Moiraine

Shouldn't we be above it? Apparently we're can't complain about U.S. torture until the C.I.A. beheads someone.

So, it's OK for Trump to insult and belittle people but...by gosh...if one of his minions does it.....he gone. He's a great leader. We all just don't understand his ways. Or if that fails he'll just surround himself by the best people. The brightest people. To lead for him.

They were certainly fortunate to not have to go up against a Lebron James led hungry team, at least. Nah.

It's ridiculous. He's also against freedom of the press. Not for lying but because they don't blow sunshine up his ass.

I'm somewhat neutral on the whole gun rights issue. I want it to be harder than it is to get guns. But I find it pretty hilarious that many of the gungho pro-guns, "the libs are gonna take away my guns!" crowd are also in support of many things that take away the rights of others. Particularly the right to privacy, not being profiled because of your skin color, and getting married to who you want to marry. To those people, anyone who complains about those issues is accused of acting politically correct. Anyone who complains about their ease of gun access being reduced is considered to be patriotic. Apparently having your freedom being stomped on is okay as long as it doesn't relate to guns. As to the argument that it's the same in reverse: having an item made a little bit harder to obtain and being judged (denied marriage, stalked by police) for who you are born as are completely different things. One of those things is a hell of a lot worse than the other.

F***t**d. Anyone who can't see what a terrible idea this is can't see past their own a-hole. Or doesn't know what the word "precedence" means.

i said that because of what was said to me, and it was a direct response to that poster attacking me.. it said " or do you want to be one". I never said he was one. You're incredibly sensitive.

Got an HBO password. I think the last episode of GoT I saw was from Season 2. Are we on season 6 now?

you could, like, you know, look at the article That'd be too hard.

A woman posted these photos she took of her son on Facebook. She says she took them the same night the attack happened in the same place.

No. They'd never do that!

Really doubt that was it.Then what was it? Ineffective recruiting or did Huskers not really want this kid? You win some you lose some. We're not going to get every recruit. Although it's scary how few DTs/DEs we're getting. Riley would've known before he pursued this guy whether there were scholarships available, and if you are considering going after juco players you don't just throw scholarships at walk ons in the spring before trying to land some.

I thought coaches couldn't be around summer workouts. How would Riley know how he looks? They can talk to the strength coaches.

Agree 100%. Trump must be stopped. I have no words for the stupidity of this comment. I know. That's what makes it scary. No, what makes it scary is that Hillary is the one that will continue to balloon the government until we live in a tyrannical socialism and Trump wants the scope of the federal government greatly decreased. What is also even more scary is that people would rather believe a ton of media and political propaganda that makes them believe it's the other way around. Most of people's opinions on Trump come from the words that come out of his mouth. The press pretty much just has to show clips of him talking.

Really doubt that was it.

I know the father (though not well at all) and can't stop picturing it. I can't imagine trying to go back to your daily life after something like that.

Well, it's a pointless question, so the answer doesn't matter. Without a gun he was far less likely to be able to kill that many. If bomb-making was easier, more people would do it.No interest in debating this with you. We've never talked about it before that I recall, and I think I've made one or two posts in this thread. I'm not all that heavily opinionated on the subject. So that's a little weird. But okay. That came off rude, I appologize. The tone of that post just gave me the sense that nothing I can say will outliney point any better than I have over the last 7 pages. The ultimate point is this: Those dead set on doing harm will do it. If it reduces casualities by enforcing stricter gun laws then we need to do it. But IMO it will only reduce the crazies that feel the need to make the news/go out with a bang and that alone is worth it. It won't, IMO, atop anyone involved with terror groups since they are already in most states under false identities and in networks where aquiring weapons won't be an issue regardless of laws. No problem. You didn't mention the bolded in your post. You just said, if he was unable to acquire firearms.

They shouldn't, they don't, and reasonable gun reform doesn't make them "suffer". And how does additional policing of peace loving muslims make them suffer? In trying to make your argument you continue to lose ground.No he doesn't. If you don't understand how it makes them suffer, you're not trying and you have no ability to empathize with the people who already unfairly get "a little extra policing." People of Arab descent and Blacks and basically anyone not White already go through that, from higher pullover rates to more airport security pat-downs. Being continually profiled is a hell of a lot worse than being asked to do a little extra stuff to buy an item that can kill someone instantly.

I re-read through the topic again and I was confused too.

Well, it's a pointless question, so the answer doesn't matter. Without a gun he was far less likely to be able to kill that many. If bomb-making was easier, more people would do it.No interest in debating this with you. We've never talked about it before that I recall, and I think I've made one or two posts in this thread. I'm not all that heavily opinionated on the subject. So that's a little weird. But okay.

Well, it's a pointless question, so the answer doesn't matter. Without a gun he was far less likely to be able to kill that many. If bomb-making was easier, more people would do it.

I'm assuming you mean a AR-15 rifle, not a real assault rifle since they're effectively banned? In that case, there's zero functional difference between a standard AR-15 and a ranch rifle like the ruger mini 14 that's been used for hunting for over half a century, other than the fact that it's black. Thanks. I actually wanted a real answer. I know next to nothing about guns.

Why do people need assault rifles to hunt?

Wow, you are really on a roll with these laughable statements. First off, I will give Obama credit for taking out Bin Laden and other key targets, as any time this is accomplished its putting America First. With that said, Obama would never have caught Osama without the intelligence and interrogation policies put in place by Bush that he and the left strongly opposed. There were countless stories written about this at the time of Bin Laden's death. http://www.redstate.com/dan_mclaughlin/2012/09/05/no-president-obama-didnt-find-osama-bin-laden/ http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/05/05/bush_led_bin_laden_dead_--_wheres_the_credit_109757.html http://townhall.com/columnists/guybenson/2011/05/05/vindication_three_controversial_bush_policies_help_take_down_bin_laden Second, just as Al Quada began to thrive during the Clinton years, ISIS has began to thrive under the Obama years, GROWING BY 4400%, and this according to Obama's own CIA director. http://freebeacon.com/national-security/cia-director-isis-has-grown-4400-percent-under-obama/ What world events or Middle East events happened that allowed a group like ISIS to take hold and grow? None. I'm sure their part of Iraq would've been just as easy to take over while Saddam Hussein was in charge.

Did she really post that?? lol