Previous 11 - 20 Next
Generally speaking, it comes a lot more from the left than from the right. Start counting up how many times you see it on the left vs. the right. Just because you can name a handful of times it's come from the right doesn't mean it's the same thing as the left doing it almost every other week. Sorry, one of my pet peeves is when someone makes a general statement that is "countered" by a specific example. Ex. "Men have more upper body strength than women." "Oh yeah? I know a couple women who are stronger than you!"
Fortunately for Ann, she's not a liberal democrat who feels like she has to agree with "her side" 100% of the time...even if she doesn't agree with it.
Really?? You think that's what this article was about?
I just want to say that I'm not even a little religious, but these atheist extremists really tick me off. I think that forcing religion out of society (and taking it out of ALL of society is their goal, not just enforcing this mythical "separation of church and state" that they think is in the Constitution) is leading America to a cliff.
In response to:

Lancet: a Home for Evil's Useful Idiots

baddham Wrote: Aug 05, 2014 4:43 PM
If you really did support Israel you would understand that your " that is not theirs..." comment is part of the issue. The land in question is in dispute. The Arabs think it's theirs while the Israelis think it is theirs. Also, while there have been plenty of civilian deaths in Gaza, comparing that to the Germans in WWII leveling whole villages because of one sniper is a poor (simplistic?) analogy. It could be argued that the Israelis have been as precise in their retaliation against the hundreds of rockets being fired into their country as is possible given modern weapon capability. Firing the rockets from within dense civilian areas (including schools, hospitals, mosques, etc) leaves the blame at least as much on Hamas as it does on Israel.
The rebuttal to all of your examples is very simple: "ineffective rockets"? Oh, so since they're not very accurate Israel should just ignore them. Israel controls all aspects of Palestinian life as sanctions against the Palestinians for their continued hostility towards Israel...and the fact that the Palestinian leaders have no desire to give up the fight against Israel and allow their people to produce their own food, electricity, supplies, etc. Also, if the leadership weren't such anti-semites, whatever the Palestinians weren't able to produce themselves (water, fuel) they could negotiate for from Israel. But since they are so fanatical, no Palestinian is allowed to deal with a jew. Also, your argument becomes totally irrelevant as soon as you state "occupied territory" as if it's obvious that's the case. That is actually the main argument (i.e. who does the territory really belong to?) To just state that it's obviously the Arabs territory is disingenuous. The "desperation created by Israel" can easily be reworded to, "desperation created the Palestinian leadership, and the Arab world in general". Yes, Israel is making life hard in the West Bank and Gaza, but that is a valid tactic by a more powerful country to try to force a weaker opponent to stop attacking them. There are only 2 alternatives to that tactic: 1) just allow the weaker opponent to have it's way (in this case, destroy Israel), or 2) use your overwhelming power to destroy the opponent. No one would choose #1 and most of the world already hates Israel now, so #2 isn't an option either. I'm also sure the 17 year "detained in an Israeli prison" was just walking down the street, minding his own business when the Israelis picked him up and threw him in prison. What is most likely the case, is that the 17 year old Palestinian was arrested for either killing Israelis or was on his way to kill Israelis and was caught beforehand. This could all end if the Palestinians stopped trying to destroy Israel. Anyone who denies that does not understand the situation in the Middle East.
Not liking soccer, and expressing that, is pig-headed narrow-mindedness? So, to not be pig-headed and narrow-minded means I have to like everything?
...which is what makes it so boring for me. I've given soccer an honest try, but I just can't make it through a game.
I don't think it's that they play not to lose, I think it's that given the nature of the game (size of field, limited to only using the feet, number of players on the field, etc) that the better they get the easier defense becomes. Offense in soccer is much harder than defense.
"...and cannot even advance 10 yards?" You do realize there are world class athletes on the other side of the ball trying to stop them from advancing 10 yards, right? How about this one - There are 90 minutes (or maybe more) in a game and the teams can't score more than a goal or 2? I get paid a lot of money (some making millions) and only score a goal once every 3 or 4 games.
I agree with you on baseball, but you're completely off base about football. There is no way you can honestly say soccer has more strategy, let alone trying to compare the long stretches of uneventful play, than football. If you "cannot seem to keep up" with the strategy of football, then that must be because you were raised on soccer. Granted, the strategy of soccer can be complicated (it's very similar to basketball), the problem is that the defense in soccer is much easier than the offense (when both teams are close to each other in skills/talent). Also, there are not soccer players who can kick the ball more accurately than a pro quarterback can throw it. That's a silly thing to say.
Previous 11 - 20 Next