TakeYouToTasker

Odd then that atheists have systematically killed more people over the last 100 years than the religious. Odd then that so many societies, some persisting even until today, disagree with you.

Actually, I rather prefer when the muppets let me know who they are right away so I can discard them sooner rather than later. This guy didn't even make me wait around for a pile of Pepe memes.

This is a complete non-story. The Browns were never going to pay his 3/11 roster bonus.

I apologize in advance for triggering you by espousing idea that one should read not only an article, but then the supporting source material, before forming an opinion.

You're engaging in logical fallacy. Further, Cato isn't "partisan", as it soundly criticizes policies of both Democrats and Republicans. It's a libertarian (small "L") think tank; and I find it laughable that you both a) seem to believe that all think tanks don't have guiding philosophies, and b) that you're dismissive of the findings of studies whose guiding philosopies you don't subscribe to. That's a near perfect definition of anti-intellectualism.

Rather than resorting to what looks to be the build up to a logical fallacy, how about reading the report, and then challenging it's findings with your own data. And I still can't get over the fact that you believe children are the property of government, and the notion that parents being involved in the educational choices for their own children is un-American. Which America are you referencing? Malenkov's or Khrushchev's?

So your newest assertion is that children belong to the government, and their parents should have no say in how they are educated. Swell.

Actually, I'm not trying at all. The Cato institute did a comprehensive study on this determining that tens of thousands of crimes are prevented every year by ordinary armed citizens. Read it here.

Who do I report "crime that didn't happen" to?

I also think it's adorable that you believe that criminals will obey laws and turn over their weapons.

I think it's absolutely adorable that you believe disarming law abiding citizens will make law abiding citizens safer.

Healthcare is a commodity, produced through the labor of individuals, and as such, it has a limited supply. Unlike actual rights, such as speech, religion, etc., which require only the inaction of others for one to enjoy; a right to healthcare demands not only that others labor for you against their will, but nullifies the natural rights I first described, and making men into slaves. Good work there, Karl. Rise up proletariat! Any other failed ideologies you'd like to espouse?

Well done. Your law should be very effective in regards to disarming criminals, who will clearly respect your law. Once the guns are out of the hands of the criminals, who will clearly turn over their firearms, law abiding citizens will have no need for them. You also have a very good understanding of the Second Amendment, and a tremendous amount of respect for Constitutional protections of our basic rights. /golfclap

The only thing that is immoral is your belief that it is acceptable to take the justly earned dollars of one person at the point of a gun, and give them to another undeserving person.

People focus on Chicago because it's the canary in the coal mine. It's the result of failed liberal policy after failed liberal policy, and conservatives and libertarians shine a light on it for that reason: we don't want to repeat those mistakes.

This is DOA, and is nearly as ill-conceived as what it's replacing anyway. This should be scrapped, and a largely market based solution should be implemented. Given the Democrats won't play ball, the talking point of Republicans should be a non-stop "We aren't willing to circumvent Constitutional processes like the Democrats did to foist the ACA on you. Here is our plan:" and lay out a plan and how it works. Then stump with "replace Senate Democrats who are blocking your access to healthcare." while the ACA crumbles around them. Keep the ACA as an issue until the mid-terms, and solve the problem with a true libertarian/conservative solution in 2 years with a super majority in the Senate.

This is awesome

Be the lack of change you want to see in the world.

Meathead is a Crayonz account. He's a troll. Hard stop.

I guess he doesn't celebrate our "Jewness". It's a real shame he didn't marry one, or work with Oskar Schindler.

Interesting. Would you mind expanding on this please? If minimally convenient with sources please.

This is an absurd position to take. If this is truly your position, your issue should be with the wholly with Franken for asking poorly worded questions, not with the individual who answer the question as it was asked.

You believe he was stupid to answer the question within the framework it was asked?

No, it does not. This is an assertion that correlation is causation. In order to prove institutional racism, you need to demonstrate that racism is a motivator of the policy. When examining the case of North Carolina's voting laws, you must prove that the desire to eliminate electoral fraud was not the motivator. All requirements and prohibitions imposed by the law in question can far more linearly be squared with the desire to protect the integrity of the vote than it can with seeking to disenfranchise minorities. Because statitcs have always borne out that men commit a largely disproportionate amount of crimes compared to women.

In order to view Sessions statements as anything approaching perjury, you would have to believe that he wasn't answering the question within the framework which it was asked. For that to be the case, you'd have be viewing the back and forth through a very partisan lens.