Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
freshwest
freshwest's Journal
freshwest's Journal
June 7, 2014
American assault troops injured while storming Omaha
On D-Day, US casualties totaled 1465 dead, 3184 wounded, 1928 missing & 26 captured and 2499 were from the US airborne troops.
http://www.chacha.com/question/how-many-american-soldiers-were-killed-on-the-d%26%2345%3Bday-invasion-of-normandy
More numbers here:
The cost of the Normandy campaign was high for both sides. From D-Day to 21 August, the Allies landed 2,052,299 men in northern France.[13] The Allies suffered 209,672 casualties from 6 June to the end of August, including 36,976 killed, 153,475 wounded, and 19,221 missing. The British, Canadians, and Poles suffered 16,138 killed, 58,594 wounded, and 9,093 missing, for a total of 83,825 casualties.
The Americans suffered 20,838 killed, 94,881 wounded, and 10,128 missing, for a total of 125,847 casualties.[13]
The Allies lost 4,101 aircraft and 16,714 airmen killed or missing.[13] Allied tank losses have been estimated at around 4,000, of which approximately half were fighting in American units.[14]
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Operation_Overlord&printable=yes#Allies
TRIGGER WARNING: Numbers and terms don't tell the full story.
A friend whose husband was a paratrooper who was part of D-Day, told me the horrific details of what that day was like. Some stuck with me.
He told her how some of the soldiers, seeing their comrades jump out of the planes being shredded by German gunfire or blown to pieces, dead before they hit the ground, didn't want to jump into that meat grinder.
That gives a meaning to the euphemistic acronym, MIA or missing in action. They were not missing in terms of having left or being lost from their crew mates. Their bodies were missing just like a tiny bird blown to bits by a gunshot blast. They were so vulnerable, and they were some mother's child.
Those who were not there or not in warfare, nor have family to would tell them the facts, as they seldom talk about it, have a hard time grasping just how hideous this all was.
This man was assigned the task of pushing those who resisted jumping out of the plane before jumping himself. He felt guilty, as some of them were blown apart soon afterwards.
He also said how he shot a man in a German uniform who approached his guard post at night and didn't respond to his calls for him to identify himself or say what he wanted.
I'm guessing the man did not speak English or was somehow too upset or afraid to speak. He turned out to be an unarmed, but tall young boy and he cried when he saw what he'd done, but had no time to grieve anything.
The guilt, the horror and the fear from war stole his sleep and turned him into an angry alcoholic who spent many months over the years in VA hospitals before he died. There is a lot of unknown suffering behind all of these wars.
One report I read last night was of a veteran at yesterday's ceremony who wouldn't be dissuaded from 'giving Obama a piece of his mind.' Later he was caught by the same reporter who titled his entry that way and he asked him what did he say to the President. He said he 'thanked Obama for keeping us out of war.'
IMO, he fully knew why.
Thanks, Obama.
D-Day was a horrific day for the veterans. At least they survived to tell the story.
American assault troops injured while storming Omaha
On D-Day, US casualties totaled 1465 dead, 3184 wounded, 1928 missing & 26 captured and 2499 were from the US airborne troops.
http://www.chacha.com/question/how-many-american-soldiers-were-killed-on-the-d%26%2345%3Bday-invasion-of-normandy
More numbers here:
The cost of the Normandy campaign was high for both sides. From D-Day to 21 August, the Allies landed 2,052,299 men in northern France.[13] The Allies suffered 209,672 casualties from 6 June to the end of August, including 36,976 killed, 153,475 wounded, and 19,221 missing. The British, Canadians, and Poles suffered 16,138 killed, 58,594 wounded, and 9,093 missing, for a total of 83,825 casualties.
The Americans suffered 20,838 killed, 94,881 wounded, and 10,128 missing, for a total of 125,847 casualties.[13]
The Allies lost 4,101 aircraft and 16,714 airmen killed or missing.[13] Allied tank losses have been estimated at around 4,000, of which approximately half were fighting in American units.[14]
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Operation_Overlord&printable=yes#Allies
TRIGGER WARNING: Numbers and terms don't tell the full story.
A friend whose husband was a paratrooper who was part of D-Day, told me the horrific details of what that day was like. Some stuck with me.
He told her how some of the soldiers, seeing their comrades jump out of the planes being shredded by German gunfire or blown to pieces, dead before they hit the ground, didn't want to jump into that meat grinder.
That gives a meaning to the euphemistic acronym, MIA or missing in action. They were not missing in terms of having left or being lost from their crew mates. Their bodies were missing just like a tiny bird blown to bits by a gunshot blast. They were so vulnerable, and they were some mother's child.
Those who were not there or not in warfare, nor have family to would tell them the facts, as they seldom talk about it, have a hard time grasping just how hideous this all was.
This man was assigned the task of pushing those who resisted jumping out of the plane before jumping himself. He felt guilty, as some of them were blown apart soon afterwards.
He also said how he shot a man in a German uniform who approached his guard post at night and didn't respond to his calls for him to identify himself or say what he wanted.
I'm guessing the man did not speak English or was somehow too upset or afraid to speak. He turned out to be an unarmed, but tall young boy and he cried when he saw what he'd done, but had no time to grieve anything.
The guilt, the horror and the fear from war stole his sleep and turned him into an angry alcoholic who spent many months over the years in VA hospitals before he died. There is a lot of unknown suffering behind all of these wars.
One report I read last night was of a veteran at yesterday's ceremony who wouldn't be dissuaded from 'giving Obama a piece of his mind.' Later he was caught by the same reporter who titled his entry that way and he asked him what did he say to the President. He said he 'thanked Obama for keeping us out of war.'
IMO, he fully knew why.
Thanks, Obama.
June 6, 2014
Ah, I see in reviewing who you replied to. But I think Ryan and Gohmert are not quite the same:
Although Gohmert is less of a stinking opportunist than Ryan. Louie believes God answers his prayers:
Rep Louie Gohmert: God ‘Answered my Prayers’ by creating the Tea Party
http://freakoutnation.com/2014/02/27/rep-louie-gohmert-god-answered-my-prayers-by-creating-the-tea-party/
Louie Gohmert became a congressman to stop single moms from getting welfare checks.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/09/louie-gohmert-i-became-a-congressman-to-stop-single-moms-from-getting-welfare-checks/
to unhappycamper:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024310161
All the people that will die from this, well, they just don't count as far as he's concerned.
Lyin' Ryan is following the dogma from his goddess, Ayn Rand. Biden didn't care for it at all:
There was a viral RW response to Biden over that debate and we find some denigrating him and his son here. Coincidence or just serendipity for the RW? The tone is the same.
June 6, 2014
by Mandy Van Deven
March 23, 2009
On January 20th the first self-identified feminist was named President of the United States of America. Just two days after taking office, Barack Obama performed his first presidential act of solidarity with women around the world by repealing the Global Gag Rule. Established in 1984 by President Reagan, the Global Gag Rule denies aid to international groups "which perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning." The Global Gag Rule has come to be seen as a litmus test of the current US President's stance on women's rights, though it is just one aspect of the complicated story of the impact of American reproductive rights policy in countries around the globe. [17]
After witnessing the impact of President Bush's reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule, Michelle Goldberg, journalist, author, and long-time critic of the Bush Administration's policies on sexual and reproductive health, decided that a book about the global battle for reproductive justice was long overdue. So she wrote The Means of Reproduction: Sex, Power, and the Future of the World [17].
The cover art depicting a woman holding the Earth on her shoulders is more than appropriate for this deeply-researched, historically-informed examination: fifty years worth of research about four continents has convinced Goldberg that women's oppression is at the crux of many of the world's most intractable challenges. She illustrates how US policies act as a catalyst for or an impediment to women's rights worldwide, and puts forth a convincing argument that women's liberation worldwide is key to solving some of our most daunting problems. "Underlying diverse conflicts - demography, natural resources, human rights, and religious mores - is the question of who controls the means of reproduction," she writes. "Women's intimate lives have become inextricably tied to global forces."
http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2009/03/23/controlling-means-reproduction-an-interview-with-michelle-goldberg/
The war on women is not just a war on women, but on men, too. Men who don't support women's rights are sealing their own fate. But that's what division always does.
Not just an American problem. It is about global control and reducing all of mankind to commodities.
Something you lay out well in your posts on this thread... We must hang together, no matter what the timeline looks like.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110212801
And here I go tooting the horn for Obama again:
Keeping His Promises to the Poor and Vulnerable: Thank You, President Obama!
HHS finalizes rule guaranteeing 100 percent funding for new Medicaid beneficiaries
Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius today announced a final rule with a request for comments that provides, effective January 1, 2014, the federal government will pay 100 percent of the cost of certain newly eligible adult Medicaid beneficiaries. These payments will be in effect through 2016, phasing down to a permanent 90 percent matching rate by 2020. The Affordable Care Act authorizes states to expand Medicaid to adult Americans under age 65 with income of up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level (approximately $15,000 for a single adult in 2012) and provides unprecedented federal funding for these states.
“This is a great deal for states and great news for Americans,” HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said. “Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, more Americans will have access to health coverage and the federal government will cover a vast majority of the cost. Treating people who don’t have insurance coverage raises health care costs for hospitals, people with insurance, and state budgets.”
Today’s final rule provides important information to states that expand Medicaid. It describes the simple and accurate method states will use to claim the matching rate that is available for Medicaid expenditures of individuals with incomes up to 133 percent of poverty and who are defined as “newly eligible” and are enrolled in the new eligibility group. The system is set up to make eligibility determinations as simple and accurate as possible for state programs.
Under the Affordable Care Act, states that cover the new adult group in Medicaid will have 100 percent of the costs of newly eligible Americans paid for by the federal government in 2014, 2015, and 2016. The federal government’s contribution is then phased-down gradually to 90 percent by 2020, and remains there permanently. For states that had coverage expansions in effect prior to enactment of the Affordable Care Act, the rule also provides information about the availability of an increased FMAP for certain adults who are not newly eligible.
The rule builds on several years of work that HHS has done to support and provide flexibility to states’ Medicaid programs ahead of the 2014 expansion, including:
* 90 percent matching rate for states to improve eligibility and enrollment systems;
* More resources and flexibility for states to test innovative ways of delivering care through Medicaid;
* More collaboration with states on audits that track down fraud; and
* Specifically outlining ways states can make Medicaid improvements without going through a waiver process.
For more information on the improvements made to Medicaid, please visit:
http://www.medicaid.gov/State-Resource-Center/Events-and-Announcements/Downloads/MMF_Jan-Dec-2012_FINAL.PDF
For the full text of today’s final rule, please go to:
http://www.ofr.gov/inspection.aspx
http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2013pres/03/20130329a.html
This is a huge relief to those who would not be covered for conditions no one can afford. I will be passing this good news along to those who have loved ones dependent on Medicaid.
This is what the GOP wanted to slash and are doing in every state that they control. It will save the lives of many people we may never meet, but they are our fellow sojourners.
Thanks to ProSense for finding this story and letting me post it here. She posted it in GD, where you can see it here:
HHS finalizes rule guaranteeing 100 percent funding for new Medicaid beneficiaries
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2584523
http://www.democraticunderground.com/11028481
Another one, because I can't find the quote about his mom:
Some people have little imagination outside of what media manufactures for them. They don't see outside that narrow box, they don't acknowledge the lives of those who support this president and others like them. They have that luxury.
And even if they claim to have gained knowledge from CTers, youtube, and the many voices that fire them up, all they end up doing is to direct their hatred outside themselves. One has to wonder why all the disdain, vitriol and accusations which they are very practiced at, are so precious to them.
A past member of a Nazi group made an analogy between men who blame women for what's making them unhappy, under the guise of their rights being taken away. That is a deflection from taking responsibility, saying that if women changed, shut up or went away, they would be free. We see this played out again and again. But it doesn't work that way, and you and I both know that.
He said that the sign of a hate group is that instead of advocating positively for their rights and seeking solutions, they blame others. That is where their energy goes and is his defintion of a hate group. He ought to know what one is, I think.
I've quoted from a U2 song they sang to Obama in this first inauguration:
'And I miss you when you're not around...'
He won't always be around.
So enjoy the grace that he has afforded us with his intellect, his heart and his determination. I began to miss him already when he won re-election, and still appreciate your words in 2012.
HRC will be somewhat like him, but there will never be another Obama. The stars were for us, I guess. Anyway, hope you enjoy all of that.
:) Alhough she won't be the First Feminist President. Hope you enjoy this:
The First Feminist President, Barack Obamaby Mandy Van Deven
March 23, 2009
On January 20th the first self-identified feminist was named President of the United States of America. Just two days after taking office, Barack Obama performed his first presidential act of solidarity with women around the world by repealing the Global Gag Rule. Established in 1984 by President Reagan, the Global Gag Rule denies aid to international groups "which perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning." The Global Gag Rule has come to be seen as a litmus test of the current US President's stance on women's rights, though it is just one aspect of the complicated story of the impact of American reproductive rights policy in countries around the globe. [17]
After witnessing the impact of President Bush's reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule, Michelle Goldberg, journalist, author, and long-time critic of the Bush Administration's policies on sexual and reproductive health, decided that a book about the global battle for reproductive justice was long overdue. So she wrote The Means of Reproduction: Sex, Power, and the Future of the World [17].
The cover art depicting a woman holding the Earth on her shoulders is more than appropriate for this deeply-researched, historically-informed examination: fifty years worth of research about four continents has convinced Goldberg that women's oppression is at the crux of many of the world's most intractable challenges. She illustrates how US policies act as a catalyst for or an impediment to women's rights worldwide, and puts forth a convincing argument that women's liberation worldwide is key to solving some of our most daunting problems. "Underlying diverse conflicts - demography, natural resources, human rights, and religious mores - is the question of who controls the means of reproduction," she writes. "Women's intimate lives have become inextricably tied to global forces."
http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2009/03/23/controlling-means-reproduction-an-interview-with-michelle-goldberg/
The war on women is not just a war on women, but on men, too. Men who don't support women's rights are sealing their own fate. But that's what division always does.
Not just an American problem. It is about global control and reducing all of mankind to commodities.
Something you lay out well in your posts on this thread... We must hang together, no matter what the timeline looks like.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110212801
And here I go tooting the horn for Obama again:
Keeping His Promises to the Poor and Vulnerable: Thank You, President Obama!
HHS finalizes rule guaranteeing 100 percent funding for new Medicaid beneficiaries
Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius today announced a final rule with a request for comments that provides, effective January 1, 2014, the federal government will pay 100 percent of the cost of certain newly eligible adult Medicaid beneficiaries. These payments will be in effect through 2016, phasing down to a permanent 90 percent matching rate by 2020. The Affordable Care Act authorizes states to expand Medicaid to adult Americans under age 65 with income of up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level (approximately $15,000 for a single adult in 2012) and provides unprecedented federal funding for these states.
“This is a great deal for states and great news for Americans,” HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said. “Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, more Americans will have access to health coverage and the federal government will cover a vast majority of the cost. Treating people who don’t have insurance coverage raises health care costs for hospitals, people with insurance, and state budgets.”
Today’s final rule provides important information to states that expand Medicaid. It describes the simple and accurate method states will use to claim the matching rate that is available for Medicaid expenditures of individuals with incomes up to 133 percent of poverty and who are defined as “newly eligible” and are enrolled in the new eligibility group. The system is set up to make eligibility determinations as simple and accurate as possible for state programs.
Under the Affordable Care Act, states that cover the new adult group in Medicaid will have 100 percent of the costs of newly eligible Americans paid for by the federal government in 2014, 2015, and 2016. The federal government’s contribution is then phased-down gradually to 90 percent by 2020, and remains there permanently. For states that had coverage expansions in effect prior to enactment of the Affordable Care Act, the rule also provides information about the availability of an increased FMAP for certain adults who are not newly eligible.
The rule builds on several years of work that HHS has done to support and provide flexibility to states’ Medicaid programs ahead of the 2014 expansion, including:
* 90 percent matching rate for states to improve eligibility and enrollment systems;
* More resources and flexibility for states to test innovative ways of delivering care through Medicaid;
* More collaboration with states on audits that track down fraud; and
* Specifically outlining ways states can make Medicaid improvements without going through a waiver process.
For more information on the improvements made to Medicaid, please visit:
http://www.medicaid.gov/State-Resource-Center/Events-and-Announcements/Downloads/MMF_Jan-Dec-2012_FINAL.PDF
For the full text of today’s final rule, please go to:
http://www.ofr.gov/inspection.aspx
http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2013pres/03/20130329a.html
This is a huge relief to those who would not be covered for conditions no one can afford. I will be passing this good news along to those who have loved ones dependent on Medicaid.
This is what the GOP wanted to slash and are doing in every state that they control. It will save the lives of many people we may never meet, but they are our fellow sojourners.
Thanks to ProSense for finding this story and letting me post it here. She posted it in GD, where you can see it here:
HHS finalizes rule guaranteeing 100 percent funding for new Medicaid beneficiaries
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2584523
http://www.democraticunderground.com/11028481
Another one, because I can't find the quote about his mom:
Some people have little imagination outside of what media manufactures for them. They don't see outside that narrow box, they don't acknowledge the lives of those who support this president and others like them. They have that luxury.
And even if they claim to have gained knowledge from CTers, youtube, and the many voices that fire them up, all they end up doing is to direct their hatred outside themselves. One has to wonder why all the disdain, vitriol and accusations which they are very practiced at, are so precious to them.
A past member of a Nazi group made an analogy between men who blame women for what's making them unhappy, under the guise of their rights being taken away. That is a deflection from taking responsibility, saying that if women changed, shut up or went away, they would be free. We see this played out again and again. But it doesn't work that way, and you and I both know that.
He said that the sign of a hate group is that instead of advocating positively for their rights and seeking solutions, they blame others. That is where their energy goes and is his defintion of a hate group. He ought to know what one is, I think.
I've quoted from a U2 song they sang to Obama in this first inauguration:
'And I miss you when you're not around...'
He won't always be around.
So enjoy the grace that he has afforded us with his intellect, his heart and his determination. I began to miss him already when he won re-election, and still appreciate your words in 2012.
HRC will be somewhat like him, but there will never be another Obama. The stars were for us, I guess. Anyway, hope you enjoy all of that.
June 6, 2014
In certain religious contexts evil has been described as a supernatural force.[1]
Since I'm not religious, I don't see it in that way. Those who are still wrestling with religion will be unable to see it any other way, it is their battle, pro or con, and not mine. My definition falls within this one listed here:
Definitions of evil vary, as does the analysis of its root motives and causes.[2] However, elements that are commonly associated with evil involve unbalanced behavior involving expediency, selfishness, ignorance, or neglect.[3]
Clearly, the character that OP is talking about fits within all of those and I'll call him evil. Just as I think this woman would:
I believe that ignorance is the root of all evil. And that no one knows the truth.
~ Molly Ivins
In cultures with Manichaean and Abrahamic religious influence, evil is usually perceived as the dualistic antagonistic opposite of good, in which good should prevail and evil should be defeated.[4] In cultures with Buddhist spiritual influence, both good and evil are perceived as part of an antagonistic duality that itself must be overcome through achieving Śūnyatā meaning emptiness in the sense of recognition of good and evil being two opposing principles but not a reality, emptying the duality of them, and achieving a oneness.[4]
I am closer to that view, since many ideologies and mantras seem to be a game that is immediately discarded when someone points it out as it loses the element of chance and mystery. The alternative I embrace is choice. When one realizes one has a choice to believe or not, it no longer has any power.
The philosophical question of whether morality is absolute, relative, or illusory leads to questions about the nature of evil, with views falling into one of four opposed camps: moral absolutism, amoralism, moral relativism, and moral universalism.
Which pretty much falls on its ass as some simply repeat and act on what they see and hear, without reflection or compass as to what is right or wrong outside their own self interest to maintain their position in a dog pack. They just parrot what they hear and they don't think ahead or have empathy.
As far as such things as killing, raping, robbing, destroying a person or their community and the environment, which ruins the lives or the capacity to exist freely and thrive, I'll continue calling that evil as it is anti-thetical to the opportunity to live and pursue happiness and find meaning within the limited framework that the body, emotions and mind allows us to have.
I find our real problem is defining what is good and standing up for it in the media environment we live within, a polluted ocean of memes that tell us to FUD anything we want to go higher in life. Because we know in advance we'll be called stupid for doing so as the howling monkey pack is not in favor of it.
While the term is applied to events and conditions without agency, the forms of evil addressed in this article presume an evildoer or doers.
Some say there is a spirit of evil, without agency or body, infecting the world. For some it's satan, for some it's human invention or humans themselves. This guy isn't embodying an ethereal supernatural agency. He is a selfish, short sighted asshole who was put into power by his spiritual kin, and by spirit I mean emotionally.
Definitions from this link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil
Asking him that was my first thought, but evil is not always a supernatural concept.
Evil, in its most general context, is taken as the absence or complete opposite of that which is ascribed as being good. Often, evil is used to denote profound immorality.[1]In certain religious contexts evil has been described as a supernatural force.[1]
Since I'm not religious, I don't see it in that way. Those who are still wrestling with religion will be unable to see it any other way, it is their battle, pro or con, and not mine. My definition falls within this one listed here:
Definitions of evil vary, as does the analysis of its root motives and causes.[2] However, elements that are commonly associated with evil involve unbalanced behavior involving expediency, selfishness, ignorance, or neglect.[3]
Clearly, the character that OP is talking about fits within all of those and I'll call him evil. Just as I think this woman would:
I believe that ignorance is the root of all evil. And that no one knows the truth.
~ Molly Ivins
In cultures with Manichaean and Abrahamic religious influence, evil is usually perceived as the dualistic antagonistic opposite of good, in which good should prevail and evil should be defeated.[4] In cultures with Buddhist spiritual influence, both good and evil are perceived as part of an antagonistic duality that itself must be overcome through achieving Śūnyatā meaning emptiness in the sense of recognition of good and evil being two opposing principles but not a reality, emptying the duality of them, and achieving a oneness.[4]
I am closer to that view, since many ideologies and mantras seem to be a game that is immediately discarded when someone points it out as it loses the element of chance and mystery. The alternative I embrace is choice. When one realizes one has a choice to believe or not, it no longer has any power.
The philosophical question of whether morality is absolute, relative, or illusory leads to questions about the nature of evil, with views falling into one of four opposed camps: moral absolutism, amoralism, moral relativism, and moral universalism.
Which pretty much falls on its ass as some simply repeat and act on what they see and hear, without reflection or compass as to what is right or wrong outside their own self interest to maintain their position in a dog pack. They just parrot what they hear and they don't think ahead or have empathy.
As far as such things as killing, raping, robbing, destroying a person or their community and the environment, which ruins the lives or the capacity to exist freely and thrive, I'll continue calling that evil as it is anti-thetical to the opportunity to live and pursue happiness and find meaning within the limited framework that the body, emotions and mind allows us to have.
I find our real problem is defining what is good and standing up for it in the media environment we live within, a polluted ocean of memes that tell us to FUD anything we want to go higher in life. Because we know in advance we'll be called stupid for doing so as the howling monkey pack is not in favor of it.
While the term is applied to events and conditions without agency, the forms of evil addressed in this article presume an evildoer or doers.
Some say there is a spirit of evil, without agency or body, infecting the world. For some it's satan, for some it's human invention or humans themselves. This guy isn't embodying an ethereal supernatural agency. He is a selfish, short sighted asshole who was put into power by his spiritual kin, and by spirit I mean emotionally.
Definitions from this link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil
June 5, 2014
I'm surprised that one of the concussions wasn't given to him by Biden in that debate:
Don't tell me what you value, show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value. ~ Joe Biden
June 5, 2014
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/news/feds-respond-to-splc-revive-domestic-terrorism-working-group
Good golly, my search result were skewed so far to the right I could barely find this on a page full of Infowars, Breitbart, World Nut Daily and other conservative sites attacking the SPLC.
Here's the link:
Feds respond to SPLC, revive domestic terrorism working grouphttp://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/news/feds-respond-to-splc-revive-domestic-terrorism-working-group
Good golly, my search result were skewed so far to the right I could barely find this on a page full of Infowars, Breitbart, World Nut Daily and other conservative sites attacking the SPLC.
June 5, 2014
This is their idea of fun.
Or a drone!!11!!! Their inspiration comes from a well-funded culture:
This is their idea of fun.
Profile Information
Member since: Fri Dec 10, 2010, 11:36 PMNumber of posts: 53,661
