cmorg

What condition do you think our country would be in if the right to vote was granted only after passing a basic intelligence test? We do not let those under 18 vote because they are uninformed kids. Convicted felons can't vote, I suppose because they are too stupid to make the right choices. Why not require all potential voters to pass a basic intelligence test?

Now, now. They are the political class and they know what's best for us, even when we don't.

I don't know about that. In the early days, adults blamed violence on music. Then TV and movies were to blame. Now it must be the video games? I still believe that it all comes back to the fact that we do not teach our kids to defend themselves or stand up for themselves - lest they get hurt. We have done a disservice to our children by babying them to the extent that they cannot fend for themselves. Oh. . . About how kids interact with each other, what about social media? Kids don't know how to interact with others, not like they used to. In small circles, s

In regard to how or why the man's name was released, I have heard two different things. One is that under California law, anyone making a political contribution over $100 is to be made public. If it's that simple, then OK. But I have also heard that that law was enacted after this contribution and that the law is not retroactive. If that is the case, then someone should be in trouble.

The idea of "screening" kids is terrible. Aside from moderate to serious emotional issues, the typical child goes through an emotional roller coaster as they develop. With that in mind, on any given day a child may be determined to have a serious issue when there isn't one. But speaking to you jenilyn, the reason people "clutch their guns a little bit tighter" is because the general public's immediate reaction is that the weapon is the problem, not the attacker, and those who own a gun (or maybe a knife?) know that the "good" people of America believe that taking them is the answer

As a side note, I do understand the comments about "banning knives" because it is poking fun at those who think that a ban on guns is the way to prevent gun violence. The people who want to ban guns cannot be convinced that violence will happen with or without guns. I do remember a comment made by someone on TV (I can't remember who) that was about how guns made violence easier, that with a knife there would be fewer victims. As I said, violence will happen and all we can do about it is be ready for it.

No, I wouldn't either. A person never knows what will happen until it happens, and hopefully most will never have to find out. And a serious, non-political correct discussion does need to occur.

First, let me say that I hate that this happened and I hope the victims have a quick recovery. Having said that . . . We do need to discuss how 20 kids got stabbed. Think about it: 20 kids with books, backpacks, some with purses. I can see how the attacker surprised a few kids, maybe even a dozen. But how did this happen to 20 people before an adult was able to stop it? I think part of the reason is that kids are taught to hide, run, or cower, but not to try and stop anything because they might get hurt. And where did that get them? If kids of today were taught

And what would she have done had she gotten the job? Leave them in the car all day, every day until she could afford daycare? Or maybe she would just leave them at home.

The choice you made is obvious.

Micro Center! You can get 7 from Micro Center. I agree that anyone needing to upgrade should make sure their PC will run 7 and run it well. If your system meets the minimum requirements, that just isn't good enough. I also saw where Microsoft was offering a trade-in if you have an XP machine and want a more up-to-date system.

Yes, by design. But thanks for the parting shot!

Well again we agree. If someone ever seriously gets their feelings hurt or gets angry over this stuff, they have more serious issues to be dealt with. Yes, you have your views; yes, I have my views . . . as do we all. But I see this as healthy and fun. And who knows? Maybe somebody will think of things a little differently after its all said and done.

Then are we in agreement on at least this one point: that we wish each other the best, for whatever might be needed? If so, I truly do have only good wishes for you.

Again, an amusing post. Thank you! You say any hate filled post from you is in response to an attack? And I suppose that those people just "attacked" you out of the blue, no reason, just for fun. But since I said that I pity you, that was an attack? That made it ok for your comments about me and other posters, about being neo-cons? All of that, yet you say you have a fabulous life? Sounds to me that you feel the need to put others down so that you can feel better about yourself for the briefest of moments. Maybe you should work on you for a bit. Find your ha

You are right that it is shameful and he should not have been elected. But how is my perspective wrong? He was elected and his past was excused.

You amuse me. Tell me: how many hate filled posts have you read from me? I have read plenty from you. And your posts here are proof that you do, in fact, need pity, though maybe you don't even deserve that. If you assume that I have hate and resentment and participate in hate-filled politics because what I say tends to be conservative, then you help to prove my point about people like you. And the fact that you seem to have taken it so personal just makes it all the more clear. That's really too bad.

I can understand your point. And certainly people will look on anti-gay behavior as bigoted. But I can't help but point out that Robert Byrd served as a representative, then a senator for decades, after being a leader in the KKK. This fact didn't disqualify him from his job, it didn't even raise an eyebrow in his party - because it happened before he took office and "is in the past and has no relevance now" - just a few years after leading his KKK chapter. So tolerance is selective.

No I do not. I know that gays have been and still are discriminated against. But exactly what does that have to do with this? Who suffered discrimination? Did I miss where someone has been denied his or her legal rights to something? I mean, aside from being denied the right to think and feel and have an opinion.

Joke's on you: I have no party affiliation. But you are certainly one of the people I pity.

But back to the original topic. . . According to Google, tolerance is "the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with" Intolerance is an "unwillingness to accept views, beliefs, or behavior that differ from one's own" So the very group that demands tolerance of all is intolerant of everyone who does not agree with them. The fact that this guy was fired sucks, but a company has that right and I am glad that they do. But they shouldn't have fired him. By doing so, they are sho

I suppose if I felt a desperate need to support a weak view, I would seek out "news" reports and post links so everyone would know that I must be correct. The fact is, I don't need somebody else (newsworthy or not) to validate what I feel, what I believe, or how I see things. I don't feel the need to support or strengthen my position/argument with what others say because I am confident and comfortable with my views, yet I listen to others in the event they are able to enlighten me. However, those with opposing views have done little to further or strengthen them.

I don't like his voice at all. Let me be clear: I can't stand it.

People do not crave negativity, they crave truth. And it is not more important to be right than it is to be happy, however the term "ignorance is bliss" does apply to some, for they do not want to know what the facts are because it might make them unhappy. Sadly, much of what is real today is negative, and to dismiss it simply because of it being negative is to turn a blind eye to the problems (or potential problems) and either having to lament over them later or remain ignorant.

I can not click through but I will share my thoughts. It is one thing to have an opinion on these types of things. Just like it is ok for people to hate people of different races or cultures. When you send the check it becomes an act against gay people. Same as burning crosses on lawns it becomes an act. One is illegal of course. The perception of those that support same sex marriage see it as an act against gays. This is the most ridiculous thing you have ever posted. Rather than it being an act to protect and preserve what you feel is right, AKA standing up for what y