Senate hearing. Barbara Boxer is making up one imaginary statistic after another.
http://www.c-span.org/video/?320038-1/addressing-climate-change
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
- Harris To Win In A Blowout
- Election Results
- “Glaciers, Icebergs Melt As World Gets Warmer”
Recent Comments
- conrad ziefle on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- conrad ziefle on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Terry Shipman on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Bob Gutjahr on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- arn on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- dm on “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- arn on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- Gamecock on Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- William on Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Francis Barnett on Michael Mann Hurricane Update
And a senator to boot.
Who’s with me on repealing the 17th Amendment?
With the 17th amendment’s repeal, state legislators would once again be vested with the power to elect senators so that the power of states is not diluted (as was originally feared by the framers of the Constitution).
.
Nobody is with me?
The Republic is doomed. Nice knowing y’all.
Al’s coming to oz in a couple of weeks. I will aim to connect my fist with his head.
Hopefully on a purely metaphysical level …
.
.
Metaphysics – a traditional branch of philosophy concerned with explaining the fundamental nature of being and the world that encompasses it.
Don’t you have some nice snakes you could introduce him to?
Careful! The dullness rubs off.
Term limits, Term limits, Term limits,
We can do this – the right to petition– 10% is needed, and on this issue I am sure there is a clear majority that would sign.
Thinking of having state chairpersons, who would then solicit chairpersons, perhaps by county.
I think name and address would be adequate.
Sorry Jim, I missed your post initially. I support the repeal.
I’ve been agitating for the repeal of the 17th since I first learned of it in high school history, but as far as I can tell the only way to effect such a thing would be for the states to call a Constitutional Convention. The problem with a Constitutional Convention being called is that the whole shebang (1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, etc) then becomes up for grabs & good luck with that 47%. The only way that a good Amendment will make it through the usual process is if the GOP holds a big majority of both houses, & even then I doubt it.
” The problem with a Constitutional Convention being called is that the whole shebang (1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, etc) then becomes up for grabs ”
From what I have heard, that is not the case …
That is not correct. Please go research what an Article V Convention is all about. NOTHING is “up for grabs”. The process is not unlike a Congressional process of amendment. The Constitution cannot be “re-written” through this process anymore than it can through a Congressional amendment process. The difference with an Article V Convention is that Congress has no control over the process. All 50 states appoint 2 delegates to the convention. During the convention, amendment(s) are hammered out and agreed to by UNANIMOUS consent. Once the articles are adopted by the convention, those articles are then presented to the sovereign states and require a 3/4 majority passage to become an amendment to the Constitution.
An Article V Convention is safer than our conventional Congressional amendment process as “the people” are more likely to have more reflective representation.
Article V Conventions have been tried in the past, but have thus far failed to garner the required number of votes from the state to proceed to convention (37 required I believe). Twice we have been within 1 vote of having the necessary 37. As I understand it, we are currently just 1 vote away from a convention as well. If just 1 state now steps up and agrees to calling a convention, then it would move forward. You will have to go research the details behind these things to get the exact numbers and such, but that is the gist of it.
Fear of an Article V Convention is wholly unfounded and is a scare tactic that has been planted by our legislators in D.C. as they do NOT want an Article V Convention because it pulls the power away from them and gives it to the people, where it belongs.
In my view, the only way to amend the Constitution should be by way of an Article V Convention. If that were the case, you wouldn’t have ended up with so many crappy amendments, like the 14th, the 17th and others. The 17th being a special case in that it is a horrid amendment that should never have happened, as it has successfully pulled more power away from the sovereign states, and further away from the people. Additionally, without the 17th amendment, term limits for the senate would likely be of no consequence since the state legislatures would replace their representation in the Senate much more frequently than by popular vote. This is how our system was designed and how it is supposed to work. The reason why our system is not working so well these days, is because we have changed the process away from the original intended design, in most cases for the worse, not the better.
And by the way _Jim … I absolutely agree with you in ridding ourselves of the 17th amendment. The 17th amendment is a complete travesty.
Squid – I believe he changed his tune based upon his posting of the Levin remarks.
But you are slightly wrong. Amendments can change any part of the Constitution if adopted. So basically the whole shebang is up for grabs. However, getting everyone (or 3/4) to agree is the tough part.
It actually is the truth. However, it still requires agreement of 38 states (3/4). I could possibly with squinty eyes see some things being passed (term limits being one), but I cannot (yet, that may change) see the bill of rights being reversed.
A far better mind than mine has looked at this … brief excerpt follows:
– – – – – – –
[Mark] Levin says in The Liberty Amendments that he used to oppose the idea of the state legislatures convening a convention to propose constitutional amendments.
“I used to buy the argument that it’s a constitutional convention until I actually read Article V,” said Levin.“There is no constitutional convention. It’s a convention for proposing amendments—proposing amendments.”
“I used to think, well, we’ll have a constitutional convention, the people today aren’t nearly as bright as our original Framers, and we’ll have this runaway convention and the change of the government,” said Levin.
But after studying the language and history of Article V, Levin realized this was not the case, and given the current propensity of all three branches of the federal government to ignore the Constitution and its original meaning, he decided the time had come for the state legislatures to call for a convention to propose amendments that would renew the limits on federal power that the Framers intended the original Constitution to impose.
“There can be no runaway convention because three-fourths of the states still need to ratify [the amendments a convention proposes],” said Levin. “But we need to make it clear to the people in Washington that we do have a way out. There is a way forward. The states collectively, pressured by we the people, have enormous power.”
– – – – – –
.
Here. Here.
Levin is absolutely correct in his findings. Our Constitution is designed to ONLY be amended. That is why there was an amendment for prohibition, and an amendment that removed prohibition. This is by design as it gives a road map to the changes to the Constitution over time, reminding us of our mistakes. It continues as a record of our actions. You cannot “change” the Constitution, you can ONLY amend it. And either of the two processes (Congressional or Article V Convention) REQUIRE 3/4 of the states to ratify. So this notion that a convention can spin out of control and rewrite our Constitution is complete and utter bullshit, a fabricated lie by legislators that do not wish to lose their power. An Article V Convention is actually SAFER than a Congressional process (from the view of the people) as it requires UNANIMOUS consent by the delegates on proposed amendments AND still requires 3/4 of the states to ratify. The biggest difference, the dipshits in congress HAVE NO SAY! .. The way it SHOULD be! …. It is OUR (The People’s) Constitution, not the governments! It is to RESTRAIN the government, it is NOT to give it power!
By the way, for the reasons I have stated above, this is why several schools (Progressive of course) are now pushing back against teaching the Constitution and these Constitutional processes in school.
They don’t want future generations to realize that THEY have the power, not the government!
Please fight back against these attempts to dumb down our youth and our populace. We are a nation of PEOPLE, a nation RUN BY THE PEOPLE, not by tyrants and bureaucrats! … We must fight to keep it this way! … we have lost a lot of ground the past several decades, but it is time that we take back OUR power!
I doubt you can restrict the scope of a constitutional convention to some single, narrow area; & any part of the constitution is available for amending, including congressional pay, the office of the Vice President, or the sale & consumption of chemical substances.
That’s nice, so my argument about the 47% stands: you’ll never get a decent amendment past ¾ of the states either. All that NPR, CBS, NYT, et al need to say is that a repeal of the 17th disenfranchises blacks & your LIVs will line up & vote as they’re told.
” I doubt you can restrict the scope of a constitutional convention to some single, narrow area; ”
Your choice of terms in this debate; Nota Bene those issues were not raised by me or Levin. Do not also let the fact that 3/4 of the states must also ratify said proposed amendments, after having been adopted by a 2/3 majority at the ‘convention’.
Maybe your way is better though, as it would save valuable time; we all stay safely in our kennels and wait for our feeding by the block warden …
.
Mark Levin says pretty much what I did. The founders were very smart. They knew that to get 3/4 of the states to agree on anything would be herculean. But just the convention itself might slap some sense into DC (I doubt that), or perhaps just a couple of amendments that limit the feds (until they can figure a way around them).
That’s “Hear, Hear”. Listen up.
_JIm, I mentioned earlier this year that the 17th Amendment, passed in 1913, was one of the three events that killed the USA.
Yeah, and –
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/04/14/a-peek-inside-the-schizophrenic-mind-of-progressives/#comment-339043
I’m with you.
The concept of a Republic of Sovereign States was all but eliminated with the passage of the 17th amendment.
(Obviously, the problem of low-information voters is not novel to our time.)
Just like the 16th Amendment, the 17th never was legally passed.
http://www.rense.com/general95/36_dev.htm
Then again, neither was was the 14th.
Bottom line: our “representatives” have not followed the law for a long time. Repealing the 17th (or the 16th) would make little difference. Don’t get me wrong — philosophically I am with you! Repeal away! But if the states would not stand up for their rights in 1913, will they do so now? I do not think the system can be fixed within the system rules, because the people who run the system are unwilling to follow the rules. I would love to be shown wrong on this, but I think the system has to crash before it can be fixed.
Citing ‘rense’; not a good start … (IOW ‘conspiracy theorist’ writ large)
Hey Jim! I respect your views. Here is the exact same article, written by the exact same person but posted at a different agglomeration site:
http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd522.htm
It is now clean of cooties.
“Urban Legend” stuff; had its start with a book titled “The Law That Never Was: The Fraud of the 16th Amendment and Personal Income Tax” in 1985. Authors William J. Benson and Martin J. “Red” Beckman .
See: “Tax Protest Myths” where this is #1 on the list, as shown below.
http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/tax-protest-myths.html
Myth 1: The 16th Amendment Was Not Properly Ratified
– – – – – – –
The 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1913, and explicitly gives the federal government the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes from any source. Before this, the federal government lacked the constitutional power to collect income taxes.
To become a part of the Constitution, a proposed amendment must be passed by 2/3 of Congress and ratified by the legislatures of ¾ of the states. When individual state legislatures were considering ratifying the amendment, like any other law, each state had to draft a bill and put it to a vote. Each bill contained the full text of the proposed amendment and varied from state to state in spelling, punctuation, or capitalization.
However, the substance of each version of the proposed amendment was identical. Every court that has considered the constitutionality argument of the income tax has flatly rejected it.
– – – – – – – –
Hey Jim! “Urban Legend”? I would disagree — but true or false, it makes little practical difference in this case. Do I pay what the IRS says? You betcha! Why? Not because I feel like I have a legal or ethical duty, but strictly because they have a much bigger and better armed gang than I do. They will kidnap me or kill me if I resist. While there are some things worth dying for, resisting the IRS is not on my list. Same thing with the 17th amendment. Do I plan on storming to DC and stopping the next senatorial inauguration? ahhhhh, no.
Anyway, we may disagree about whether the 16th and 17th amendments were legally passed. As for the 14th… I defy anyone to research the history of its passage and say that it is legal. And no, I am not driving to DC to protest THAT either! 🙂
And since you asked, here is a ‘source’ much closer to the facts and describes the circumstances back in the day of 1913:
– – – – – – – – –
The argument that the 16th Amendment was not ratified is best explained (and refuted) by this quotation from U.S. v. Thomas, 788 F.2d 1250 (7th Cir. 1986), cert. den. 107 S.Ct. 187 (1986):
“Thomas is a tax protester, and one of his arguments is that he did not need to file tax returns because the sixteenth amendment is not part of the constitution. It was not properly ratified, Thomas insists, repeating the argument of W. Benson & M. Beckman, The Law That Never Was (1985). Benson and Beckman review the documents concerning the states’ ratification of the sixteenth amendment and conclude that only four states ratified the sixteenth amendment; they insist that the official promulgation of that amendment by Secretary of State Knox in 1913 is therefore void.
“Benson and Beckman did not discover anything; they rediscovered something that Secretary Knox considered in 1913. Thirty-eight states ratified the sixteenth amendment, and thirty-seven sent formal instruments of ratification to the Secretary of State. (Minnesota notified the Secretary orally, and additional states ratified later; we consider only those Secretary Knox considered.) Only four instruments repeat the language of the sixteenth amendment exactly as Congress approved it. The others contain errors of diction, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. The text Congress transmitted to the states was: “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.” Many of the instruments neglected to capitalize “States,” and some capitalized other words instead. The instrument from Illinois had “remuneration” in place of “enumeration”; the instrument from Missouri substituted “levy” for “lay”; the instrument from Washington had “income” not “incomes”; others made similar blunders.
“Thomas insists that because the states did not approve exactly the same text, the amendment did not go into effect. Secretary Knox considered this argument. The Solicitor of the Department of State drew up a list of the errors in the instruments and–taking into account both the triviality of the deviations and the treatment of earlier amendments that had experienced more substantial problems–advised the Secretary that he was authorized to declare the amendment adopted. The Secretary did so.
“Although Thomas urges us to take the view of several state courts that only agreement on the literal text may make a legal document effective, the Supreme Court follows the “enrolled bill rule.” If a legislative document is authenticated in regular form by the appropriate officials, the court treats that document as properly adopted. Field v. Clark, 143 U.S. 649, 36 L.Ed. 294, 12 S.Ct. 495 (1892). The principle is equally applicable to constitutional amendments. See Leser v. Garnett, 258 U.S. 130, 66 L.Ed. 505, 42 S.Ct. 217 (1922), which treats as conclusive the declaration of the Secretary of State that the nineteenth amendment had been adopted. In United States v. Foster, 789 F.2d. 457, 462-463, n.6 (7th Cir. 1986), we relied on Leser, as well as the inconsequential nature of the objections in the face of the 73-year acceptance of the effectiveness of the sixteenth amendment, to reject a claim similar to Thomas’. See also Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 433, 83 L. Ed. 1385, 59 S. Ct. 972 (1939) (questions about ratification of amendments may be nonjusticiable). Secretary Knox declared that enough states had ratified the sixteenth amendment. The Secretary’ decision is not transparently defective. We need not decide when, if ever, such a decision may be reviewed in order to know that Secretary Knox’ decision is now beyond review.”
– – – – – – –
Of course you would disagree; you are not studied. No offense meant. Pax
.
Well, it is an interesting subject — but I am reminded of something a bit closer to the whole CAGW discussion. I have found over the years that one of the main sources of disagreement between myself and the warmists is over what constitutes believable evidence. More often than not, they will completely discount something I say because they believe that my sources have not creditability. They will say things like “Watts?! You can’t just go believing what WUWT posts! Not everything on the Internet is true, you know!” Meanwhile, they quote Al Gore to me and “An Inconvenient Truth”. You can imagine how much faith I place in that… Neither they nor me are operating in bad faith, but because we do not trust the same group of people, we cannot honestly agree.
I’ve long considered the direct election of senators as one of the key changes that has led to the current condition of this country. State governments choosing senators is an interesting way of using corruption against itself.
Senator Cardin of Maryland just backed her up on the 97%. He says that the good news is that there is no need to debate with the other 3%, because dealing with CAGW is a net job producer and economic benefit.
Idiots, all …
Just like her boss Obama and Swift boat Kerry, the local village fool.
If she had told the truth, I would have been shocked.
Staffer feeds stuff in one ear, comes out the mouth; There is no lay-over for processing in the brain …
There is no brain – just an empty echo chamber.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/1597/confidence-institutions.aspx
A few more months, and Congress will reach the magical 97% consensus of distrust.
I can hardly watch the lying politicians. They have no concept of the truth. To them it is all about “selling”. It is like a high-pressure salesman selling you something you don’t want or need. They will not take “no” for an answer and just keep talking.
The phony politicians are selling “snake-oil”, and much of the public, either not knowing the science, or being irresponsible and willing to let someone else think for them, or both, laps it up.
The Leftist pols make it sound as if there had never been a hurricane before the oil companies sold the first barrel. No one challenges them. The media wants AGW to be true.
And, if the politicians get their way, and raise taxes, and the hurricanes continue, they will just say it would have been much worse if they had not raised taxes. And, no one will challenge them. They have it framed so that they can win any debate. They know all the tricks.
Did someone say something about “phony politicians”?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaZFfQKWX54#t=10
16th and 17th got to go.
I’ll go with that …
I’ll double second that one.
The MSM and nearly all the politicos have abandoned the truth. Especially left-wingers.
The Sunnews Network in Canada [Ezra Levant in particular] is an exception.
http://www.ezralevant.com/
The other place to get the truth is right here on Real Science.
Misplaced priorities – I’m more interested in the factual 100% consensus of Islamic extremists that are currently wreaking havoc on our blue ball right now. Nigerian schoolgirls kidnapped by Muslim extremists get a hashtag from the first lady while supposed global warming gets yet another Senate hearing? Really?
Priorities misplaced I beg to differ. Just yesterday a very important decision was reached concerning the name of the Washington football team. What can be more important than that to the federal government?
Wonder if this will ‘stick’ this time. Patent Office tried the same trick in 1999, but were overturned in 2003 …
Meanwhile, back at the Patent and Trademark Office, those folks have better get busy.
List of sports team names and mascots derived from indigenous peoples
American football – – – – –
Kansas City Chiefs (NFL)
Washington Redskins (NFL) See also: Washington Redskins name controversy
Duluth Eskimos (NFL), now defunct
Baseball – – – – – – – – – –
Atlanta Braves (MLB), originally Boston Braves, then Milwaukee Braves, plus all but one of their minor league affiliates:
Danville Braves
Gulf Coast League Braves
Gwinnett Braves (formerly the Richmond Braves)
Mississippi Braves
Rome Braves
Cleveland Indians (MLB), along with one current minor league affiliate and one defunct affiliate:
Gulf Coast Indians
Kinston Indians (defunct; replaced in 2012 by the Carolina Mudcats)
Indianapolis Indians
Peoria Chiefs—The Peoria Chiefs no longer use indigenous imagery, instead using imagery related to firefighters.
Spokane Indians
Syracuse Chiefs—The team changed its name from “Chiefs” to “SkyChiefs” from 1996–2006, but reverted to “Chiefs” in 2007.
Today’s Chiefs do not use any imagery related to indigenous peoples, instead using railroad image
Indios de Ciudad Juarez (defunct)
Yaquis de Obregón
Caribes de Anzoátegui (Venezuelan Professional Baseball League)
Mayos de Navojoa (Liga Mexicana del Pacifico)
Basketball- – – – – –
Atlanta Hawks (NBA) — Originally Tri-City Blackhawks (1946-1951). The Hawks do not use indigenous imagery.
Buffalo Braves (NBA) — relocated to San Diego, now Los Angeles Clippers. The Clippers do not use indigenous imagery.
Golden State Warriors (NBA) — Originally Philadelphia Warriors, then San Francisco Warriors. The Warriors no longer use indigenous imagery.
Guaiqueríes de Margarita (LPB)
Canadian football- – – – – –
Edmonton Eskimos (CFL)
Ice hockey – – – – – –
Chicago Blackhawks (NHL) – Named for an World War I Infantry Division that in turn was named for Sauk leader, Black Hawk, a prominent figure in the history of Illinois. In 2008, this logo was voted best in the National Hockey League by The Hockey News.
Johnstown Chiefs (ECHL) — Named after the Charlestown Chiefs, the fictional team in the movie Slap Shot (partially shot in the real team’s home city of Johnstown, Pennsylvania). Team moved and became Greenville Road Warriors in 2010.
Frölunda Indians (Swedish Hockey League)
Malmö Redhawks (HockeyAllsvenskan)
Moose Jaw Warriors (WHL)
Portland Winterhawks (WHL)
Spokane Chiefs (WHL)
Chilliwack Chiefs (BCHL)
Lacrosse – – – – – –
Brooklin Redmen
Burlington Chiefs
Kitchener-Waterloo Braves
Elora Mohawks
Mississauga Tomahawks
Six Nations Arrows
Six Nations Chiefs
St. Regis Indians
– – – – – –
I don’t seem to see any of the College athletic teams. For example:
Florida State Seminole’s
North Dakota State Fighting Sioux
Just to name two off the top of my head.
Both of those got the blessings of the Tribes.
Hmmm … College teams, a whole ‘nother ball of wax …
For high schools try
Marquette Redmen
Escanaba Eskymos
These are in the UP of Michigan.
Damn fine research! I am also impressed you knew about the Triple A braves and their former home.
Fortunately none of my teams are there. Raiders, Mets and Lakers (no wise cracks please). I guess they will come for them once they have finished with your list.
The name of the Dallas Team.
Here’s my favorite! The Fighting Whites!
http://www.cafepress.com/fightinwhite
They named the team the “Fighting Whites” to show how hateful such a stereotype was. The result? Everyone — mostly whites — loved it, wanted to buy shirts and gear. Go Fighting Whites!
The 2nd Infantry Division (“Indianhead”)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2nd_Infantry_Division_(United_States)
The 98th Infantry Division (“Iroquois”)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/98th_Infantry_Division_(United_States)
Climate quackery and other globalist pseudo-progressive socialist false prophecies are a mark of the Antichrist to confuse and bring down humanity. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2014/06/how-to-recognize-the-anti-christ.html
What liberals do –
is keep increasing numbers until they finally scare enough people into their predetermined direction, usually meaning more power for them. Several national figures have openly admitted that’s what they did, and yet the buffoon class of voters keep breathing through their mouths and pulling the handle to support these scams. *sigh*
It’s what all power hungry people do. Republicans just pick different things to scare us with.
What always got me is how scientist and the media never mention the positive effects anthropogenic climate change would bring if it was actually happening. Which I believe the positive effects would outweigh the negative ones. It really makes you think what they are trying to scare us from?
Mexican football teams (not futebol) with the name Redskins, Theses guys are Indians.
Mexican Arena League
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Pieles-Rojas-Arena-Football/48417962659
Mexican High School Football
http://www.fotolog.com/football_team/33401093/
Mexican College Football (ONEFA)
https://twitter.com/PielesrojasIPN
TOP OF THE LIST – Indiana! (Indian-ana)
2nd from the top of that list – Indianapolis! Capitol city of Indiana! (h/t Mark Levin)
Libs: conundrums wrapped in contradictions cuddled up with their own guilty feelings …
Illinois is named after an Indian tribe also.
They libz already banned Chief Illinwek from the Fighting Illini. Once you let the libz clown your team you’re done. That’s why the Illini suck so bad.
True that.
So much for freedom of speech.
Wiki has this B.S.
Good grief!
Are these people for real?
“She FELT insulted” not that someone actually insulted her. Is this a college student or some spoiled rotten whiny four year old running to Mommy because someone made a funny face and scared her?
Heck I had more spine than this cry baby when I was six and had to put up with the ostracism caused by going to a brand new school system in a wheelchair for my second grade year. I then spending the rest of my school years in ugly clunky corrective shoes dealing with a new school systems every few years.
I rather put up with the nasty remarks, ostracism and kids deliberately kicking me in my bad leg than this P.C. crap. You learn quick the Universe is NOT a nice place, a lesson everyone needs to learn so Ma Nature doesn’t hand them a Darwin Award instead.
Also this P.C. chip-on-the-shoulder crud has gotten a lot worse since Obummer took office. Now ‘minorities’ go LOOKING for ‘Insults’ so they can dump verbal abuse all over you and if you say a word or walk off and do not fall on your knees and kiss there rosy red rear you just proved you are a ‘racist.’
I have lost three gigs in recent years because I did not apologize hard enough to a rude obnoxious person for some imagined offense and I am very sick and tired of it.
Being Catholic in rural Virginia, I was often met with hostility and animosity. I simply chose to avoid those who would make me feel that way. I did not demand anyone take down signs, change themselves or their outlooks. I understand that freedom means people are free not to like you just because of your religion (RCorC).
What about Virgin(ia)? Such vulgarity! Everyone knows that virginity is anti-PC.
Worse than Indiana – Oklahoma!
Oklahoma is based on Choctaw Indian words which translate as red people
We actually have a state called Redskins!
Didn’t they call these people Indians because they thought they had landed in India ?
Yes
So the story goes.