In response to:
ResistWeMuch Wrote
Allidunce wrote: "Yes, but Obama was simply asking Americans to CHOOSE not to offend a world religion (Islam). Of course, as you know, sometimes you cannot simply rely on that. Which is why I support free speech 100% but I also agree with the narrow specific boundaries created by hate speech legislation."
....
Dont you see Mo? You are free to speak what you want as long as it agrees with what she thinks?
Because when it says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,"
it doesn't really mean NO Law, It just means NO LAW she does not approve of!
But thankfully in America we have NO hate speech laws.
The bad news? Pew's partisan split is R+1 (R+3 among likelies), which seems a few shades too optimistic for the GOP. The good news? The media suddenly cares about partisan breakdowns in public opinion surveys. After weeks of mocking conservatives as tinfoil-hat-wearing paranoiacs for wondering if polls with D+8 samples were all that predictive in the 2012 cycle, every member of the Beltway smart set -- from NBC to WaPo -- is eager to share an opinion about the likelihood of a partisan over-samples. The difference? Back then, it made Obama look stronger than he actually was. Totally...
Math is hard.
It is harder when you are stupid.
It is downright impossible when you are a bloody Progressive fool like Allidunce.