westend1

I don't think there are many "bad" cops.  I think there are plenty who are either scared, improperly trained, or just not suited for a dangerous job.  I think that is the basis for the protest.   It's a tough job and takes a special person.   We should pay them more.

I don't think there are many "bad" cops.  I think there are plenty who are either scared, improperly trained, or just not suited for a dangerous job.  I think that is the basis for the protest.   It's a tough job and takes a special person.   We should pay them more.

I don't think there are many "bad" cops.  I think there are plenty who are either scared, improperly trained, or just not suited for a dangerous job.  I think that is the basis for the protest.   It's a tough job and takes a special person.   We should pay them more.

I didnt see people running and hiding behind the police, as you suggested.  btw, I sent money to the families of the slain officers via go fund me.  Put your money where your mouth is.

Interesting.  I see unarmed citizens hauling a$$ , as they should, and police coming in, as they are trained to do.

Show me a video that shows different.  I am open to changing my mind. Apparently, you have seen something that i didn't see.  Don't make me talk about crickets.
 

Honestly, i didn't see anybody run "to the cops".  Looked like the crowd ran out and the cops ran in.

So speculate for me.  Why would a cop feel the need to shoot the guy three or four times?  If the guy was a bad guy, would he announce that he had a gun?  I can't even come up with a logical scenario for this one.

Same thing as reading Dr Seuss.

The guy certainly has problems.  Hope he gets it fixed before it kills him.

I take it you disagree with my religious beliefs.

I take it you disagree with my religious beliefs.

You mean like black people?   Yeah.  One time businesses were able to discriminate.

You mean like black people?   Yeah.  One time businesses were able to discriminate.

Just stop.  You are guessing with your opinions.  I am guessing that you don't know a damn thing about it.

Just stop.  You are guessing with your opinions.  I am guessing that you don't know a damn thing about it.

Lifestyle "choice"   Please.  Nobody would choose that difficult road.   

Too deep for me.

This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up  
I don't know but here is what I found in about 2 seconds.

The two Republicans are correct that military forces were reduced significantly under Clinton. The active-duty military totaled 1.8-million at the start of his presidency in 1993 and declined to 1.4-million in 2000. They are also correct that the naval fleet shrank dramatically. The Navy had 454 ships in 1993, but as vessels were retired and not replaced, the fleet was down to 341 by 2000.
But they are selectively choosing numbers that make it appear that the military cuts were Clinton's alone. In fact, the cuts were prompted by the end of the Cold War during the presidency of President George H.W. Bush, a Republican.
During Bush's presidency, he and Congress agreed to a sharp drop in military personnel. Active-duty military declined from 2.2-million to 1.8-million. Total defense forces also shrank, from 3.3-million to 2.9-million.
The Republicans are trying to portray Clinton and the Democrats as weak on defense and to make the peace dividend look like a partisan effort. But contrary to the Republicans' claims, the post-Cold War shrinkage of the U.S. military was very much a bipartisan effort. It began under a Republican president and a Democratic Congress and continued under a Democratic president and a Republican Congress.

Is this satire?  There have been enough baseless allegations against those two to choke a horse.  I can show you Enquirer examples if you like.

We already leave the social part to the states, unless they try and take away some constitutionally protected right.  We might disagree on what is protected, but the Supreme Court resolves those issues.

No need to apologize.  This board hasn't  been on an "intellectual level" for several years.

Now this is a beaten man.   He is willing to fight it harder than you are.  I am not saying you are right or wrong, just beaten.

No need to apologize.  This board hasn't  been on an "intellectual level" for several years.