anatess2
-
Posts
11884 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
78
Posts posted by anatess2
-
-
On 7/18/2020 at 12:55 AM, Scott said:
True, but my own opinion is that we should stay completely out of it.
Obama started it. And the Brits (Steele, et. al.) tried to upend the US election. All gloves are off.
-
16 hours ago, romans8 said:
The chorus for this song has
Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven!
Traitors and tyrants now fight him in vain.
Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his brethren;
Death cannot conquer the hero again.Did some revelation lead the church to believe he ascended to heaven or is this a theoretical
song? Did the NT church also sing a similar hymn of Peter or Paul?Matteo
Yes.
-
2 minutes ago, Jamie123 said:
You know, what REALLY makes me mad is that on TV this morning they had an ad for their new album. "The Chicks are back! With their new album Gaslighter!" No mention that these are actually The Dixie Chicks, and with this look...
They made Goodbye, Earl. I can't abandon them.
-
2 minutes ago, Carborendum said:
One guess what the lawsuit was about and why he won it.
Let me guess... he charged BK with racism or bigotry.
Same thing happened at the bank my husband worked for... they have this rainbow employee who, if I would have owned the company I would have fired within 5 minutes he has 0.5 on a scale of 1 to 100 work ethics. But he's still there while half the department got laid off.
-
-
1 hour ago, Carborendum said:
I believe these reverse boycotts do actually have a powerful effect (sometimes dampened by things like the quarantine) because of one quirk of human nature. People don't know how to "NOT" do a thing. They do know how to DO a thing.
This, and the propensity of humans to form tribes (or teams). We see something as "our tribe" and we flock to defend it... especially if it's not too much trouble to do so.
One thing about these businesses being cancelled by woke culture, though, is that they are good businesses. Like, I don't think CFA would have retained all those new customers if they sucked. The thing is, they are on top of the mountain on the customer service scale and you feel it. So you come back just because you don't want to have to deal with the frustration of getting onions and pickles on your "do it your way, no onions, no pickles please" burger.
I don't know if there's a relationship between woke millennials and bad business.... there's probably a study on that already. In any case, somebody thought a jobs board for non-woke businesses is a good idea. Can't find the link right now.
-
7 hours ago, Jamie123 said:
No need to apologise to me!
I was just saying I had nothing to contribute.
Jamie, the way it's been going, the Republicans have been pro-Brexit while the Democrats have been pro-Remainers. So I'm sure you still have a lot to contribute.
-
29 minutes ago, Grunt said:
Maybe. I consider it pretty crappy. It certainly isn't "saying nice things about America"
Well... this is a jamie series. We've gone back and forth on his claims on these threads. He says nice things about Brits and we challenge his claims, he says nice things about Americans and we challenge his claims.... that's how it's been going. We're still neck deep in the first one on UK vs US cops.
-
31 minutes ago, Grunt said:
I consider it pretty crappy when we start calling each other liars, don't you?
Meh. Maybe because English is only my 3rd language. I don't see a problem with calling a spade a spade. So, if somebody sees a lie, then I don't find it crappy at all when somebody calls them out on the lie. Of course, if the person did not state a lie then he can debate the issue.
-
3 hours ago, Grunt said:
Well, this thread became the "say crappy things about each other" thread.
Did it?
If one says you're wearing red, and the other says you're wearing yellow, and the first one says you're wrong, and the other says no you're wrong... did it become a say crappy things about each other thread?
Or were you talking about something else?
-
2 hours ago, Jamie123 said:
However, I think you're talking about the "if you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided" bit. This is irrelevant, because it only applies to criminal cases.
I have another movie for you - Two Weeks Notice starring your very own popular Remainer Brit, Hugh Grant.
Quote from the movie:
"That was really a nice speech you just made, and I'm really going to miss everyone here at Wade. Um... there are a million memories I wouldn't trade. And if you're ever accused of murder you can find me at Legal Aid."So yeah, Legal Aid in the US is the same as Britain. They don't just take murder cases.
-
12 minutes ago, Jamie123 said:
And pays for it.
I'm sure you have seen a quadzillion American movies where the Miranda Rights are recited.
-
3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:
Oh...wait, maybe you meant this flag instead...because if we are going with stereotypes...
Well, DUH!
Is this also a leftist thing? The inability to distinguish statements with group identity as the subject rather than individual identity? I would say yes... after all... the American left are the ones weaponizing group identities - Reparations, Cultural Appropriation, White Privilege, Patriarchy etc. etc... using group identities to eliminate individual identities after fighting so hard for individual identities (Girls don't wear pink, Girls can STEM... I'm trans-girl because I like pink. Sigh.)
"Filipinos eat balut". True. That statement doesn't become false just because my Filipino son doesn't eat balut. Nor does it become false just because my American husband eats balut (he doesn't - just using an illustration). You hear "Balut", Filipino comes with it.
Confederate Flag wavers are conservatives. True. I wish it wasn't. It is really stupid. It is not conservative to defend a flag whose purpose was to wave in battle against the US Constitution.
Flag desecrators are liberals. True. Which is another wierd thing when the preservation of 1A is a conservative thing. Only in America do you find people who hate an act with a vengeance simultaneously defend the rights of people to do such act with the same vengeance.
-
24 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:
Another reaction I received, was along the lines of "aren't you worried about viral shedding and the possibility of giving your family COVID if the vaccine uses live cells?"
I would think you have bigger problems than the corona virus if your family's immune system is so weak as to get covid from viral shedding of vaccine-strength virus... am I wrong?
-
1 minute ago, Jamie123 said:
"Plus ça change, plus ç'est la même chose" (to quote the late great Neil Peart).
N'est pas?
-
4 minutes ago, Jamie123 said:
Like I said... you can get your assets forfeited without criminal charges... it doesn't end in just taking the asset... the taking needs to be justified in a court of law. It is not quite right to say "it doesn't see judicial hearing". That is simply the choice of the individual not to go to a hearing. A hearing is provided if the individual demands it. This is the exact same thing that happens with a traffic violation - it happens so many times over and over that the fine is rubber stamped by the judiciary. You can appear in court to challenge it on the basis of innocence until guilt is proven. Not appearing in court gets the rubber stamp (basically, a guilty plea) and you pay the fine without a hearing. In the case of civil forfeiture, if you don't appear in court then the forfeiture gets the rubber stamp (guilty plea).
Libertarians - Ron Paul and his son Rand being the most prominent of the lot - wants this to change to remove rubber stamping cases when it comes to asset forfeiture. I doubt it will pass in Congress.
-
In the USA:
In the days of slavery, Democrats have been telling people that White People are People and Black People are Chattel.
In the days of Jim Crow, Democrats have been telling people that White People are susceptible to disease carried by Black People and therefore, they have to be segregated.
In the days of Affirmative Action, Democrats have been telling people that Black People can't achieve anything unless White People give Black People certain advantages.
Today, Democrats are telling people that White People are born with Privilege and Black People are born victims of such privilege.Same racist Democrats, different era.
-
3 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:
Speaking of 'running away from all this crap', my wife lost a little hen a while ago. She figured a dog or coyote got her. Then, the other day, well, we found where she had run off to:
Cuteness overload!
Speaking of running off... my chickens didn't run off, they got run off... had to move them to a member-owned farm 25 miles away after my HOA threatened to put a lien on the house. Come to find out, the HOA by-laws are held higher than the county permit... anyway, one day in the new farm and a rogue bantam rooster plucked all the hair out of my silkie rooster's head to hopefully steal his hens away from him. Proud to say the silkie rooster lost his hair in a bloody battle but succeeded in protecting his hens. That poor silkie looks so funny bald tho.
-
1 hour ago, Scott said:
No; that's a different topic.
I definitely support having public lands.
There needs to be a place where anyone can go to visit nature and do healthy activities.
Anyway, there was more to that out west, but I have to go to bed now.
I'm impartial to public lands even though I don't believe that the same land made private would prevent people from visiting nature and doing healthy activities. What it does do is make environmentalists put their money where their mouth is and take on the responsibility of taking care of the land rather than leaving the work to elected officials who puts his hat out to the highest paying lobbyist every few years.
-
24 minutes ago, Scott said:
Yes, I have heard that arguement, however I fail to see why tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of deaths, plus millions of health problems wouldn't be considered "significant enough" to warrant restrictions.
To me doesn't make sense that pollution restrictions are considered an infringment on freedom, while forcing your pollution on someone else isn't an infringment on their freedom.You're talking about masks? Show incontrovertible evidence that ANY mask (and not the N95 or the Respirators) reduce deaths and health problems by such a degree as to overcome the risks provided by mask wearing - health concerns of prolonged non-regulated-mask wearing plus the concerns that made mask wearing in public banned in Florida from 1951 to 1981... plus the freedom of expression infringement that caused the mask ban to lose its teeth in 1981 which is also applicable to its twin sister of mandated mask wearing... etc. etc.
Smoking has incontrovertible proof of its health impacts not just on one's self but also on others. Even THAT was not banned in all public places in the entire nation as it is considered an infringement of freedom. Only 26 States banned it. Yet... you don't hear too much about smoking karens.
24 minutes ago, Scott said:Although we agree on many things, we will never agree on this particular topic.
It's more than just pollution too. For some reason conservatives in this region at least tend to be anti-protected nature areas. They seem to think that people who want to go see nature shouldn't have the right, while anyone who wants to destroy the land does, and I mean that in the most literal sense. I guess in Florida it isn't as big of a debate/topic as it is out West.Conservatives, not so much. Libertarians, very much so. They all get lumped on the same bucket usually. The concept is not about "protection". The concept is about Private Property. In the East, there is not much State-owned property like there is out West. American tradition (conservatism is rooted on tradition) is built on Private Ownership. The environmentalist debate is that only the State can protect the environment whereas private owners cannot. Libertarians, of course, take the very opposite position - the State cannot be trusted to protect anything but its own interests. It even sucks at protecting enumerated freedoms how much more for State-owned property.
-
3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:
Decided to post what I posted here in another thread. Instead will comment on the Benedictine option.
I believe that normally is to create a community (within the community) which requires more than just one or two people, but at least a few like minded individuals to accomplish this.
Benedict started on his own and established personal rules to live by and lived them. Then he took in people who choose to follow the same rules until he "infected" entire communities to live the same rules.
-
3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:
Regarding masks
Well, related to Utah (and the rest of the US), I understand Walmart is going to institute a corporate wide mandate for all customers to wear masks when shopping.
The only problem I have with that, is whether they will supply masks for people to wear. What happens if someone who has no masks available, and cannot obtain one, tries to go shopping? I hear that in Utah some stores are making them freely available?
AS long as they are available, as the store is private property (even if a public company), they can make whatever rules they want on their property. I think it is also a good idea. I'm just wanting to go to walmart and stock up on free masks (I have some made by my lovely wife, and they are excellent masks, but I only have two or three of them and different looks are good from time to time).
In my town, stores are required to provide customers with disposable masks. That includes Walmart. Sometimes the door-checker doesn't know that they have to provide masks to those who doesn't have one to comply with the county mandate. So you might have to go to a manager to get one.
I am 90% sure all counties that have a mandatory mask mandate require all businesses to provide the disposable masks to their customers.
Now, about Walmart mandating masks. I'm 100% fine with that. It's a private business and they can require anything they want. People who don't want to comply have many other shopping choices.
-
18 minutes ago, MormonGator said:
I'm going to walk away before I say something I regret, he can get the last word. Once again, I apologize @JohnsonJones.
I'd say this is also something the American left does... apologizing for things they didn't do. Wierd. Although, it seems like this changed drastically in the last month... seems like even the seemingly die-hard right like the Chik-Fil-A CEO is now apologizing to blacks for things he didn't do. At least he has it in common with the British Prince - apologizing for things he didn't do but didn't even make an apologetic mention for the things he DID do.
We are living in Clown World.
-
3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:
That's the big question that's hitting some medical researchers. Even if the vaccine comes out, will enough people actually take it so that herd immunity is reached or not?
What I want these medical experts need to answer is the WHO statement that according to the data gathered through contact tracing, asymptomatic virus carriers does not show that they pass the virus to others. This basically means, if proven correct, that asymptomatic carriers are already contributing to herd immunity without the need for a vaccine.
The "Say Nice Things About America" Thread
in General Discussion
Posted
That's what wikipedia says. But that's not quite accurate. Denmark law does not have the same structure as the US Constitution. The US Constitution is structured such that freedoms originate from the people with specific enumerated rights protected by government. Danish law (nor any other law, for that matter) is not structured in this manner. Danish law is structured such that the authority rests on the government that doles out rights to the people.
So here's how that affects the desecration of flags law:
USA - freedom of expression is a government-protected right. SCOTUS has ruled that burning the flag falls under freedom of expression, therefore, it is a protected right. The US government, therefore, has to protect that right and, therefore, no law, state or federal, can be made to prosecute such act without first disentangling desecration of the flag to freedom of expression.
Denmark (same in UK, actually) - freedom of expression is a right given by the government to the people. There is no law on desecrating the Dannebrog nor the Union Jack. Therefore, the government has not doled out such a right to the people nor do they protect such a right. It is basically completely up to the government how they want to address each situation depending on how the winds of politics flow. In short, Danes can burn the Dannebrog simply because of the fact that the Danish government chose to ignore it.