knapplc

This is true. Isreal is not classified as a terrorist organization by the West. South Africa was during Apartheid. What does that tell you? There were also very violent Jewish terrorist groups fighting for Israel's statehood up until the very moment it was granted. THey bombed marketplaces, theaters and cafes, etc. Members of the group/s went onto be top leaders of Israel. What does that tell you? Who classified South Africa as a terrorist state? Source please.

Have at it.

This is another disingenuous allegation. Both sides were heavily prepared for war. Two-thirds of the entire Egyptian military were on the Israeli borders. Iraq, Syria and Jordan all had large contingents on the Israeli border. This is not a peace-time maneuver. Don't pretend that Israel attacked a sleeping enemy like Japan. Not even close.

This is true. Isreal is not classified as a terrorist organization by the West.

Dodd-Frank wasn't a token effort - or, more fairly, it wouldn't be if the Republicans in the House & Senate would allow it to be funded.

And Hamas routinely attacks Israel in a manner that prevents them from being able to trust that they will have safety in their homes at night. We can dance like this forever. There are two parties here who are wrong. You cannot simply focus on Israel.

It's disingenuous to start your history at 1967 without mentioning the reasons those borders changed that year.

Spring game ticket sales are down from years past.

Now who's moving the goal posts? Nobody said this was ONLY about Hamas. It's about Israel and their occupation of territories, and the response of Palestinians. Hamas is only one group, and we're talking about them for the moment. All of Palestine is responding to Israel, though, and we're going to be dealing with the entirety of the situation, not just specific groups. Have to. Can't take it piecemeal, because it's not a situation of having truces with one group for all groups. Knapp I am going to give you some advice. We went round and round before on this subject. He will change and move the posts forever. He is right and you can't tell him a thing, the best you can do is just let him spout and throw up his little jabs and be done with it. He can't even say bombing a bus of innocent people is wrong without somehow tying it to the Israeli govt. and their policies that are the real cause of the killings. Just a little advice!! Thank you. It's helpful to speak with someone with experience.

Now who's moving the goal posts? Nobody said this was ONLY about Hamas. It's about Israel and their occupation of territories, and the response of Palestinians. Hamas is only one group, and we're talking about them for the moment. All of Palestine is responding to Israel, though, and we're going to be dealing with the entirety of the situation, not just specific groups. Have to. Can't take it piecemeal, because it's not a situation of having truces with one group for all groups.

Are you subjecting your Wiki page to the same vetting? That would only be fair. If we're going to quibble this much over sources, all sources must be put to equal tests. Or we could step back from the minutiae of this conversation and take it for granted that both sides, Israeli and Arab, have violated the peace. Numerous times. That's the olive branch I've held out to you from the beginning. It's still there.

Agreed.

I'm referring to the myriad truces and ceasefires that have been tried, and all have failed. I suppose, conversely, I could ask you what evidence you have that would support the contention that a true peace would be possible, Sub. That may be an easier target for us to hit. I would love for your point to be true. I don't think anyone here in this message board has any desire for war over there. Peace in the Middle East would be the goal of everyone involved in this conversation, I believe. I just don't think it's possible.

Mao was the Chairperson in China, carl. I'm so disappointed in you.

It's not misleading, it's the law. And it's the law because the rich have lobbied heavily to make it so. So once they're in that elite category they have a far less likely chance to lose that status than you and I have of losing our middle-class status and diving into poverty. Wages are NOT guaranteed. Nearly every state in the Union is At-Will, meaning you can be fired for little to no reason at all. Employment is not guaranteed, nor is your paycheck. You have a FAR GREATER risk of losing your job than a billionaire has of losing theirs. And when you do lose your job you're simply out of a job. There's no golden parachute waiting in the wings for you.

It's also Laura Ingalls Wilder's birthday, as well as Charles Dickens' 200th birthday.

I would consider a ban on Catholicism an assault on the Catholic church. This isn't that, and it's not even close. It's the same as asking the church to stop burning witches or stop the Inquisition. There are many things that the Church has done that secular government doesn't agree with. Some of those things are right to stop and some are wrong. There are many people, both Catholics and non-Catholics, who believe that contraception is not only OK, but a right. They are not assaulting the Church, they simply believe differently than church dogma states. Again - this was not the best way to go about this. I see both sides of the issue and I think they both have valid points. I'm not even sure whose side I'd fall on at this point. All I'm saying is it's not an "assault." That's an unnecessarily inflammatory word, much like "class warfare."

37,824.

What is fair, how much do they have to pay to be fair? Some pay none how is it that they are paying their fair share? This drives me crazy that they somehow are cheating this country. The top1% pay 38% of federal income tax. The bottom 50% pay 3% of the fedral income tax. What are you talking about witht his fair share crap, that is Bo talking points and his class warfare. http://www.heritage....-income-earners That chart is misleading. The top 1% pay 38% of total taxes, but they don't pay an equal portion of taxes compared to you and I. To wit: If you and I earn $100 per year, and are taxed at 25%, we pay $25 in taxes. If John Smith the One-Percenter earns $1,000 per year and is taxed at 10%, he pays $100 per year. John Smith pays more in taxes, but his tax burden is lighter. That's what Obama is trying to address. This is not "warfare" it's simple math, and simply fair. I can't see why you'd defend someone's ability to have a lower tax burden than you. Why would you do that?

Exactly! And just remember that it is NOT a football game, and is not intended to be a football game. The absolute best thing about the Spring Game is the tailgating, as if you were at a real game. Can't beat that.

You do realize that carlfense isn't saying they didn't, right? And that that has nothing to do with why he's talking about hypocrisy, right? You don't have to get him to admit that people calling themselves Muslim were responsible for 9/11. Everyone knows this. It's a non-point.

Being a hermit ain't what it used to be. PS - sorry to derail the thread. I just ran across that the other day and the "living in a cave" line reminded me of it. Mea culpa.

That would be awesome.

Exactly. This has been shown to be true time after time after time after time. And it's not just one side doing it - it's both sides, like two bears constantly poking each other with sticks. It's naive to think that if one side stopped, the other side would suddenly stop, too.

That is an excellent point, sir. however, I don't believe Stoopid Larry was ever convicted of a crime while he was at Nebraska There have been a large number of Huskers convicted of criminal activity. You can't dodge the point this way. You know the point I'm making. We don't have to belabor it. It's OK to decry the wrongs committed by The Church. It's better not to convict every Believer because of the actions of their superiors, but I can't stop you from doing that. I hear you clucking, big chicken. By the same token, college football and organized religion is kind of an apples/oranges comparison. Totally agree that it's a poor analogy. There are so few good analogies out there.