Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's best if you stay in your mothers basement in seclusion, you don't know your ass from A hole in the ground.
Your political correctness makes you weak
It doesn't matter, the less/no contact I have with the federal government to better my life is… FactIt's best if you stay in your mothers basement in seclusion, you don't know your ass from A hole in the ground.
Your political correctness makes you weak
Guy, the reality is, you're too stupid to realize that you are in the same boat the darkies are in...
That's how clever the one percent are...
I'm sure you weren't invited to Trumps big party in Florida New years eve. Arab businessmen, mobsters and rich people were.
Homeschooling is not an option for two working parents. Perhaps they should be discouraged from having kids.
I was attempting to answer your question, "Are you saying they hacked the voting machines? The answer was obviously, no. However, Russia was attempting to influence the election as they have done in other countries such as France by stealing private sensitive information and seeing it was leaked to public in order to discredit a candidate they did not want see elected.Hacking the actually voting machines and not being discovered is almost impossible because they are not online during the voting. The votes are either stored on a cartridge, hard drive, paper punched card, or a marked card. All machines produce a paper backup. The danger in manipulating votes is in counting, not the voting.Liberal whining, hyperbole, and fabrications aside, there is no way to explain the Trump victory based on experience nor logic.
In fact, they must recognize this as well, and, thus, are ready to accept any fable.
It defied every political science meme.
I see it as a miracle of biblical proportions, and one last chance for America to turn itself around.
Yeah, you see, it's very simple to explain.
The Russians hacked the election, and a lot of the usual safeguards we have to prevent EXACTLY THIS SORT OF THING FROM HAPPENING didn't engage.
The Media normalized Trump's behavior. Normally, you say things like he said, your career is over and you are putting a newspaper in front of your face when you leave your house in the morning.
Now we are stuck with this guy, and he will be a disaster.
Again, how did they hack the election? I hear all about hacking but I heard they hacked the Democratic Party's emails, then leaked the emails.
Are you saying they hacked the voting machines?
The Russian hacking had no effect on the voting process. The question of whether it had any effect on voter decisions is unknown and will remain so. However, Russia has had a long history of inference in the political process of selecting leaders in other nations. To think that Russia would not attempt to do so in US elections seems a bit naive.
This is not the first time Russia has meddled in US presidential elections. Russia attempted to persuade Adlai Stevenson, the Democratic presidential nominee in 1952 and 1956, to run again and offered to support him. This is probably the best documented attempt but there are others.
The Russians Tried Once Before to Meddle in a U.S. Presidential Election
1. "The Russian hacking had no effect on the voting process."
I appreciate you posting this...but, based on this line from your link....what's your point??
2. "The question of whether it had any effect on voter decisions is unknown and will remain so. "
That's false.
Watch:
..the proof that this 'fake news' tale of Russia changing the course of our election....
a. The day before any leaks, wikileaks or otherwise, the RealClearPolitics had Hillary at 48%
b. The election result gave Hillary 48.08% per the election.
Soooo......where is any....ANY....result due to Russia, Putin, Wiki, or Mickey Mouse????
If anything....it increased the criminal's vote tally.
3. May I point out that the real news is that Trump actually won the popular vote, once you discount the illegal alien vote that was ginned up by the snake in the White House.
Security agencies such as the CIA and the FBI usually don't want to release a lot of details that involves on going operations for obvious reasons. I don't know if it's possibility to gather enough evidence to prove the Russians are guilty in this politically charged court of public opinion. My guess is they would be able to establish a fairly high level of probability but not absolute proof. Kind of like the farmer who has lost 3 chickens, finds bloody feathers and sees a chicken hawk hanging around. It's possible a fox he has never seen did it but not likely.Hacking the actually voting machines and not being discovered is almost impossible because they are not online during the voting. The votes are either stored on a cartridge, hard drive, paper punched card, or a marked card. All machines produce a paper backup. The danger in manipulating votes is in counting, not the voting.Liberal whining, hyperbole, and fabrications aside, there is no way to explain the Trump victory based on experience nor logic.
In fact, they must recognize this as well, and, thus, are ready to accept any fable.
It defied every political science meme.
I see it as a miracle of biblical proportions, and one last chance for America to turn itself around.
Yeah, you see, it's very simple to explain.
The Russians hacked the election, and a lot of the usual safeguards we have to prevent EXACTLY THIS SORT OF THING FROM HAPPENING didn't engage.
The Media normalized Trump's behavior. Normally, you say things like he said, your career is over and you are putting a newspaper in front of your face when you leave your house in the morning.
Now we are stuck with this guy, and he will be a disaster.
Again, how did they hack the election? I hear all about hacking but I heard they hacked the Democratic Party's emails, then leaked the emails.
Are you saying they hacked the voting machines?
The Russian hacking had no effect on the voting process. The question of whether it had any effect on voter decisions is unknown and will remain so. However, Russia has had a long history of inference in the political process of selecting leaders in other nations. To think that Russia would not attempt to do so in US elections seems a bit naive.
This is not the first time Russia has meddled in US presidential elections. Russia attempted to persuade Adlai Stevenson, the Democratic presidential nominee in 1952 and 1956, to run again and offered to support him. This is probably the best documented attempt but there are others.
The Russians Tried Once Before to Meddle in a U.S. Presidential Election
Well we don't know if Russia leaked the emails or not, their reputation precedes them. However, no one has given solid proof who hacked the computers and no one has proof the Russians are involved, it is all speculation.
The US government has an obligation to it's citizens to investigate and then let the citizens know if the Russians are involved or not and what the evidence is. Simply retaliating against Russia is not proof of anything.
The current tactic is saying yes they are involved and not releasing proof is highly suspicious.
Assuming the CIA has a huge amount evidence and released it, would it be enough and would it be worth divulging information that would be potentially damaging to their operation? I think this would definitely be a consideration when the president elect has already said he didn't believe it.
Zero proof doesn't work for me....
It worked fine for you with the E-mails, Benghazi, Whitewater, Filegate, Travelgate, Obama's Birth Certificate...
Now you want "Proof" (you know, like 17 intel agencies saying, Yup, the Russians did it!)
Well...you're correct if one counts the illegal aliens that the snake, Obama, told to go vote and there'd be no "investigations."
But in America we eschew counting illegal alien votes.
I don't. first, no evidence illegals voted. Second, who cares even if they did? They are here, they pay taxes, they work hard. They aren't going anywhere and they are going to be effected by how badly the orange buffoon screws up the economy.
On the other hand, the Russians hacking the vote. That's a big deal.
Which is exactly how your puppet masters planned it.
So the puppet masters where the ones who made Trump call on the Russians to hack Hillary's Emails?
You see, that's the problem you guys have. Trump really did play footsies with the Russians. And that's just the stuff he was dumb enough to blurt out, we aren't even talking about what he's hiding in his tax returns.
Listening to the radio today, I heard the host remind his audience several times of the Assange interview with Hannity being aired tonight. In that interview, Assange swears that Russia had absolutely nothing to do with those emails.
So the guy who hates America says he loves Trump, and you guys are good with that?
Well we don't know if Russia leaked the emails or not, their reputation precedes them. However, no one has given solid proof who hacked the computers and no one has proof the Russians are involved, it is all speculation.
The US government has an obligation to it's citizens to investigate and then let the citizens know if the Russians are involved or not and what the evidence is. Simply retaliating against Russia is not proof of anything.
The current tactic is saying yes they are involved and not releasing proof is highly suspicious.
Good idea. Let's release all the evidence, including the names of the spies we have in Russia who tracked it down. Let's also tell the Russians how our electronic survellience works.
You are just full of awesome ideas!
It would certainly be equitable if the amount of tax paid was in direct proportion to the individuals usage of the supported service, such as the gas taxes for roads. However, there are many services in civilized societies where the cost can not be equitable allocated such as public education, public health services, law enforcement, the judicial system, and the penal system. We all benefit from having these services even if we rarely or never use them.Ray, the reasoning behind you paying higher property taxes for education is because your property has a high value due in part because an education system exist in your community.OK ray then how about nobody in america has kids except if they make at least 500 thousand dollars per year.
Then you would complain our military is shrinking because people aren't having enough kids. I would highly disagree and perhaps ahuge birthrate decline for many years would be the way to go. That means a lot more low paying jobs unfilled which to my retired viewpoint, and yes I collect social security...happily. With businesses struggling to find workers we all win.
You don't need a half-mil a year to educate your children. There are plenty of families making less than six figures that do it today. One of those families are tenants of mine. The father works as a computer tech (making nowhere near six figures) and his wife stays home and home schools their two children. A friend of mine the same. He works two full-time jobs and has been supporting his family since he and his wife got married. They raised three children all home schooled and again, he makes nowhere near six figures.
Now as far as public school, I don't mind doing my part. But I do believe that people with kids in the school should pay more than people with no kids in the school. As I stated earlier, I'm paying more to the schools with no children attending than other people on my street that do have kids in those schools. If anybody here thinks that's fair, I would sure love for them to explain to me how.
You own more valuable properties, therefore you pay higher taxes. There ya go!
There you go what????
Because my property is valued better than others on the street, I should pay more for their kids education? Again, please explain the equity or how that makes any sense.
Your property is valued less than mine, but you have four kids in the school. I have no kids in school, yet I'm paying more into that school than you are and you call that fair?
I have a better idea: why don't people with kids in school pay more for the school than people that don't? That's much fairer than forcing people with higher property value to pay for education.
In essential all states education is supported jointly by property taxes and sales taxes. Most of the money for education that comes from property taxes is paid by businesses who benefit indirectly form public education. Most of the money for education that comes from sales taxes is paid by those in middle and lower income brackets which are the people most likely to benefit directly from education.
The idea that parents should bear the cost of educating their children may seem equitable but it's not practical. The average cost in the US is $11,009 a year per child. How many young families with 2 kids could afford an additions $22,000 a year in expenses for education.
How is that my problem, that's the question.
If you bought a house you can't afford, why should I be taxed to pay it for you? Or your car? Or your swimming pool or boat?
Children are an expense, it's one of the reasons I never had any. You act as if having children is something people can't control. Oh, I just happened to end up with three kids, but I don't have the money to educate them. Well, that's not my problem, that's my neighbors problem!
And again, if people are too stupid to have kids they can't afford to educate, fine. I'll chip in, but I shouldn't be paying more than you are when I don't use the schools and you do. That's about as stupid as taxing me more than you to pay for public transportation that you use and I don't.
It would certainly be equitable if the amount of tax paid was in direct proportion to the individuals usage of the supported service, such as the gas taxes for roads. However, there are many services in civilized societies where the cost can not be equitable allocated such as public education, public health services, law enforcement, the judicial system, and the penal system. We all benefit from having these services even if we rarely or never use them.Ray, the reasoning behind you paying higher property taxes for education is because your property has a high value due in part because an education system exist in your community.You don't need a half-mil a year to educate your children. There are plenty of families making less than six figures that do it today. One of those families are tenants of mine. The father works as a computer tech (making nowhere near six figures) and his wife stays home and home schools their two children. A friend of mine the same. He works two full-time jobs and has been supporting his family since he and his wife got married. They raised three children all home schooled and again, he makes nowhere near six figures.
Now as far as public school, I don't mind doing my part. But I do believe that people with kids in the school should pay more than people with no kids in the school. As I stated earlier, I'm paying more to the schools with no children attending than other people on my street that do have kids in those schools. If anybody here thinks that's fair, I would sure love for them to explain to me how.
You own more valuable properties, therefore you pay higher taxes. There ya go!
There you go what????
Because my property is valued better than others on the street, I should pay more for their kids education? Again, please explain the equity or how that makes any sense.
Your property is valued less than mine, but you have four kids in the school. I have no kids in school, yet I'm paying more into that school than you are and you call that fair?
I have a better idea: why don't people with kids in school pay more for the school than people that don't? That's much fairer than forcing people with higher property value to pay for education.
In essential all states education is supported jointly by property taxes and sales taxes. Most of the money for education that comes from property taxes is paid by businesses who benefit indirectly form public education. Most of the money for education that comes from sales taxes is paid by those in middle and lower income brackets which are the people most likely to benefit directly from education.
The idea that parents should bear the cost of educating their children may seem equitable but it's not practical. The average cost in the US is $11,009 a year per child. How many young families with 2 kids could afford an additions $22,000 a year in expenses for education.
How is that my problem, that's the question.
If you bought a house you can't afford, why should I be taxed to pay it for you? Or your car? Or your swimming pool or boat?
Children are an expense, it's one of the reasons I never had any. You act as if having children is something people can't control. Oh, I just happened to end up with three kids, but I don't have the money to educate them. Well, that's not my problem, that's my neighbors problem!
And again, if people are too stupid to have kids they can't afford to educate, fine. I'll chip in, but I shouldn't be paying more than you are when I don't use the schools and you do. That's about as stupid as taxing me more than you to pay for public transportation that you use and I don't.
The value of your property is very dependent on the community and services rendered by the community. How much would your property be worth if there were no schools or law enforcement. You pay more taxes because you financial benefit from those services in your community and of course the fact that you can pay.
If you and people like you don't pay through your taxes to educate kids of parents that can't pay, then what are the alternatives? Do the kids grow up with no education, usable to hold down a job, and add to the crime rate in your community bringing down property values?
I don't think many cared about those emails. If what Hillary did in the past didn't convince you not to vote for her, nothing would have. It's not like she came in with integrity and a clean slate. She was being investigated by the FBI for crying out loud.
And the FBI found she didn't do anything that wrong. Not that it mattered to you guys. Mere accussation was good enough.
Now your boy has much more serious accusations against him,and you want 'proof'. But don't actually investigate. We can't have that!
So the puppet masters where the ones who made Trump call on the Russians to hack Hillary's Emails?
You see, that's the problem you guys have. Trump really did play footsies with the Russians. And that's just the stuff he was dumb enough to blurt out, we aren't even talking about what he's hiding in his tax returns.
So the guy who hates America says he loves Trump, and you guys are good with that?
Roads like Education are used indirectly by everyone. Businesses need educated worker just as they need roads. Therefore they should pay a share of the cost of both which they do.Why should I pay for the roads to be p!lowed so business can use the roads? I have no interest in the business succeeding as its not mine.
Ahhh, because everybody use the roads??????????
Families need education for their kids just as they need roads and they should pay a share of both as they do.
School choice is a great thing. Schools should always have the choice on whether to accept a student or keep a student.Thinking Democrats should applaud school choice. The greatest disadvantage suffered by poor urban young people is the bad education inflicted by the corrupt public school monopoly. Let students and parents choose and the schools will either improve or go out of business. Why would anyone want to empower union bosses and bureaucrats rather than students and parents?!
A Generation of School-Voucher Success
Learning from Sweden's School Voucher Success
Poor, Disadvantaged Youth Would Benefit From School Choice Programs That Include Faith-Based Schools, 50 Years of Research Suggests
The report only address one and only one issue, Whether Russia hacked into the DNC network and other government and non goverment networks, not how hacked information might have been distributed or if was distributed, nor whether it influenced the election, nor clandestine acts the US may have committed in the past, nor the accuracy of various security agencies, because that was not purpose of the report nor the responsibility of these security agencies.Security agencies such as the CIA and the FBI usually don't want to release a lot of details that involves on going operations for obvious reasons. I don't know if it's possibility to gather enough evidence to prove the Russians are guilty in this politically charged court of public opinion. My guess is they would be able to establish a fairly high level of probability but not absolute proof. Kind of like the farmer who has lost 3 chickens, finds bloody feathers and sees a chicken hawk hanging around. It's possible a fox he has never seen did it but not likely.Hacking the actually voting machines and not being discovered is almost impossible because they are not online during the voting. The votes are either stored on a cartridge, hard drive, paper punched card, or a marked card. All machines produce a paper backup. The danger in manipulating votes is in counting, not the voting.Yeah, you see, it's very simple to explain.
The Russians hacked the election, and a lot of the usual safeguards we have to prevent EXACTLY THIS SORT OF THING FROM HAPPENING didn't engage.
The Media normalized Trump's behavior. Normally, you say things like he said, your career is over and you are putting a newspaper in front of your face when you leave your house in the morning.
Now we are stuck with this guy, and he will be a disaster.
Again, how did they hack the election? I hear all about hacking but I heard they hacked the Democratic Party's emails, then leaked the emails.
Are you saying they hacked the voting machines?
The Russian hacking had no effect on the voting process. The question of whether it had any effect on voter decisions is unknown and will remain so. However, Russia has had a long history of inference in the political process of selecting leaders in other nations. To think that Russia would not attempt to do so in US elections seems a bit naive.
This is not the first time Russia has meddled in US presidential elections. Russia attempted to persuade Adlai Stevenson, the Democratic presidential nominee in 1952 and 1956, to run again and offered to support him. This is probably the best documented attempt but there are others.
The Russians Tried Once Before to Meddle in a U.S. Presidential Election
Well we don't know if Russia leaked the emails or not, their reputation precedes them. However, no one has given solid proof who hacked the computers and no one has proof the Russians are involved, it is all speculation.
The US government has an obligation to it's citizens to investigate and then let the citizens know if the Russians are involved or not and what the evidence is. Simply retaliating against Russia is not proof of anything.
The current tactic is saying yes they are involved and not releasing proof is highly suspicious.
Assuming the CIA has a huge amount evidence and released it, would it be enough and would it be worth divulging information that would be potentially damaging to their operation? I think this would definitely be a consideration when the president elect has already said he didn't believe it.
"What The Russian Hacking Report DOESN’T Say
Today, the Department of Homeland Security and FBI released a report alleging Russian hacking.
It’s important to note what the report does NOT say …
It does NOT allege any of the following:
It doesn’t claim that it’s accurate.
weasel words – “as is”, “does not provide any warranties of any kind regarding any information” –
It doesn’t mention Wikileaks … not even once. In other words, the report does not allege that the Russians gave any Democratic Party or Podesta emails to Wikileaks
It doesn’t address the fact that the NSA possesses records showing exactly how the emails went from the Democratic Party to Wikileaks, as it tracks all electronic communications in the U.S.
It doesn’t address the fact that Russia would not have used widely known hacking methods (and wouldn’t have paid tribute within the code to a famous Russian intelligence officer), and that anyone could have copied these methods and names
It doesn’t address the fact that top former NSA and CIA officials (and Wikileaks) says that these were not hacks at all … but rather leaks by American insiders
It doesn’t address American intelligence services’ less-than-stellar history of truthfulness, and routinely skew intelligence to justify preordained policy outcomes
It doesn’t address the fact that – according to the Los Angeles Times – the U.S. interfered in foreign elections 81 times between 1946 and 2000 … compared to only 36 times by the Ruskies
It doesn’t address the fact that most Americans aren’t buying the whole claim that the Russians hacked our election
In other words, the report really doesn’t say much of anything …"
http://www.globalresearch.ca/what-the-russian-hacking-report-doesnt-say/5565479
Wise up.
Thinking Democrats should applaud school choice. The greatest disadvantage suffered by poor urban young people is the bad education inflicted by the corrupt public school monopoly. Let students and parents choose and the schools will either improve or go out of business. Why would anyone want to empower union bosses and bureaucrats rather than students and parents?!
We don't need that, but we need something. I didn't back Benghazi because of lack of evidence, I am not backing this either.
How did the "Russians hack the vote.", as you keep claiming?
How is that union you are forming at work coming?
