Become an expert in pussy licking! She'll Beg You For More! | Get Paid For Using Social Sites! | Stay Hard as Steel!!! | Male Multiple Orgasm Discover your full Abilities! |
New Comment Rating: -4 Similar topics: 1.American men? 2.nude 3.Donald Trump 45th President of United States 4.🎆 🇺🇸 HaPpY BiRtHdAy America!! 🇺🇸 🎆 5.The Nobel Peace Prize 🏅 Comments: |
All of the dozens of lawyers working for Donald Trump are probably hoping that he doesn’t get reelected. If he does, there will be no case for them to defend against and they won’t be making the millions of dollars that he’s paying for them by way of Republican donations.
only registered users can see external links
Federalist Society and conservative icon and lifelong Republican Judge J. Michael Luttig has just given his full-throated endorsement of Kamala Harris, calling the Democratic Party the only true protector of the flame of democracy in America.
only registered users can see external links
Americans with a brain, to observe clearly what is happening in the US.
But, I can indeed read too. I had an education and some of it required reading books with text in them. That's how people accumulate knowledge about physics, chemistry, biology, statistics, philosophy, psychology, history, religion, economics, ethics, politics, engineering, the law, management, process excellence, logic and reasoning itself.
What you call 'common sense' doesn't exist. It's just an accumulation of your personal experiences, but everyone's personal experiences differ. That's why it isn't 'common'. Your experiences are dependent on your observation and even observation is a skill that needs to be taught. You don't 'see what is happening', you have a massive bias, and you see what you want to see. You have an incredible aversion against any information that refutes what you want to see. Stop pretending that your 'common sense' provides you any useful knowledge or insight and stop pretending that you are a neutral observer. You don't know anything and you don't want to know anything.
You're even proud to not know anything. You think knowledge is harmful.
It's not, knowledge allows you to make informed decisions, understand complex concepts, and solve problems. It provides the leverage to achieve success instead
of failure, in almost every aspect of your life.
Knowledge is only dangerous to the people who want to control you.
That's why they indoctrinate you with the idea that knowledge is useless.
i bet he has anew car in the garage or some gold coins in his safe that just happened to show up right before he changed his mindset.
I live in a community! I spend time with people from all sides of the political aisle.
I don't dismiss what they say upfront, I do my research.
It's not my fault if people with your opinions have no leg to stand on.
You convince yourself of wrongdoing of the other side with SPECULATION,
while you ignore FACTS AND EVIDENCE of wrongdoing of your own side.
No saint is going to run for office.
I have always said and will repeat, I am not hiring Trump for a fishing buddy,I am hiring him to save my country .harris is out to finish Biden omics destruction of our country.
"he has been paid or something to change his tune" MADE UP SHIT!
"i bet he has anew car in the garage or some gold coins in his safe" MADE UP SHIT!
I bet Trump showers in the blood of 1 day old babies each morning and eats
live kittens for breakfast, with a bowl of dried foreskins in shemale cum.
I CAN MAKE UP SHIT TOO!!!
I don't assume anyone is honest in politics, but I go on evidence.
You have nothing on Walz being corrupt. You just have one sentence,
you take out of context, to call him a liar. You can do that for EVERYONE.
Meanwhile, your guy doesn't do anything besides lying, and he's clearly corrupt in record ways. He lied about r@pe IN COURT. He said he never met her, one minute, and he said she attacked him, minutes later. THAT IS A CLEAR LIE!
That's just one tiny example, and it's not taken out of context.
Also it shows he's guilty of r@pe. If you cannot tell the truth in court...
Are you now going to accuse Walz of r@pe, to justify your support of Trump?
If you're going to support Trump, no matter his lies and corruption,
why do you keep attacking the other side of lies and corruption?
You obviously don't care, so it's just a smear. Why do you need to do that?
Isn't it because you cannot defend the actions of your side, so you do
false equivalency? Accuse the other side of what your side is doing?
I also see that the stock market is doing a huge percentage better than before Covid hit. I also see that inflation is down to the lowest point in the last three years. And I also see that unions are supporting Harris over what they see as "that SCAB Trump". None of this was from books or research in Google or getting it from the Democrats. I got it from FOX NEWS. Are they RINOS TOO?
only registered users can see external links
One concerned parent in Tulsa Oklahoma has shared one of her daughter's homework assignments, in the first week of school. This is a WORLD HISTORY assignment:
Answer the following question, but you must provide a source Using APA Style supporting your answer:
1.) How did the world start?
2.) Who started it?
3.) When did evil start or did it always exist?
4.) Are people inherently good or evil or neither?
5.) What is morality?
6.) What is religion?
7.) What is Christianity?
8.) What does it mean to be a Christian?
9.) Is God real?
10.) Is satan real?
Foregoing the obvious judgement that this is wildly unconstitutional, I would like people
to think about how to answer these questions, considering this is testing the students knowledge on WORLD HISTORY.
What are the 'correct' answers here?
What would result in 0 points for the student?
If the student answers these questions from a Hindu perspective, or a Muslim perspective, or from a Buddhist perspective, or from the perspective of a 500 BC Roman (it is a World History class), or scientifically accurate, will that result in a PASS or FAIL of the WORLD HISTORY curriculum?
If a student wanted to provide scientifically correct answers,
does anyone get the idea that the school provided any knowledge for that,
or any instruction where to find that material / APA Style source?
Who thinks that students are being taught any useful WORLD HISTORY in Oklahoma?
Christians came to America,to get away from the others, but decided to set up the country to TOLERATE the others and allow them freedoms they the settlers didn't have back home.
Religion, gives a person a foundation to build upon, that's what's missing in peoples lives. Do we agree on what that foundation should be? no, but we all need 1.
In my job, I use math at maximum 1% of the time.
The most important skills a school should teach are logical thinking
and independent learning. Religions crush both skills.
Religion is not a foundation to build upon, it's a reason to stop thinking, learning
and searching for the truth, because thinking, learning and the truth destroys faith.
Remember this one?
How very true.
But don't expect fascists/religionists
to understand.
It's basically saying; 'If you're brainwashed, reality doesn't matter'.
By the way, I'm not saying it's impossible to believe in some sort of creator
and accept reality / science at the same time, but it does require an
allegorical interpretation of the Bible or to accept the Bible as nothing more
than one of the many attempts of humanity to explain reality.
They just hadn't discovered the optimal process to investigate reality yet.
Anyone who wants to except a holy book as literal, will have to lie to themselves.
I'm having difficulty with praise, on this site.
I'm more used to indignant rejection and profane repudiation.
I find your stamina to write in length amazing. I agree with everything you write and applaud both your command of language as well as your logical faculties.
I find it hard, or futile, to write in such a length responding to illiteral stupid fascists. Alas, the US has millions of those. These people have the ability to delude themselves and turn criminal or illiberal acts into virtues. You know what I mean. Examples: social care = bad; guns = save lives; religion = the ultimate virtue; dictators = messiahs; rationality = a vice to be avoided. And so on. They're a dangerous lot. And, of course, they will say they're not. They're sick. But you're brave and always energetic to be able to defend humanity.
They think people are evil and stupid by nature, so they require their mind filled with some simplistic ideas, that keeps them obedient. They are unable to believe those simplistic ideas themselves, and you can see that from their behavior.
They are not honestly considering the message of Jesus of how to get into heaven and what would condemn them to hell, because they are just pretending to believe. If I believed in God and an afterlife, I would be very seriously trying to get into heaven, because my lifespan is nothing compared to eternity.
I would not take anyone's ideas about that God and afterlife for granted, but I would be reading that Bible every day, until I was sure about how I am supposed to live my life and treat other people. I would not listen to false prophets, like Donald Trump. I wouldn't listen to propaganda from the wealthy, supporting Prosperity theology, because that goes against everything in that Holy book and most other Holy books. I would consider those other Holy books too, because I would understand that the type of religion around me was just the chance of my birth location. I would not eat pork or shellfish. I would consider the parable of the Good Samaritan. I wouldn't support any bloodshed in wars apart from the minimum to defend the innocent, because Jesus said to turn the other cheek.
I would clothe the poor, feed the hungry and care for the sick. I wouldn't support leaders who's priority is making money. I wouldn't support religious leaders who are living in affluence. I would support leaders who use my contribution for being kind to people, for serving justice and for defending people against injustice.
Which is further evidence that the maga-subhumans and their supreme leader are not following the religion they claim they do.
In fact, even an
Evangelical pastor in North Carolina calls Trump blasphemous
only registered users can see external links
I have been in Christian schools up 15 years old.
I watch debates between religious apologists and atheist, all the time.
It would be careless to just reject religion, if we would have a sole
and an afterlife that depends on our actions in life.
I did my research, before I rejected it all as human creations.
It's actually very interesting to see that non-religious people know much more about religion than religious ones. I've experienced this time and again. I belong to the former category. Most religious people don't follow what they believe and don't know what they believe.
Fucktard!
Try to answer just the first two questions:
1.) How did the world start?
2.) Who started it?
Take note that these are two SEPARATE questions.
Answer them with your beliefs and then consider if you pass.
Can you be 100% honest or do you need to pretend?
As for math and religion. Both need to be taught.
Trouble is common core math, 2 plus 2 no longer makes 4.
It is not the simple act of laying 2 apples here and 2 apples there and pushing them together and recounting and it come up 4.
Figuring out how it could be 5 or 3.9 is not useful thinking.it is wasted thinking.
Why not put that effort into finding why the man on the factory floor needs 5 of a part when he only should be using 4? Apparently he is wasting 1.
that is the critical type thinking that is important.
And actually, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion",
so you are constitutionally wrong that religion needs to be taught.
Religion is a private matter and should not be supported by the government.
Math is still math. Even Christians can handle that. So Far!
Sorry, math is not critical thinking, it's at best logical thinking.
You didn't try to answer the 2 questions. Give it a shot. Didn't they teach you?
If your answer to 1.) is; "We came from goo as explained by Q to Captain Picard on star trek", you will flunk that question in any class.
The question is: "How did the world start?".
Science has a very clear and sure answer to that question.
What does the Bible make of it?
but after finding the complicated topics here (eg politics), I expected more.
I didn't know, at that time, that flat-earthers exist, who discuss physics and astronomy. It all made sense after I found out about the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
Aren't you also supporting the 'creation model'?
If there is any truth to it, you should have no problem answering
some basic questions about it. Why ain't any of you even trying?
the question, which was first, the chicken or the egg?
There had to be 2 chickens, 1 male chicken, and 1 female chicken,1 to fertilize the egg and 1 to lay it ,sit on it and hatch it.
Explain how that came about from some single cell creature that happened by accident in a swamp.there had to be 2 chickens, dropped from mars or something.
I am waiting.
A human could have come from a ape but there had to be some serious inbreeding going on to get this many birth defects from being a ape don't you think? 1 human has the egg, female, and 1 human ,the male, fertilizes the egg, woman sits on egg so to speak 9 months and it hatches,
again, explain how that came from a ameba in a Egyptian desert?
When you break things down, it is still to complicated to be "natural". liberals and conservatives alike have yet to actually figure out how the pyramids were built, and suddenly, folks like you believe without a shadow of a doubt that creation is not real?? come on.think man THINK.
absolutely NONE!!!!
There were eggs, long before there ever was a chicken.
Don't you know that dinosaurs laid eggs too?
There are fossils of dinosaurs with feathers.
Birds belong to the theropod group of dinosaurs that included T. Rex.
They were the only surviving dinosaurs, 66 million years ago.
Still, there are other groups of animals that lay eggs.
As you probably know, there are still apes. Only a few mutations resulted in the expanded brain development of our ancestors, who turned into humans.
They were not 'birth defects', those mutations were beneficial for the survival of those apes, outside of their original environment, allowing humanoids to spread while apes without that genetic mutation stayed in their original environment. Biologically, we are STILL 'Great Apes'. That's our sub-group of primates.
We did not come from an ameba in a Egyptian desert, that's dumb.
Life didn't evolve from single-celled organisms in the desert, but in water environments. Ameba's are unicellular protozoa, like our ancestors, but they evolved from our single-celled Eukaryotic ancestors, just like we evolved from those. Our ancestors evolved to multi-celled organisms, to fish, to tetra-pods,
to mammals, to Great Apes, to Australopithecines (the earliest known genus of the human lineage), and then through several other steps to Homo Sapiens.
The pyramids were built by thousands of Egyptians working together.
We know that, because the whole area is scattered with their completely worn out skeletons and the tools they used. We know that from their own drawings.
They want to teach the literal words of the Bible as a science fact.
Yes, without a shadow of a doubt THAT creation is NOT real!!!
And when something is NOT real, you don't teach it as being real.
Without a shadow of a doubt Earth is billions of years old.
Without a shadow of a doubt the universe is even much older.
Without a shadow of a doubt evolution is a natural fact.
Without a shadow of a doubt every life-form on earth is evolved
from single-celled organisms.
Without a shadow of a doubt humans share a common ancestor with Apes.
Everything that you refer to as "too complicated" comes from very simple beginnings. That's a proven reality. We are not made from magical god-matter, we are made from the most simple atoms that are created by stars, in roughly the same composition as stars make them. When those atoms are slushing around on a wet planet with an atmosphere at the right temperature, for a few hundred million years, it forms all the molecules that our form of life depends on. Life seems to be not unlikely, but inevitable, given the circumstances of earth. It would have been a miracle, if we had evolved on a planet that is not that hospitable to life. It's stupid people who turn that around and ask why Earth is so hospitable to life. Because you wouldn't be here to ask that question otherwise. The universe is fucking big, possibly infinite. Life will be on the best planets, not the worst ones. Don't fucking destroy this one, because it's the best one we know about. The ones that could be a backup are fucking far away.
There are some things that science is not completely sure about,
but every time creationists presented a fact that they claimed contradicted evolution, that was proven false. At the moment, they are still repeating claims that have been proven false, in several ways. That's called "LYING"!
only registered users can see external links
They cannot help themselves, they have to lie, even if it hurts their own cause.
Vance was just pretending on Fox'News' that the polls are all fake and they are
still ahead. That's not smart, if you want to motivate your voters to come out for you, you say you're the underdog. They get dumber by the day.
Can't you see the protest are interfering with people's trying to just get IN the convention center?
The damn fools can't behave long enough to have a civilized event.
only registered users can see external links
I want to make sure you and leo read the 5th rule, it is the technic you try to use on me and others here just on this site, I can only imagine how much you use it against the people you encounter every day.
Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have."
"Never go outside the experience of your people."
"Whenever possible go outside of the experience of the enemy."
"Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."
"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. There is no defense. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage."
"A good tactic is one your people enjoy."
"A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag."
"Keep the pressure on."
"The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself."
"The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition."
"If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside; this is based on the principle that every positive has its negative."
"The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."
"Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."
The 'official' 7 steps to become a dictator are:
1. Expand your power base through nepotism and corruption.
2. Instigate a monopoly on the use of force to curb public protest.
3. Curry favour by providing public goods efficiently and generously.
4. Get rid of your political enemies...
5. Create and defeat a common enemy.
6. Accumulate power by manipulating the hearts and minds of your citizens.
7. Create an ideology to justify an exalted position.
(I don't get 3, most of the dictatorships are fucking poor)
All steps require lying 24/7, because the citizens don't like most of it, but they are very susceptible to blaming others for what the dictator does himself.
Hannah Arendt Explains How Propaganda Uses Lies to Erode All Truth & Morality:
Insights from The Origins of Totalitarianism
only registered users can see external links
The Art of Deception: How Dictators Use Lies to Maintain Power In the realm of politics
only registered users can see external links
Spot the Dictator (That's 100% Donald Trump)
only registered users can see external links
- MESSIANIC PROMISES OF SAVING THE NATION
- ATTACKS TO DEMONIZE THE OPPOSITION
- REDUCTION OF NATION’S PROBLEMS TO A SCAPEGOAT
- CRONY NETWORKS AND CORRUPTION
- OBEDIENCE OVER ENGAGED CITIZENSHIP
- SILENCING OF MEDIA AND THE TRUTH
communist or even socialist, watch this:
only registered users can see external links
Have the balls to listen to the truth, for once in your life.
Yes, it's Chris Cuomo, but he's spilling the beans here.
It doesn't hurt, it's a truth about both parties.
Start at 1:35, if you want to skip the introduction.
Did it wake you up already?
I didn't watch the fellow interpretation of chris's words but i did listen to chris. valid point.
i don't see how that tells me kamala won't be marxist though?
ask them what happened in the last one. I think you might agree with this:
only registered users can see external links
New Comment Go to top