baddog

I've known some cases where the kid would have been better off with the dad, but what do I know? I think the laws are designed to protect the woman from being used and abused and being stuck with a kid with no visible means of support. I understand that, but some women abuse the system (golddiggers) and the man suffers......why?

Dinner date......better known as "The Big Fish"

If they are going after him, makes you wonder if they are going to go after his dinner date........

Just watched a segment on Sixty Minutes about this program called Year Up.  It is a highly successful program intended solely for the disadvantaged that gives them an opportunity they might otherwise not get.  All of you lefties who believe that the right consists of greedy, uncaring, rich people need to take notice and understand what this program is achieving WITHOUT GOVERNMENT assistance and WITHOUT TAXPAYER DOLLARS.  And the majority of the participants are the Wall Streeters that you have been taught to hate ( even though you really don't know why, you have just accepted that they are evil)  THis program has high standards and demands accountability.  I heard one instructor say that if you are late to class because the bus was late, that simply isn't acceptable.  Young people who come out of this program are producing at a very high rate and have become productive citizens without throwing endless taxpayer dollars at it.  Donations are coming in from all over the country and you need to know that those evil Republicans are heavily involved in the donations and even more heavily involved in the education process.  This is PROOF POSITIVE that there are often times better ways to solve problems that having a bloated, inefficient, and unaccountable government handling the process and it is damn sure more productive than Occupy Wall Street demonstrations.  Big Girl, what would you do if someone you knew took advantage of this program and became a Wall Street success story?  Would you cheer them for what they have accomplished or would you demonize them for becoming a productive member of  the "establishment"?

.....handgun ban unconstitutional.


http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/27/justice/washington-gun-ruling/index.html?iphoneemail

You simply have swallowed the party line without examining the facts and coming to your own conclusion.  First- A subsidy is a money provided by the government for the purpose of promoting something such as solar energy.  Therefore, the oil companies do not receive subsidies.  Additionally, the oil companies have available to them the same tax deductions that every other corporation in the country has access to.  When you understand the difference between a subsidy and a tax deduction, you will be better equipped to then cry and bemoan the deductions that the oil companies take.  All are lawful and were passed by the government.  Once again, you should be very pleased that the oil companies make significant profits.  Of course, what you don't consider is that they also take significant risks but that doesn't matter to you.  When British Petroleum caused all that damage in the gulf last year, they were able to be financially responsible for everything without needing a government/taxpayer funded bailout and a bankruptcy.  Thus they are still employing thousands of people who pay a lot of taxes based on their income.  If they had not earned significant profits over the years, they would have gone under, thousands of people would have been added to the unemployment roles, and government tax revenues would have declined due to the lost jobs and the taxes paid by British Petroleum.  If and when that would have taken place, the government would need more money and would cry out (with your full support) that some other industry and some group of individuals weren't paying their fair share-  It never ends

Illegal is Illegal....Period..... Ship them back!!! All 20 million!! Let their own government take care of them. If they want to live here, then apply for citizenship and do it legally.

I remember the piece of the Hot Wheels race track.  Not very fun.  My mom was about to give me a spanking once with a yard stick.  I decided to challenge her by taking the yard stick away from her and breaking it over my knee.  BAD MOVE!!! Then, for some reason I handed both of the broken ends back to her.  ANOTHER BAD MOVE!!!  As you can probably imagine, mom went to work on my little behind with both ends of the yard stick.  One of those childhood memories that I will never forget!!!  Never challenged my mother again!!!

My Dad used a belt and would hit me high enough so as not to show below my gym shorts. My Mom liked a switch. You better not come back with a puny one either. Both of these offenses would land both of my parents in jail today. I loved my parents to death and hold no grudges for being disciplined. We have become a country of wusses.

I told my kids early on that if I ever disciplined them and they called the cops on me and I went to jail, then they better run because one of us is going to the hospital and the other is going back to jail. I can actually count on one hand the number of times I spanked my kids. I guess i was lucky. When they were old enough and I made them have a conscience. I was able to reason with them. I would make them apologize to their Mom and never sent them to their room or to timeout.

Every time I hear about anything to do with child abuse I can't help but reflect on an example one of my professors used as to how statistics can sometimes be very misleading. (It was a statistics class.)
 
The number of child abuse cases is higher today than it was in the 1970s, and dramatically higher than in the 1950s. One would conclude that child abuse is on the rise. And that conclusion would be false, and in fact the opposite is true. What has led to the rise in child abuse cases is the definition of child abuse, and the number of cases reported. In the 1950s, a complete stranger could swat the backside of a misbehaving child without fear of any type of prosecution, much less any reporting. Leaving a child in car while going into a convience store was standard practice for many. Now-a-days, both can get you thrown in jail. For this particular topic, in the 1950s this trial would have never seen the light of day even if the kid had huge welps from being spanked. In fact, the person who reported the abuse would probably be more liable to being charged with submitting a false report than the parent facing abuse charges.

My Dad used a belt (and not very often because I was a pretty smart kid and it only took one time to realize that sucked!)......
 
My Grandmother would use a metal fly swatter.......holy crap that stung!! I remember my cousin being chased up a tree with my grandma following her.....She wouldn't come down, so my Gandma went and got a lawn chair and waited for her :D

My Dad used a belt and would hit me high enough so as not to show below my gym shorts. My Mom liked a switch. You better not come back with a puny one either. Both of these offenses would land both of my parents in jail today. I loved my parents to death and hold no grudges for being disciplined. We have become a country of wusses.

I told my kids early on that if I ever disciplined them and they called the cops on me and I went to jail, then they better run because one of us is going to the hospital and the other is going back to jail. I can actually count on one hand the number of times I spanked my kids. I guess i was lucky. When they were old enough and I made them have a conscience. I was able to reason with them. I would make them apologize to their Mom and never sent them to their room or to timeout.

Spying on Americans by our government without proper warrants is always bad. Using the guise of it being for security is no excuse. Bad people will do bad things. We will never be able to completely eliminate this problem. Justice for such an act should be swift and complete. If it is state sponsored or allowed to happen because a country allows terrorists to train and prosper in their country, when those terrorists hurt Americans, we should wipe out the leaders of that country along with the terrorists. Make the country responsible for what happens in their territory. If the terrorists are Americans, then they should be taken to the courthouse square and hung upon capture.

I understand why now.

I understand why now.

1.  America is capitalist and greedy- yet half of the population is subsidized
 
2.  Half of the population is subsidized- yet they think they are victims
 
3.  They think they are victims- yet their representatives run the government
 
4.  Their representatives run the government- yet the poor keep getting poorer
 
5.  The poor keep getting poorer- yet they have things that people in other countries only dream about
 
6.  They have things that people in other countries only dream about- yet the want America to be like those other countries

Smitty, in all fairness, the video about the Sacramento protest.....I don't think any of those people are affiliated with anyone. They are just stupid people and they are everywhere. Stick a mike in lots of people's faces and they get brain farts. It is comical that none of them could really tell you why they were there. The black dude was drunk and wanted to start some crap. The rest were lost souls. I really don't know how some people get to work. Their cars must know the way.

Joke all you want, but I think it is a true statement. For the record, I think Sumlin, Saban, Briles, and a few other coaches have more pressure on them than Obama. Let's not EVEN talk NFL pressure. Coaches have to win every week. Obama only had to win twice.

BTW, how long you been hanging out on Orangebloods?

Sigh, big girl with her 3rd grade education again. I asked you to pick out the lies in the woman's stance against the Muslim woman. You listed none, so I assume that is how many you could find.

What is truly sad is that this is a country of free will and free thinking. I could sit down with a communist and we could jaw back and forth about what we believe in and where we disagree. You, on the other hand, care more about what channel the info is on. What difference does that make really? Try and digest what is said without having to label it.

What i really liked about the video is that she was not scripted. It is how she felt and she gave the Muslim woman a what for. Now, please list the lies. You won't. You will simply ask another foolish question.

Its racist because liberals like em and dont want the truth interfering with there future voter registration!

Mitt Romney got one million more votes than McCain did in 2008 or before the Tea Party movement even started. No matter what else happened and with the Tea Party out there, Romney got more votes with a Tea Party in existence than McCain got before they were even formed. Hmmmmm.......
 
Obama on the other hand lost almost 5 million of his supporters in his reelection. In fact, you have to go back 70 years to a 3rd and 4th term of FDR before finding any reelected president that did not gain votes. 
 
Since then Eisenhower gained 1.5 million votes in his reelection. Nixon while being beaten up in the press and faced the beginning of the Watergate Scandal and gained more than 10 million votes in his reelection for the largest landslide in history to that point. Reagan gained 10 million in his reelection and surpassed Nixon in the largest landslide in history and Clinton (while he never got 50% of the vote) gained 2 million. G W Bush after being slammed by the left who were particularly still angry after the 2000 election and Florida contested election, gain 12 million votes. 
 
Then along comes Obama who lost almost 5 million in support from his first election and Romney gain 1 million...... and the question was about the Tea Party being thrilled? A better question would be how a sitting president for the first time in almost 4 generations and only the second president in history to lose any votes in a reelection. 
 
The question about the Tea Party has some basis in that Romney was not their main person to support but if we are talking popular vote, Hillary got more votes than Obama in the 2008 Democratic primary and only internal rules of the Democratic party gave him the primary, not popular vote. Let's sit on that for a few moments. Obama did not even win the popular vote in his own party in getting nominated. Meanwhile Romney won by 6 million popular votes over his closest Republican challenger. So it seems that the enlightened person's question is based merely on trolling rather than some historical basis or true political question. With all the claimed non-support of the Tea Party, Romney won his nomination by 6 million votes and Obama when he had a challenger in 2008, lost the popular vote in his own party and as an incumbent president in 2008 won with a bare majority of 51% of the vote and in doing so lost 5 million of his own supporters. 
 
Of course, that is just looking at facts. 

Ok, I'll bite. I would consider myself a teabagger in its ghetto meaning. Based on that meaning I would think EnlightenedChosenOne would agree since it was his momma that initiated me to the club! Boom, I can act like a 12 year old moron too.
However to answer your question, I was not happy with romneys nomination because I supported a different candidate that seemed more interested in following the constitution than the other candidates.
Grow up and quit wasting everyone's time playing word games and trying to entice an angry response. Your actions on this board are just like a politicians. Never a straight answer or anything with meaning. Just trying to bait people and cause confusion.

There are conventional weapons that can topple mountains such as the daisy cutter or the MOAB. They are not nuclear, biological, or chemical in nature. Videos on YouTube. Look them up. Learn something and quit asking questions with obvious answers.

The proliferation of WMDs could mean the end of the world as we know it and rogue nations have to be prevented from possessing them. This is why Korea and Iran are scary and to be dealt with. So was/is Iraq. If you can't understand that, then there is simply no hope for you.

There are conventional weapons that can topple mountains such as the daisy cutter or the MOAB. They are not nuclear, biological, or chemical in nature. Videos on YouTube. Look them up. Learn something and quit asking questions with obvious answers.

The proliferation of WMDs could mean the end of the world as we know it and rogue nations have to be prevented from possessing them. This is why Korea and Iran are scary and to be dealt with. So was/is Iraq. If you can't understand that, then there is simply no hope for you.

Truck....my Toyota Tundra with the 5.7. Pull up beside it....we'll have a go. If I can't tow it, you don't need it. 92,000 and runs like the day I bought it.

SUV....I really like my wife's Rav4. Fun to drive, great mileage, revamped 4 banger.

Car.....I sure do like the Challengers. Not a huge Dadge fan but those are very nice lines. Once you drive a truck, it's hard to go back to a car.