Professor

No we want the one who admitted in his book that he spent high school smoking pot and snorting cocaine.

Written by: 4 and out baby! on June 11, 2012 7:14 PM

yeah, like Bush?

Written by: Jay on June 11, 2012 4:19 PM

Pathetic that people would vote for one psychopath over another when there are far more palatable choices.

What he did isn't what constitutes it being a prank or not but rather whom he targeted and did it too...his friends.

It was a prank and I think it is funny that it's trying to be exploited.

Written by: Con_Alma on June 11, 2012 3:59 PM

What is it with you people on here and actually reading what he's accused of doing?

He also pointed out that the "

I posted this article, and jay either is too stupid to read or just wanted to call me a racist so bad, he attributed the words to me.

http://www.thegrio.com/specials/trayvon-martin/...

He then lied and said that I called Trayvon Martin a "thug," (I never did) and that I said that his appearance made him a thug or something like that.

(I have condemned that very thinking several times, and called it racism. "If someone looks like a young black man, they get immediately labeled "suspicious."

That's racist.

Written by: TheProf on March 28, 2012 3:01 PM )

When in fact, Jay is the one who said that his appearance was a possible excuse for George Zimmerman:

"CNN had a REAL 17 year old Trayvon Martin picture and he looks A LOT different than the 14 year old in the football uniform.

The bottom line is Zimmerman probably did not murder Martin.
Written by:
JAY on March 28, 2012 3:19 PM "

That's not edited, that's EXACTLY as he posted it.

So when you look at the TRUTH and the FACTS about who has said what, you can plainly see that JAY is the one who has said his appearance is the basis for his changing opinion of what happened. I NEVER called Trayvon Martin a thug, Jay can't and won't prove it.

So Jay - I ask again - do you have proof of your assertions? Or are you content with everyone seeing you as a blatant liar?

Are you a man or a chicken, Jay?

I love this - the guy who thinks there's no such thing as "gay rights" is going to speak for the gay community as a whole.

Unreal.

Did bigots pass affirmative action laws?

Written by:
ecphan on May 11, 2012 12:41 PM

Yes and no.

Well-intentioned people who tried to create a system where bigotry CAN'T influence hiring actually created a system where it HAS TO influence hiring.

I am against it, in case you're trying to attack me for it.

quit dragging your knuckles and get with the 21st century. Stupid cave-men.

If you have to invent these rules and excuses, you're prejudiced. Stop spinning and justifying. Your version of marriage isn't the only version, so you can't ban the ones you don't like because you happen to be in the majority. It's simply denying someone a right because it doesn't fit YOUR narrow definition. You're a bigot if you're for this.

However, there is a physical difference between men and women. This means there is a difference between the marriage of a man and a woman compared to a same sex marriage. They shouldn't get equal treatment because they are not equal.

Marriage is referred to as matrimony. Marti refers to motherhood. There is an obvious disconnect between motherhood and gay couples.

Keep marriage defined as being between one man and one woman and allow gay couples to have a civil ceremony - but not a gay marriage.
Written by:
ecphan on May 10, 2012 8:24 PM

Your definition is fine for your church, but not for a government where they have to deal with people who are wired differently than you. So unless you're still wanting to force your backwards (and false) religious morals on EVERYONE because you're an intolerant bigot, you have to let it open for every set of adults who wants to marry.

You still lose.

well at least I don't have child porn on my computer.

Written by:
watchingthefraud on May 10, 2012 7:27 PM

Which is worse, intolerance for bigotry or intolerance for a race or gender or sexual orientation?

If someone came on here bashing, for example, Christians for being terrorists, would you just sit back and say, "well, I should tolerate his opinion!"

I think not.

Written by:
ecphan on May 10, 2012 6:48 PM

I am not going to waste my time answering it over and over. Now - how much child porn do you have on your pc?

Written by:
ecphan on May 10, 2012 5:29 PM

Are you? What's your obsession with marrying children? What kind of pictures are on your computer, ecphan?

This is not for the President to do anything about.
Written by:
Con_Alma on April 7, 2012 8:46 AM

Oh Bull cr@p. The safety and security of the nation is at stake. This kind of reckless speculation needs to be stopped. It's like the megabanks are skimming off the top. They bet high gas prices are coming and because they do so, high gas prices come. They become an unnecessary middleman.

Speculators do nothing but make money at the expense of everyone else in the nation.

Now if someone said "look at those Asian thugs dressed in hoodies with gold teeth they must be criminals because any Asian who looks like that must be up to no good but a black kid dressed the same way is probably a nice young man" would be making a racist comment. At least in my opinion.
Written by:
Yaj on April 6, 2012 10:42 PM

So if someone means it but doesn't say it, it's fine? Someone was referring to black youths in this instance.

Just drop it.

Please forgive the source, but I use it to prove that the stock market isn't a good indicator when trying to pump up a republican-lead economy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1trSD3Auyo
"Employees of the US military contracting group Academi (formerly Xe, Blackwater USA and Blackwater Worldwide) are seen in new leaked video shooting their machine guns at random while driving through the streets of Baghdad, crashing into other cars and even running over a pedestrian without hesitation. Academi received a $250 million contract by the Obama administration to provide military services in Afghanistan."

Here is the link to the full article and videos:

http://harpers.org/archive/2012/04/hbc-90008515

Americans are the terrorists. This kind of stuff is sickening.

It could go to 100,000 and it wouldn't mean much.

What about reducing spending?

Romney's plan will increase spending, increase the deficit, continuing to make things worse. I don't see how that represents hope or change.

Oh really?

So who decides that? The Church?

Not if the employer is self-insured.
Written by:
ecphan on March 19, 2012 4:13 PM

I agree with you in principle. I really do.

But if insurance is meant to supplement paying for healthcare (it clearly has become that now) then it should be the decision of the patient and doctor over that of the insurance company and especially the employer.

The Church is also against men using contraceptives. There is equality in how the Church regards contraception use by both men and women. You are wrong.

Written by:
ecphan on March 19, 2012 4:11 PM

I thought this wasn't just about contraception? Oh well, only when it suits you or conalma, I guess. Because all the dogma you posted about 'respecting sex' and all that only counts if you're a man, I guess.

Anyhow, if it was ONLY being used as contraception, then you'd have an argument. But people were being denied coverage no matter how it was used.