jdman13

A Muslim run corporation hands out 16 different kinds of Christmas food in december to their employees such as turkeys and beef but refuse to hand out ham because of their religion. The Federal Government makes a law saying they have to give out ham too and the Muslim corporation takes it to the Supreme Court based on religious freedom. The governments argument is that everyone has a right to food. Which side do you take?

Florida St.

Clemson

Alabama

Georgia

Oregon

Stanford

Ohio St.

Michigan

I say it is Clemson, Georgia, then FSU.

Who would win and why do you think that? Also, what games played already helped your pick?

Bama vs;

VT 35-10

TA&M 49-42

Oregon vs;

Nichols St. 66-3

Virginia 59-10

Tennessee 59-14

If we raised minimum wage by $7.25, how do companies like McDonalds come up with the additional 27 billion dollars?

The amount of hours in a year is 52 X 40 = 2080.

According to wiki, McDonalds has 1.8 million workers.

So;

(1,800,000 X 7.25) X 2080 = 27 Billion

Right now, McDonalds net income is 5 billion dollars, so they'll need an additional 22 billion to make payroll.

I agree that number comes in lower when not all the employees get 40 hours a week, but many do, and the rest come close to it. Even if they ALL only get 20 hours a week, that would still come out to 13.5 billion more needed to make payroll.

How exactly did they meet up?

A. Zimmerman simply caught Martin in a foot race.

B. Zimmerman was right on Martin's heels and Martin finally just turned and asked what his problem was.

C. Martin was hiding and Zimmerman found him in his hiding place and confronted him there.

D. Martin was hiding and waiting for Zimmerman to get off the phone and walked from his hiding place to confront Zimmerman.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zj7qEcD8R-8&feature...

On the 911 call you can clearly tell Zimmerman is jogging as you can hear the wind noise and you can barely understand Zimmerman. This prompts dispatch to ask, "are you following", "ya", "we don't need you to do that", "ok". Then the wind noise stops and Zimmerman finishes the remaining two minutes of the four minute call not breathing heavy and speaking clearly.

If you listen to the call, at 2:08 he says he is running, at 2:14 you hear Zimmermans door shut. So Zimmerman gave him a head start as Martin was already across the street, then gave him a six second head start, then gave him two full minutes without chasing him. If you look at the map, the incident only took place about thirty seconds walking from Zimmermans truck.

The prosecution has already admitted they have no evidence to prove Zimmerman did continue pursuit. So what exactly do liberals on here know that the rest of us don't?

http://www.wagist.com/2012/dan-linehan/evidence-th...

The prosecution admits that Zimmerman lost Martin as heard on the 911 call. But their assertion is that Zimmerman found Martin again.

http://www.wagist.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/m...

Looking at the map, how is that possible unless Martin did double back to confront Zimmerman? It was out in the open, nowhere near any kind of hiding place. Was Martin hiding behind a blade of grass??

I can undstand someone wanting to kill a mass amount of people, people who either want the world to burn or want the world in total chaos. But most terrorist targets have some kind of meaning behind them. Oklahoma city was revenge for WACO, 9/11 was thought to ruin our economy.

But the Boston bombing seems different, there were very few abdomen or torso injuries except for kids, who are short. The bombs by design were meant more to either maim adults or kill small children. So what was the point, what was the goal?

For this reason, I believe the terrorist in Boston are homegrown, domestic terrorists. Extremist Muslims may be crazy, but they are usually smart and patient, they pick targets that mean something, usually. This looked like something that was put together a week before. They even had more bombs that weren't built correctly and didn't go off. Two bombs go off and only three deaths, but a whole bunch of serious leg injuries and several amputees as a result.

Do you think these guys didn't know what they were doing, or that they meant to try and injury many and kill few?

If they are not caught, do think they'll hit again? I do, I don't think they got the results they really wanted, they may have just been a practice run for something even larger with the same type of IED's.

The reason gay marriage is a hot topic item right now is mainly because of two major deals being decided by the Supreme Court.

The first issue is Prop 8, which started in 2008 over a bill that banned gay marriage in California, a state that in that year voted overwhelming democratic across the board including a landslide victory for Obama in that state. The very same people voted for the ban of gay marriage.

The second is DOMA, a bill signed into law by Bill Clinton.

So Republicans are being demonized over gay marriage even though the Supreme Court is currently deciding whether to vote in favor of gay marriage by overturning two things liberals did.

Don't liberals make politics fun?

If it is opinion based only, what is your opinion?

As far as I know they have not proved that there exists a 'gay gene'. It seems to me that it is a choice.

These scenarios happen all the time,

A straight man or woman leaves their partner for someone of the same sex.

A gay man or woman leaves their partner for someone of the opposite sex.

There are a large number of gays that are bi, which seems in my experience to be more prodominate with women.

Were these people just born confused?

Or were these just choices they made?

I keep hearing the left say Bush is afraid to travel outside the US because several countries have called for his arrest. Yet, all I can find is that amnesty international seems to be the only motivation behind this.

“The difference is that Bush has not been indicted anywhere--unlike most of the officers wanted in the human rights cases. Until that happens, I don't think this will change Bush's ability to travel.”

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/spy-talk/2011/02/...

I can't seem to find a list of ANY countries calling for Bush's arrest, I can't even find one. And, Bush has traveled outside the US several times since he left the White House.

The real fact seems to be that Bush can travel anywhere he wants and not fear an arrest, would this not be a true statement. If you say false, what country has said different?

After being held to task, Patty Murrays' staff concede that the 1.8 trillion in deficit reduction is dishonest and only amounts to about 300 billion over ten years. Do democrats really have this hard of a time being honest? With over a trillion in new revenue and only 300 billion in deficit reduction, which is decreases to future increases, what does this tell you about democrats plans on spending? It tells me they want more and more spending. What happened to the "balanced" approach of revenue and spending cuts? All the democrats want is more revenue AND more spending, am I wrong?

This is for sure a right wing site, but if you don't believe me, watch the video.

http://www.therightscoop.com/sessions-gets-patty-m...

Vandy vs. NC State

LSU vs. Clemson

Miss State vs. Northwestern

Georgia vs. Nebraska

South Carolina vs. Mich

Florida vs. Louisville

Texas A&M vs. Oklahoma

Ole Miss vs. Pitt

Alabama vs. Notre Dame

For awhile now I have asked exactly how much is a living wage. Well it seems MIT has answered that question for me with a county by county list of 'living wage'.

http://livingwage.mit.edu/

Here's the problem, do liberals really believe that me as a single guy with no children should get paid 9 dollars an hour. While the guy who does the same exact job as I do right beside me should get 28 dollars an hour because he has three kids? Is this liberals idea of fair pay?

Or should we both get 28 dollars an hour, my pay being based on the most kids on the list. So then McDonalds employees, most are kids in school, should get 28 dollars an hour?? Wow, imagine what a big mac would cost then.

I can understand lies about the affects of certain legislature on the future of the country, these are hard to disprove. "This study this, that study that".

But to tell lies that are of history is beyond stupid.

"You know, I heard that death panel argument from Sarah Palin. It seems that every vice presidential debate, I hear this kind of stuff about panels." ----Biden

Obamacare was NEVER discussed, nor were death panels, in the Sarah Palin/Biden debate. It hadn't even been proposed. What, could the idiot not figure out a good way to throw that up without an obvious lie???

Then he says he voted against all that, that being medicare D, tax cuts, AND THE WARS. Well, he was right on the first two, BUT HE DID VOTE FOR THE WARS. DID HE THINK WE WERE TOO DUMB TO FIND THAT OUT????

Check my math, but after running the numbers to see where this figure came from, I realized what a huge lie it is.

2.5 trillion in revenue times 20% in tax cuts = 500 billlion a year times ten years = 5 trillion.

1) The problems with that is that of the 2.5 trillion, only 1.2 trillion comes from income taxes.

2) the second problem is it is not an even 20% tax cut, it is broken down to about a 6% cut for each tax rate. According to the IRS, the top 20% pay 94% of the income taxes, and the bottom 47% pay zero, so the middle 33% pay 6%. So;

1.2 trillion times 94% = 1.128 trillion times 6% = 67 billion a year times 10 years = 670 billion in ten years.

A tax cut to the lower brackets shouldn't even be figured as they pay zero now. Add in a 6% cut for the middle class on the remaining 72 billion and you get about 43 billion over ten years.

713 BILLION IN TEN YEARS IS NOWHERE CLOSE TO 5 TRILLION.

It's a complete lie, and anyone with a calculator can disprove it easily.

I keep hearing people say there is no pro-abortion people, only pro-choice.

There are a few examples that show me different though, such as;

First, the dnc platform used to say, "abortion should be safe, legal, and rare", evidently the new democrat crowd had an issue with the "rare" part, so they didn't include it in their platform.

Second, Tim Tebow became an instant contraversy the minute him and his mom made a superbowl commmercial about abortion. Her premise was that she was tolld she needed an abortion and chose to take the risk and couldn't have been happier with her decision. Nothing in this ' controversial' ad had ANYTHING to do with the legality of abortion, just that it should be a decision not taken lightly.

I believe that pro-choice people are less than fifty percent, while pro-abortion people are greater than fifty percent.

If you believe that ANY deterents to abortions are wrong, your probably a pro-abortion person.

Deterents being trying to offer alternatives such as adoption, trying to talk someone out of an abortion or passing a law that says you have to talk to the doctor alone to make sure parents or a boyfriend are not pressuring you into having an abortion.

I have to admit that I am dumb when it comes to taxes. I use turbo tax and have never itemized my taxes.

But my thought is that most middle class families use maybe two to three deductions, ie, child credit, mortgage. While GE uses everything it can, a lot more than two or three. If you start ending deductions, you run the risk of it being a deduction the middle class uses, with exception to the private jet deductions and such.

So, could we just put a limit of say three or four deductions are allowed, or am I way off on this one. I tried to research it but came up empty, I can't find a list of average deductions used by the middle vs the rich.

" Title I also limits restrictions that a group health plan can place on benefits for preexisting conditions. Group health plans may refuse to provide benefits relating to preexisting conditions for a period of 12 months after enrollment in the plan or 18 months in the case of late enrollment. [3] However, individuals may reduce this exclusion period if they had group health plan coverage or health insurance prior to enrolling in the plan. Title I allows individuals to reduce the exclusion period by the amount of time that they had "creditable coverage" prior to enrolling in the plan and after any "significant breaks" in coverage. [4]. "Creditable coverage" is defined quite broadly and includes nearly all group and individual health plans, Medicare, and Medicaid. [5] A "significant break" in coverage is defined as any 63 day period without any creditable coverage. [6]"

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hipaa#section_6

This is the HIPAA law put in effect by Clinton which says that people can't be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions. The change Obamacare made was to end this exclusion period.

But democrats KEEP harping about how now, because of Obama, insurance companies can't deny coverage for pre-existing conditions.

NO, that's what HIPAA did, not Obamacare. Why the lie dems???

Do they not expect people to be able to research this stuff or what??

Have you heard even one democrat even mention HIPAA or tell us the exact changes Obamacare makes from HIPAA???

"President Barack Obama came to office during an economic crisis, as he has reminded us a time or two. Those were very tough days, and any fair measure of his record has to take that into account. My home state voted for President Obama. When he talked about change, many people liked the sound of it, especially in Janesville, where we were about to lose a major factory. "

"A lot of guys I went to high school with worked at that GM plant. Right there at that plant, candidate Obama said: “I believe that if our government is there to support you … this plant will be here for another hundred years.” That’s what he said in 2008."

"Well, as it turned out, that plant didn’t last another year. It is locked up and empty to this day. And that’s how it is in so many towns today, where the recovery that was promised is nowhere in sight."

What he is blaming Obama of is a failed recovery. NOWHERE in his statement does he say the plant closed because of Obama. He said they were about to lose a major factory DURING Obama's run for president. He said in 2008 the candidate Obama gave a speech and that the plant didn't make it another year. So if you have no idea about when the plant closed, going by Ryan, it could have closed ANYWHERE from that date in 2008 till maybe the very first of 2009. So where is the lie???/??

He never made ANY point in saying the plant closed because of Obama, he is talking about the failed recovery, which has left MANY plants across the country with closed doors.

Is this REALLY the best liberals have???? Are you kidding me???/

This and a gaffe about the difference between 3 hours and 4 hours TWENTY YEARS ago??? What difference does his marathon time mean??? He has already said what the real time was, we wouldn't know that if he didn't tell us now would we??? How did we find out that he gaffed about his time from a marathon TWENTY YEARS AGO,,,, oh that's right,, he told us.

Come on liberals,,, you can do better than this.