Hang on, can I just clarify: are you actually saying that America is more left-wing than Britain?

EDIT: re-read it and no, that's not what you're saying. I assumed when you said something was sane, you'd probably be referring to something leftist.

Plenty of people "push Marxism" (i.e. teach about it) here. We mostly just ignore them.

Study finds immigrants commit less California crime (than Bill Clinton in Arkansas).

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "sucking the fat off the land", but if I know you, you mean taking advantage of our welfare and education system. and if so, you've shown us again how full of **** you are by posting this. are they here to work (and go home when they can't find work) or are they here to "suck the fat off the land"? which is it?

This is your opinion, and I disagree. I think Ophiel probably had it right when he said it would make sense for the illegals to be careful not to break laws. but it doesn't matter what you or I think or feel; the numbers are here for you to see. the fact that you won't see them is what proves to me again and again that you're nothing more than a good old fashioned bigot. the only reason you act like you have no problem with the legal immigrants is because you try to give the impression that you're not racist. I'm sure if it were up to you, all of the dirty brown people wouldn't be allowed to set foot on US soil.

No, I don't remember that story. I don't read the Nation or Mother Earth btw. I think you're thinking of Mother Jones though. And I don't read that either. So are you going to link me to a story about it or not? Because I'll be happy to assume you made it up if you don't. That's what you'd do to me.

well this is understandable, but now that I'm telling you the second article is from different sources, how about you take a gander at it?

****ing christ. it was a trip to a country that is in the middle of a war. hardly a trip to an exclusive resort in the middle of colorado or something. and of course, I still don't know for a fact that this place actually paid for anything so basically, your point is meaningless.

You know, I sometimes do find myself looking up things on the internet but I'm not going to go searching for something you've claimed happened. mostly because I'm sure the only sources I'll find for it, if any, will be the kind of talk radio **** that is just as fabricated as you believe that first article was. but also because when you make an assertion, the burden of proof is on you. I wouldn't just tell you that john mccain is a dog ****er and expect you to believe it, nor would I expect you to look it up yourself. if you make a claim, you back it up.

yes, child molesting has only been going on since the 60's ted. no one was ever molested before that. and heterosexuals never ever molest people.


I believe that marriage (as a cultural ritual/institution) is much more complex than that. but lol @ you being so casual about the many forms of male dominance over women that is implied by your statement.
But seriously, let me ask you a question ted- how would you have responded if your wife told you she didn't want to take your last name?

sounds like a made-up never-happened talk radio story to me. you know, the kind they tell you just to get you riled up and you fall for it every time?
but assuming it's true, I should think you'd think that was a good thing since our founding fathers were pretty clear on the need for a separation of church and state. if that was a public school, I think calling the police is excessive, but asking the guy to leave wasn't out of line at all. you wouldn't tolerate muslims handing out their holy texts next to a school, would you?

how you can fail to see even a bit of truth in all of these accusations is baffling. well, it would be if you were a normal person. but I guess I'm not really surprised that you can't see this stuff.

that's because it's true? In theory, I don't really have a problem with large companies but in reality, they create situations where humans everywhere suffer for their profit margins. wal-mart doesn't pay most of its employees enough to live on. AMERICAN WORKERS, ted. how can you support that? and wal-mart used to take pride in selling things made in the USA. but not anymore. is that how you like things?

as usual, you have no idea what you're talking about because you're interpreting world events through your own distorted perception of reality.
that movement hasn't died out. and I actually just posted an article about the Chinese funding of weapons the other day.
http://kittyradio.com/soapbox/news-p...r-carnage.html

Yeah, HK's pretty much right about all that. But yet again... what's the point? He'll believe what he wants. He'll believe that talk radio is a valid news source, as if everything worth knowing can be understood by everyone.

We have something approaching talk radio here, a show called Any Answers? where people respond to a debate on a previous show*, and let me tell you, half of the people who phone in are ****ing morons.

Recent example, after a debate over hybridised embryos, despite everyone who'd read the bill in question being aware and vocalising that it did not say this, some ******bag was on insisting that scientists would definitely use it to grow children and then cut bits off them to stick on other children. When the host called him on this, the guy just kept insisting that it was in the bill, and then went on another rant about lesbian parenting until he got faded out.

This is not atypical, and what bothers me is that most people listening won't have read the bill in question. I can't say that I have either, but I've yet to read a news report that cites any evidence of what this guy was saying. My point is, if people are getting their information from talk radio, they're not getting it unfiltered; they're getting it at least doubly filtered, and quite possibly completely false. If that twunt phoning in could get the idea that he'd read a bill, and that he'd read what he wanted to have read in it, what hope does anyone have?




*called Any Questions? - HEY LOOK, A TALK RADIO SHOW WHERE THE HOST'S NAME ISN'T THE MAJORITY OF THE TITLE, WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU?