters GOPers) to reconcile how they can sleep at night, knowing this buffoon is in charge of the most destructive force the world has ever seen. I'm yet to hear anything from a virtuous GOPer.

I'll answer, I'm able to sleep at night, because for the first time in my life (9 presidential elections), I didn't vote for the Republican in the general election. Full disclosure, I didn't vote for the Democrat either.  My guess there are a great number of conservatives like me who didn't vote for the Republican or Democrat either.

 

 

Well, here's a photo of democrat interns :

 

With an all white leadership and this photo of the interns, kind of looks like the power structure of the pre-civil war south; you know, before the republicans freed the slaves.

 

 

Again, the "White Establishment" phrase came from conservative carnival barker Bill O'Reilly. Not Rachel Maddow or Bill Maher.

 

And it is beyond disgusting for you to compare democratic interns to the horrors of slavery. Your party's standard bearer has the full ringing endorsement of the KKK. You are not the party of Lincoln.

 

And as Zoogs pointed out, political parties have switched names. This article sums it up pretty well.

 

http://us-presidents.insidegov.com/stories/3613/republicans-democrats-switch-platform

 

Bill O'Reilly is not a conservative and my original post was meant to make fun of his comment. Although I disagree with her on just about everything, I listen to Rachel Maddow more than I do Bill O'Reilly.

Wasn't my intent to offend, but get tired of the whole, "liberals good", "conservatives racist"; and the Republican Party is not my party; I left it because they nominated Trump.

Echo knapp & NM from the previous page, but I do think there are some good points there. It's not as if either party is a perfect champion for minorities. The Democrats in fact, are not above criticism. As recently as the 90s they endorsed Nixonian-era attitudes towards crime. And I completely believe there's still a wing of the party that is quite indifferent, if not hostile, to race issues.

 

Progressive movements in our nation's history tend to reach minorities last, if at all. Somewhat off topic but along the same lines, I read a recent interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates where he dryly made the observation that his book was now the one white people were reading to convince themselves they were allies. As far as deals go, you can make the case that it's a pretty raw choice, and that in all existing power structures white people are ensconced in an exclusive privilege.

 

But one party is way, way, way worse in their aims than the other. Their insistence to the contrary is meant largely to placate people who are indifferent to these issues to begin with. Or, I suppose, to feed on the truly cynical.

 

you know, before the republicans freed the slaves

The two parties have essentially swapped names since that time. You know this, right?

 

I know.

The original intent of my first post was to show how stupid Bill O'Reilly comments were (my attempt at humor obviously wasn't spectacular). From there, I was just trying to show that we should all be careful before throwing stones.

Well, here's a photo of democrat interns :

 

With an all white leadership and this photo of the interns, kind of looks like the power structure of the pre-civil war south; you know, before the republicans freed the slaves.

 

So who represents this so-called white establishment? Is it Trump, McConnell and Ryan; or is it Clinton, Schumer and Pelosi?

You'd probably want to ask Bill O'Reilly, since it's his quote.

 

But maybe this will help

 

 

Wow, those rooms look as white as a Democratic Senatorial Leadership meeting.

So the party supporting black genocide through abortion and limiting minorities educational opportunities by opposing school choice isn't the one?

So who represents this so-called white establishment? Is it Trump, McConnell and Ryan; or is it Clinton, Schumer and Pelosi?