There are no bipartisan issues anymore. There are the bat **** crazy left and sane people. They are incapable of reaching common grounds on ANY issues. I was naive once but no longer. The bat **** crazy left will never look for compromise.
It doesn't heal bat **** crazy leftist either. Don't forget who let Islmaic religious crazies into Europe in the first place and the same political ilk are welcoming them into America now.
Yep, just look at Osama bin Laden, Mohamed Atta, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, etc. You might want to check out this article (I know it is from the Daily Mail, but they are quoting MI5. As to the original question, of course there are bipartisan issues, they just don't get much coverage because most everyone already agrees on them. There are bills that pass without a single nay vote.
Yep. it is on the bat **** crazy left and always has been. This country made it for over two centuries before the left came to power and the results speak for themselves. Thanks for posting leftist. I know I can never take you seriously again. I would put you on ignore but I get too much fun from the laughs leftist provide.
You can name a few guys out of over a billion Muslims and can post a broken link.... You win. Don't you think there aren't any sure-fire ways eliminate radicals? For some reason educating women really upsets ISIS and Boko Haram, however.
I googled the claim about M16 and educated radicals and did actually find what you are talking about, Why do so many terrorists have engineering degrees?. However, it merely follows the logical conclusion that as terrorist groups become more sophisticated they need to get more educated people and that these regions were these terrorists come from merely produce a lot of engineers. I still stand by my education and wealth statement that you initially replied.
I know all this liberal hating is all-consuming, but don't forget to make some time to love thy neighbor. And please console yourself and behold the spoils you have actually already won. The left never "came to power." This country, in its politics and government policies, have been moving rightward pretty much since Johnson. Don't let a few trifles like gay marriage fool you. Especially when it comes to economics and tax policy. This is why you should be rejoicing: gilded age style wealth accumulation, union destruction, and class separation. This is exactly what you and the Kochs and Rush and the others really wanted. You've won, and you should at least enjoy it instead of gnashing your teeth about ineffectual "liberals," if you can find any.
Sorry, but it isn't "the left" that refuses to compromise. Look to the party that set the record for filibusters for that one.
This is where American voters are at today people. You will also find leftist extremists mirroring this same viewpoint against the far right. The big two parties couldn't possibly be more moderate and yet the voterbase is teetering off into extremism on either end.
(might as well continue to derail) Because the more educated you are, the more you likely to behave in strange way?? I'm semi serious. People who gain knowledge and awareness around them in certain way is even more likely to question and revolt against society, authority and have seriously extreme view. Bliss in ignorance and merrily go about or tormented in awareness (of whatever you view as unfair, unjust, ..) and this is when much responsibility lies within self to discern what is what and when that fail... Olivier Roy, an expert in Islam from France, has an interesting take on Islamic terrorists - Islamization of radicalism. Not completely tied to being educated, but it is somewhat and he talk about the anti-society, anti-world group that are attractive to certain people, about using Islam as the framework for radicalization, about how being more religious is less likely to be radicalize... and so on. Very interesting read: http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/01/07...ist-complex-charlie-hebdo-islamic-state-isis/ http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...lando_and_the_islamization_of_radicalism.html
The link works for me, it is to a daily mail article that quotes a British intelligence report stating two thirds of terrorist suspects come from middle to upper class families and are not uneducated. If two thirds of terrorists have wealth and education, then it is hard to say that wealth and education have a mitigating effect on religious fanaticism (at least of the sort that leads to terrorism). If it did, the vast majority of terrorists should be poor and ignorant.
I think that now that both the Democratic and Republican Benghazi investigations have cleared Clinton (again) we can all agree the GOP wasted our time and money for the last several years.
Considering Clinton refused to turn over state business related emails stored on her personal email server, the whole truth may never be determined. There is no denying that multiple requests for additional security were repeatedly met with no response or refusals. The House Benghazi Committee report doesn't directly blame Clinton for the attacks. It does however suggest she and other administration officials did not adequately address the risks involved. You certainly won't find any indication of "the buck stops here" for this administration.
As a review of policies and procedures that led to tragedy the Congressional investigation is useful. It's not useful to assess "blame' to one person though. State and the military are huge organizations with a massive set of protocols; they don't just work by individual decree. All processes need review and revision.
I agree that assessing blame to one person should not be the goal of the investigation. As a voter I would like to be able to assess the leadership of the people that were involved in that process when that leadership failed to protect Americans and they were killed. One of the leaders in that failed process is in the process of being elected the leader of our country. I would like to know if that person when given the chance to lead in the past has performed their duties properly or not. In this case the lack of leadership may or may not have directly caused the death of Americans but it certainly didn't stop those deaths or we wouldn't be having this conversation. The worst part in my mind is the attempt to misinform the American people into believing that this was the result of a movie and even after that was proven to be false, never accepting any responsibility for their actions or in this case inaction. I do not believe that a person who is unable to accept responsibility for the failures on their watch is a leader worthy of the office of POTUS. I'm not saying that I believe this responsibility should fall solely on the shoulders of the SOS, but somebody in the administration should have been able to stand up and say that we failed these Americans and we will do whatever we have to do to make sure that it never happens again. I think the American people would have accepted that much better that what seems like an extended game of CYA by everyone involved. This same game of CYA is going on over the private email server and IMO the only reason that server was installed in the first place was to provide the opportunity to hide the truth if necessary. I can not accept a person as POTUS that has proven time and again that they are willing put their own interests ahead of the country.
