TheProf

How many quotes from the president do you need to prove that your secret conspiracy isn't in play?

Honestly who cares? Do YOU pay that much attention to that drivel?
Written by:
Really on March 6, 2013 9:53 AM

All he wants is attention and to irritate people. There's no sense in dealing with people like that.

Regardless, making sick sexist jokes and the like isn't excused when you're talking down to someone.

Time to do the old flag and report abuse trick so I can't even read your posts. It's been fun mocking you, but you're such an egomaniac that you refuse to answer for your own actions. No respect. You're clever, have misty very smart opinions and I even appreciated some of the things you called me out about. But it's a deal breaker to deal with someone who can't admit fault.

Have fun. Some day maybe you'll respect the fact that you aren't the only one with something worth sharing.

Written by:
BowHunter on March 6, 2013 8:37 AM

Wait wait wait... I thought that was typical liberal behavior.

Written by:
BowHunter on March 6, 2013 8:45 AM

So you have no response other than "buy a clue." Predictable and pathetic.

It's pretty easy to make you revert to scared teenaged boy, you know that?

You're too chicken to answer the long post I made about your ways so you pick this one.

Do you ever even acknowledge your own behavior? That you're imperfect?

I think everyone sees through your fake tough-guy BS.

Feel free to email me, I'll take your money, but I am not posting it here. Just wondering if you would have the balls to leave a return address on the envelope.

Written by:
BowHunter on March 6, 2013 8:40 AM

Yeah, that's such a liberal thing. Conservatives never do that, right?

You'll either ignore this because you can't answer for it or you'll try to come off as not a bigot by saying that of course both sides do it, but liberals do it more or something lame like that.

You are a sad person. Did your mom not love you enough? Is that why you make sexist jokes? Try calling me "she" in a sad attempt to demean me again, that was classic.

What's sick is people like you judging everyone else as bleeding hearts for having a different opinion and interpretation than the great and omniscient Bowhunter.

This incident doesn't pass the eye test. Something is wrong with the situation. A 911 operator should never have to beg a health care professional to save someone's life.

We do rush to judgement in this country. Just like holier-than-thou jack offs who call everyone names for being liberal or not wanting more low income housing in their neighborhood.

Written by:
BowHunter on March 6, 2013 8:16 AM

Well I certainly am glad you aren't jumping to conclusions. That would be irresponsible.

this is a new one for me. Interesting.

I like that analogy!

That's what makes me want to consider him.
Written by:
Con_Alma on May 31, 2012 8:07 AM

Steal from the poor and give to the rich is appealing? You want to kill poor, sick people so the rich can harvest their organs, too?

The wealth is being funneled to the top and the gains these companies are making are being credited only to the leaders who are the only ones making more money, while those actually doing the work are continually taking pay cuts, reductions in benefits, etc., etc.

Not only that, but the rich pay a MUCH LOWER percentage of wages in taxes than the poor.

So once they get rich, they don't have to work as hard to stay rich.

CEOs aren't worth these salaries. These are the job killers - we need the ONLY true job creators (consumers) to wake up and stop using these companies. It's already started with banks, and there's a movement to damage these hypocritical entities with our spending power.

Written by:
Jay on May 30, 2012 7:22 AM

There are plenty of "not Obama" candidates.

I would never vote for Obama2 aka Bush3 Mitt Romney.

Occasionally, yes I do.
Written by:
Con_Alma on May 30, 2012 6:07 AM

then you gamble

But the spending numbers AREN'T slanted. They're accurate as far as I can tell, and the website indicates it to be so.
====

i wish romney would slash spending but i dont think people would go for it. at least he wants to grow jobs...more income to the tres. but the growth of spending needs to stop
Written by:
watchingthefraud on May 24, 2012 11:54 AM

The growth of spending has seemed to stop. I agree that he's almost doubled the national debt in 3 years. I just don't think that spending has increased that much. In fact it seems to have flattened out.

I am not trying to defend Obama. He's been a horrible president.

William Black on Guns and Butter

Like when I line up 50 people, 25 black and 25 white. Each black is identically dressed with one other white. If someone is asked to look at all 50 in random order and identify the people with criminal records, some people would identify a disproportionate number of one race maybe unintentionally, but it's still racism.

Written by:
ShutTheFrontDoor on May 23, 2012 12:34 PM

No doubt racism exists. There just doesn't appear to be any hard evidence at this point to indicate race was a factor in the Zimmerman-Martin tragedy.

Martin looked suspicious because he was a stranger roaming the neighborhood at night. That fact alone makes him suspicious. It doesn't matter if the suspicious stranger was Black, White or Hispanic.
Written by:
ecphan on May 23, 2012 12:57 PM

He wasn't a stranger roaming. He had been in that neighborhood many times before. Do you think Zimmerman called the cops on anyone he saw as a "Stranger?"

MF Global - "this did not have to happen."

Yeah there are reasons other than racism for blacks to be reported suspicious more than whites in almost any circumstance, that's where Prof is ignoring fact, but also goes both ways.

Written by:
ShutTheFrontDoor on May 23, 2012 12:34 PM

I am not ignoring anything. THe point is that someone who reports black as suspicious at a MUCH greater rate than other races is probably doing so out of some kind of racism, especially if the sample size is large enough to determine a pattern exists.

The more examples there are, the less likely it's coincidental. many here just want to brush it off as coincidence.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charles-ferguson/...

The Obama administration has rationalized its failure to prosecute any senior financial executives (literally, not a single one) for bubble-related crimes by saying that while much of Wall Street's behavior was unwise or unethical, it wasn't illegal. Here is President Obama at a White House press conference on October 6, 2011:

Well, first on the issue of prosecutions on Wall Street, one of the biggest problems about the collapse of Lehmans [sic] and the subsequent financial crisis and the whole subprime lending fiasco is that a lot of that stuff wasn't necessarily illegal, it was just immoral or inappropriate or reckless....I think part of people's frustrations, part of my frustration, was a lot of practices that should not have been allowed weren't necessarily against the law.

The president and senior administration officials (such as Lanny Breuer, head of the Justice Department's Criminal Division) have portrayed themselves as frustrated and hamstrung -- desirous of punishing those responsible for the crisis, but unable to do so because their conduct wasn't illegal, and/or the federal government lacks sufficient power to sanction them. With apologies for my vulgarity, this is complete horse___

The link to the police reports is on this page. I haven't lied, and all of the information is there.

People don't steal or rape because of the clothes they wear. They clothes theywear do not influece them at all.

If you are walking though my neighborhood at 2:30 A.M. it's suspicious and so are you. This is just reference point for me.

It's unusual for someone to walk through my neighborhood at that hour. It doesn't matter your race or the clothes you wear.

I can only guess what Zimmerman's thoughts were after having so many break-ins in his neighborhood. What the race of the individuals were and the cloths they wore didn't change or make them any more or less suspicious. The prior events in his neighborhood and their presence were enough to make him suspicious of anyone.
Written by:
Con_Alma on May 23, 2012 6:35 AM

Why bring up the time in your example when he wasn't anywhere near a time where break-ins have occurred, and I haven't found any evidence that there was a rash of crimes by black males?

Where is this proof? am I missing something?

Everyone keeps assuming that since there were break-ins, it was young black men?

or is there a reason behind this assertion?

also it was about 10 minutes after 7. Why is that suspicious in this case?

This is not the racism that I am talking about.

I never claimed he did this, nor is that the only way racism exists.

This is where your logic is fatally flawed.