Previous 11 - 20 Next
Islam has made war on the West for 1300 years. It didn't start in 2001, or 1993, or with the creation of the modern state of Israel. But Howard the Duck probably doesn't know any real history, He's a prog.
Leftist ideology is a cognitive disorder. It blinds people (in this case, Dean) to reality. That's why he's so stupid on nearly every issue, not just this one.
Did anyone else notice how few accomplishments any of these people have? Talk about the Seven Dwarfs... But then, the Hildebeast has very few accomplishments, either. Just a lot of failures such as Benghazi. And of course, Comrade Obozo had no accomplishments to speak of when he ran for prez, either. (Now he had a bunch of them -- but all of them are destructive.) There are a few governors and ex-governors on the list -- just none that have accomplished anything of note. It seems to me that the Democrat cupboard is pretty empty at the moment. (Rather like the Democrat brain...)
There is much evidence for intelligent design in things like information theory. But then, I doubt that radical notion has even a hint as to what information theory is.
In response to:

Putin Is Mentally Unhinged

tgwWhale Wrote: Dec 27, 2014 10:43 AM
"Why worry about the mental health of foreign leaders?" Well, the fact that some of them have the Bomb comes to mind... I do agree with many that our own leader is a narcissist. But I doubt he's whacko enough to start nuking people because someone insulted his eternal greatness. As for Putin -- no, I don't think he'll start nuking people. I do expect he'll just gobble up another small neighbor when things go wrong for him. As for that Kim clown in North Korea... who knows? Yes, I am concerned about the mental health of foreign leaders.
In response to:

The Communist Resurgence

tgwWhale Wrote: Dec 26, 2014 10:34 AM
We do not "starve the people of Cuba with our sanctions." Cuba could trade with all of the rest of the world. And in any case, Cuba is very rich in agricultural resources; no one should starve there, no matter what the US does. The people of Cuba are poor for one reason and one reason only: the Communist thugs who run the place.
In response to:

The Communist Resurgence

tgwWhale Wrote: Dec 26, 2014 10:30 AM
Obozo does all of those things because as a committed leftist fool he sees every issue according to the same pattern or meme: there are big guys, there are little guys, the big guys pick on the little guys, and so the big guys are the bad guys. Always. (The Communist terms for "big guys" and "little guys" are "oppressors" and "oppressed.") By this way of thinking, we are always the bad guys because we are always the big guys. It's always our fault. In Obozo's mind, the suffering of the Cuban people is our fault, not the Castros'. All of his other stupid and evil policies tend to stem from the same stupid misunderstanding of the way life works.
In response to:

Damnable Lies

tgwWhale Wrote: Dec 23, 2014 8:55 PM
The problem with your argument is that two generations ago, the black people in the U.S. did not have the horrendous cultural problems (crime, etc.) that they have now. If these cultural problems were due primarily to average group IQ, then we would have to believe that the average IQ of black Americans has fallen precipitously over two generations. If that is the case, then IQ could hardly be linked primarily to genetics, since the genetics of the black people of the US could not have changed so much over just two generations.
Maybe this hasn't been brought up yet, but I would guess that Sony's pulling of the movie was done on the advice of their LAWYERS. That is: if a terrorist bombed a movie theater to protest this movie, after threatening to do so ahead of time because of the content of the movie, wouldn't Sony be liable under all-and-several liability? And since their pockets are the deepest, they'd get the biggest lawsuit -- $billions, I would guess. You know -- "Call 1-800-BAD-FILM" -- you've all seen the ads. Whenever something like this happens and people wonder why a some person or company behaves so much contrary to what we might expect (e.g., wouldn't a media company stand by their first amendment rights?), generally lawyers are at the bottom of it.
In response to:

The College Rape Club

tgwWhale Wrote: Dec 11, 2014 1:44 PM
Of course you nailed it, Vince. The single primary purpose of the 60's revolution was to remove all moral loading from acts of sex (and drugs). In reality a great part of all sexual acts have some elements of coercion, seduction (dishonesty), or prostitution (sex in return for favors). In the old days "rape" was understood quite clearly as one person forcing himself sexually on an obviously unwilling other person. Criminal law guarded against rape; it was the old moral rules that provided SOME protection against sex involving some coercion, seduction, or prostitution. Now the old rules have been discarded, and so the term "rape" is getting applied by the progs to all sex that has any elements of coercion, seduction, or prostitution (or, according to some feminuts, all acts of heterosexual sex). This is, or course, hogwash; but this expansion of the definition of "rape" has allowed the term to be applied to nearly any sex act -- and this has led to false claims of rape by "Jackie" and her ilk, as they seek their 15 minutes of fame as "victims."
In response to:

Is Law Optional?

tgwWhale Wrote: Dec 09, 2014 1:59 PM
Dr. Sowelll is partially wrong in this piece. He holds that "law is not the place for amateurs." Thus, I assume, we should rely on the professionals. But those "professionals" are a huge part of the problem. Professionals in the field of law are called LAWYERS. And fear of lawyers and the (often absurd) lawsuits they bring is a major reason why mob rule is allowed to flourish. For example, in the UVA case, one of the reasons that the school immediately took the side of the accuser was surely political correctness -- the accused were male, and probably rich and white, as frat boys commonly (not always) are; while the accuser was female. Certainly a second reason they so acted was fear of bad publicity. But undoubtedly a third reason they acted as they did was fear of lawsuits. The university would undoubtedly have been sued (and still might be) -- the "deep pockets" principle (all and several liability) would have had the lawyers crawling out of the woodwork (and up from the sewer drains) in uncountable hordes. So UVA stifled the frats, thus taking the position held by the mob, and thus contributed to mob rule.
Previous 11 - 20 Next