Isn't this the truth.....

[Richard Cranium]

...except for the pornography part.   

[mauve66]

government debt = 14 trillion
lawsuit for coffee being spilled on you = 4 million
all the facts in one simple statement = priceless

[John_Kunkel]

Truth? To some yes, to others it's just your run-of-the-mill right wing rant.

[bull]

Truth? To some yes, to others it's just your run-of-the-mill right wing rant.

And yours just sounds like a knee-jerk left wing reactionary statement. Would you care to elaborate on how some or all of these assumptions are incorrect?

[vancamp]

Sounds pretty much spot on to me

[Tilar]

Truth? To some yes, to others it's just your run-of-the-mill right wing rant.

And if that article only said that homosexuality and abortion was ok, socialism is great and that osamabama was the messiah, It would have been a political ad for the damocrats.

[Dodgecharger74]

dead on !!

[Cooter]

Right wing, left wing, hell, they all taste the same to me...Hee,Hee...

[Vainglory, Esq.]

Truth? To some yes, to others it's just your run-of-the-mill right wing rant.

And yours just sounds like a knee-jerk left wing reactionary statement. Would you care to elaborate on how some or all of these assumptions are incorrect?

I'm no left-winger, but the "arguments" in this piece are so ridiculous, how about you let me try?

If we dislike a black person we're racist and if a black dislikes whites, it's their 1st Amendment right

Stupid on multiple counts.  First, "we" assumes that "we" are all white and that none of this applies to black people.  Second, "we" are disliking a black person and yet "blacks" are disliking all white people.  That's one way to make yourself seem less culpable for the exact same issue.  Third, no black people I've ever known have attempted to justify racism based on the 1st Amendment.  It makes me wonder whether this person understands what the 1st Amendment is, what it says, and what it protects.  The answer seems no.  And finally, I suppose it is historically "American" for white people to dislike black people, but that doesn't make it right.

the government spends millions to rehabilitate criminals and they do almost nothing for the victims

The government spends millions incarcerating people, not rehabilitating them.  Our imprisonment rates are higher than Russia, Rwanda, and Cuba.  And I don't point that out for dramatic effect, I only do so because they are, in order, the countries with the second, third, and fourth most people behind bars, per capita (among countries for which we have reliable information).  Our prison system is broken and does far more to breed more criminality than it does to rehabilitate.  And that assumes that the point of the criminal justice system is rehabilitation; in fact much of it is predicated on deterrence and outright revenge.  And the idea that the government should spend its tax revenues on restitution for the victims of criminal violations is patently ridiculous.  I'm sure you can figure out how that would skew incentives.

you can kill an unborn child but it's wrong to execute a mass murderer

More sophistry.  I grant that the abortion issue is entirely intractable, but comparing that to a "mass murderer" is disingenuous, as is the assumption that he's guilty.  If you look at the numbers that come out of places like Northwestern's Innocence Project, which has exonerated literally hundreds of "criminals" and "mass murderers" put away by faulty evidence and oftentimes outright prosecutorial malfeasance, you absolutely must come to the conclusion that the criminal justice system has some wiggle room when it comes to innocence and guilt.  For the most part, it is not that the state should not execute criminals, it is simply that it cannot be trusted to do so competently.

we don't burn books in America, we rewrite them

Yes.  It is much better to burn books.  (Facepalm.)

if you protest against President Obama's policies you are a terrorist, but if you burned an American flag or George Bush in effigy it was your 1st Amendment right.

That depends on who you talk to.  Plenty of people on both sides of the aisle get called "terrorists," and other such nonsense, but the relative volume of the namecalling just depends on who holds what office at the time.  If this bothers you, you are just stupid.  And by the way, both examples mentioned fall quite well within the first amendment's protections.  Technically, there's no difference.

You can have pornography on TV or the internet but you better not put a nativity scene in the park

Sophistry again.  TV stations and internet sites are private entities, and parks are publicly-owned.  Of course there is a different standard.  If you want to remove pr0n from the internet, perhaps you should simply advocate that the government take it over?  More to the point, if you want to remove pr0n from the internet, you're far more of a terrorist than anyone burning American flags.

we have eliminated all criminals in America, they are now called sick people

Aside from the execrable grammar, I can think of a couple things wrong with this.  Perhaps most importantly, the roughly 2.3 million people behind bars would probably disagree.  Second of all, being "sick" does not get you off the hook for crimes.  Even those people who are acquitted of crimes based on insanity are not released to the public.  They are very much locked up, albeit in different facilities.  And their number in relation to the number of people in pound-me-in-the-ass prisons is negligible.  Bet that makes you feel good to be an American.

-----------------------------------

Look, I could keep going, but it probably won't matter.  I will say this though.  The next time anyone feels the need to post a ridiculous editorial like this, I would suggest that you hold off, take a deep breath, and maybe go for a walk.

Before shooting yourself in the face.  O.P., this was the dumbest thing that I've read in days.

[Mike DC]

  
Who actually thinks that the govt's 14 trillion debt is okay?
Who actually thinks that anyone should get $4 million bucks for getting coffee spilled on themselves?



No living breathing person that I've ever met agrees with this stuff.  The only "people" that agree with these things are the fabricated opposition that the talking heads indignantly scream about all day long.  

These situations get created because of disagreements over policies, neither side of the political aisle really obeying the public, and a court system that's basically on crack.  But 10 out of 10 people off the street, liberal or conservative, will agree that both of the above stats are bad news.

[NHCharger]

Right wing, left wing, hell, they all taste the same to me...Hee,Hee...

Oh yeah and IBTL 

[greenpigs]

More clutter, thanks.

[Silver R/T]

Article is spot on