Danny Bateman

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, TG. I may get on your case in the political threads now and again, but I can tell from what you just wrote that you're a good guy and I respect you. I, too, think that was should focus more on what we can do as individuals, be it due to our religion or just our own moral compass, to help people instead of trying to legislate it. There's lots of good we leave undone, and a lot of the time these legislative attempts are led by those who in their hearts believe themselves to be doing good by their faith, when many of us can see they're just setting people back if they overreach like this. It's not hard to find how easy it is for the most "infallible" among us to lose their way. Look at the scandal going on with the governor of Alabama right now. Ran as a family values candidate, currently embroiled in extramarital affair and possibly being ousted here soon. Lastly, as an interesting aside, the Bible says some very odd, archaic things are sins.

James 4:12 Romans 2:1-3 John 3:17 (Yeah, they all know the verse before it, but does anyone pay attention to this one?) Luke 6:37 John 8:1-8 Just a dose of perspective for those of the Christian persuasion amongst us. I agree with JJ. These hypocrites would be better served ending this nonsense, deliberately casting stones, and you know, be a bit more like the Big Man himself.

I had a similar feeling. He certainly responded to her initially with some surprising vigor. Almost lashing back out at her. I too would like to know about what happened before that video. Commando's got a point, too. She was pissed when she found out about the recording, which portends that the slimier people can turn around and claim someone was the aggressor if there's no video or witnesses. It was in a public place, so that wouldn't happen. Just a heads up-- always have a witness

After reading the article, your comments actually make sense, Red Dead. Cm, they said she could've been charged with battery and a hate crime. Street, I don't think you'll get any "liberal white boys" trying to defend her. I don't know where you're getting that from. I'm pretty liberal, but I see it for what it is: she was being an idiot. She had a bone to pick with him for no good reason. Then she pulled him back when he was trying to leave, and accused him of putting hands on her. The video was pretty clear. She was being completely childish and moronic. I'd have been pissed if I were him too. And yes, technically, it was a hate crime. I'm usually not a guy who tries to view the world as colorblind, but now is one of those times in which it is wise.

Don't get me wrong. The other stuff ticks me off too, and people should fight tooth and nail to raise hell about this. But THIS^^^? What the hell planet are these people living on? Is it the 1950's? Holy crap.

Trump lies even more than Cruz. I'm saying Cruz is completely fake. I do not for a second think he really believes a 5th liberal justice would make the 2nd amendment go away. But he knows a lot of his constituents would be scared by that and eat it up. Obviously he has what he thinks are valid reasons to have a conservative 9th judge, but the thing and the 2nd am. he made up. His whole game is to get a bunch of scared voters who think he's the only one who can stop the government from taking away their guns or their "religious freedom" (i.e. the right to discriminant against gays). Fear mongering is rampant. Cruz is a liar. Trump is a liar. Hell, Clinton's a liar. Bernie's a liar. Kasich's a liar. It's useful to figure out who's the most egregious. (Hint: It's the guys on the left.)

Boom roasted! I always hear how California is super liberal. Does that extend to California Republicans, as well? I wonder if they're further left than typical Republicans. If that's the case, Cruz is a hard sell there. He's the farthest right dude the GOP could possibly draw up. I feel like that 8 point window probably widens as we move forward. I could be wrong, though. I read an article recently that liberal states' liberalness causes the Republicans in those states to be super Republican. And vice versa for Republican states (see: Sanders winning Nebraska). But Trump's still winning. Heh. My feeling without data is California isn't very religious, though. So you might have staunch Republicans but maybe they're staunch about everything except religion. And that hurts Cruz. I still don't know how I feel about the nomination. I was all for Rubio getting it because I could tolerate him as president. He didn't seem batsh#t crazy. But now we have Cruz and Trump. It doesn't even matter who wins. Cruz is anti-science and I hate to say it but Trump is right that he's a liar. He says a 5th liberal supreme court justice would cause the supreme court to immediately eliminate the 2nd amendment. What a load of horse crap. It's a very small, fringe element of society that wants it removed. I'm guessing even the majority of far left people only want the restrictions on gun ownership to be more difficult. Nothing more. But Clinton fares better against Trump so maybe I should cheer for Trump. But I don't really like Clinton. And the idea of Trump getting that close to the presidency is scary as hell. And Sanders, although he's my favorite, will not be able to pass anything he proposes. This is another topic in itself but I'd prefer if we changed how high school is funded before even starting with college. High schools should not be funded based on the income of that area. Each kid should be worth the same amount of $ regardless of who their parents are and how much money they make. /rant That was a good rant. Unleash the anger. Your reasoning on liberal/conservative splits within states seems sound. I heard recently someone say that when you have 1 far right conservative and 1 moderate square off in Cali, the far right guy wins. When it's 2 far right vs. 1 moderate, the moderate wins. So perhaps Kasich sets up well in California. Rubio seemed the most sane to me as well. He just couldn't be develop a base this year because he was trying to appeal to everyone. Kasich seems the most reasonable left. But both Rubio and Kasich share the same fierce pro-life stance, and some of the stuff Kasich's done in Ohio to implement it is gross. He destroyed their public school system as well, so I'd only vote for him with a gun to my head. Cruz is a religious zealot and Trump is a charlatan. They're both dangerously unqualified and flawed candidates. I know exactly what you mean when you say he goes on his little 2nd amendment rants. I share that rage. He also adds in that they want to "take away your religious rights." What a crock. I'm a Christian, but I've actually got a reasonable perspective on how good Christians here have it. I can back up your assertion on gun control. I'm a pretty strong gun control advocate, but come on. Obama's NOT coming to take your guns, and neither is Hillary. If you believe that, you're a moron. Lastly, glad to hear you're considering Clinton at least. I very much share your stance on Bernie and his policies, though I didn't vote for him. And your last segment about high schools (and other public education) is something that I've recently come to really care about recently, moreso than making college free. I'm all for making it more affordable, but I think we need to put our primary and secondary education first. We can't continue to send people with woeful basic education out into the world and expect them to become productive members of society. Every child deserves the same opportunity to succeed. Like I said, good rant.

Boom roasted! I always hear how California is super liberal. Does that extend to California Republicans, as well? I wonder if they're further left than typical Republicans. If that's the case, Cruz is a hard sell there. He's the farthest right dude the GOP could possibly draw up. I feel like that 8 point window probably widens as we move forward. I could be wrong, though.

Not to derail the awesome tangent going on here... But at least we know Trump is pro-life now.

1922 NYTimes Article about Hitler, the Candidate Knapp is going to love this. But I read it earlier and I thought it was too good.

I pretty much agree with your assessment, Lil' Red. It won't outright deny him the nod, but a Cruz win would go a long way. Cruz is a dead duck on either coast. The Pubs are going to need Kasich to do some work there to block Trump.

Trump's campaign manager arrested in Florida for battery of reporter. And the Trump circus rolls along.

Hey BF crew, Got a real minor annoyance when posting. When I quote another post, I space my response so as to leave a line between it and the quote box, but generally somehow when I submit my response, the space gets omitted and I'm left with my response immediately underneath the quote box, like so: N is for Nowledge I always wind up editing my own post immediately afterwards to reinsert a space, and it usually leaves it correctly spaced upon second submission. Any idea why that is? I'm using what I assume to be the most current version of Firefox.

I created a Twitter Given their recent nose dive in the stock market, you're probably the first one in months. He's bringing SEXY BACK! Sexy being Twitter.

Bernie's economic policies according to one UMass Amherst economist It should be noted that this guy, Friedman, is a single-payer advocate, so it makes sense that he'd paint a rosy picture of Bernie's policies. However, he work says that Bernie can sustain a 5.3% economic growth rate per year. That's nearly two and half times what it is now. And that statistic fluctuates rather wildly. A lot of reputable economists would laugh in your face if you suggested we could sustain a 5.3% growth rate.

I just noticed a rather interesting thing about ISIS. I watch a lot of CNN, and it seems that since the conversation has been spurred about them post-Brussels, most every foreign terror/Middle East expert they've had seems to be in lockstep that the US strategy against ISIS seem to be working. Is it perhaps the case that the US sees that particular issue through a different lens than the rest of the world? It seems the angriest voices are here.

Funny that you mention Breitbart, Zoogs. They're doing a bit of imploding at the moment due to the resignation of several employees after one of their reporters claimed Trump's campaign manager grabbed her and pulled her away from Trump after a presser. If you take Shapiro's claims to be true, they're the political equivalent of a Trump shill outlet anyway. Quite the ragtag group of foreign policy advisors he's assembled. Doesn't inspire too much confidence, to a skeptical eye...

Say what you want about this pope. A lot of people probably think he's in the limelight too much. But he's an OG.

Teach, you gotta be trolling. You're just being intentionally glib, right?

I very much agree. The difference, also, is that they're the political leaders calling for wholesale changes that affect everyone. People simply afraid of others aren't doing that.

Trump was asked "If you could substantially reduce the risk of harm to [American] ground troops, would you use a battlefield nuclear weapon to take out Isis?" The media told you that Trump said he'd use nuclear weapons. What he actually said is that he wouldn't want to use them. He refused to say he absolutely wouldn't use them because he always wants that threat to be there. What good does it do to have nuclear weapons if the world knows that you wouldn't use them? Now, I don't think they need to be used but it's nice to have them in the arsenal. Loaded question anyway. I agree with the sentiment of wanting to have your whole arsenal on the table, but forgive me if I dismiss his opinion on nuclear weaponry. It's not too long ago that he was bungling a question about them that led me to believe he was ignorant on the subject. Is there even anywhere in the Middle East that we can legitimately use nuclear weapons without massive civilian casualties? I honestly have no idea.

Zoogs is calling a spade a spade. What Cruz suggested was straight-up strongman demagoguery that actually has very little support from anyone insofar as keeping Americans safe. If it was supported and/or effective, you wouldn't have the NYPD Commissioner coming out and saying "Cruz doesn't know what the hell he's talking about," and Cruz retorting that somehow the NYPD commish is "one of [Mayor] De Blasio's Democratic political henchman." Cruz is attempting to get out in front of a political issue by fear-mongering and out-Trumping Trump. Meanwhile, the Donald is back to suggesting we utilize torture and/or nukes to deal with Islamic terrorists. It is revolting and feckless, in my opinion. I think that it actually speaks to the ignorance of both of them on the matter.