Jump to content

Jeerleader

Member
  • Content Count

    408
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Previous Fields

  • Political Party:
    Conservative

Profile Fields

  • Website URL
    http://www.pagunblog.com/

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Upper Bucks County, PA
  • Interests
    Surf Fishing, Hunting, Shooting, Political Debate

Recent Profile Visitors

1,055 profile views
  1. I've been making that point often here; if only young Black men could "act White" thousands of lives could be saved. It's obvious the hip-hop / gangsta rap / thug-life act is deadly. If Black males aged 15-29 were murdered at the same rate as non-Hispanic White males aged 15-29, there would have been 279 instead of 4,578 young Black men being murdered in 2017, a 94% reduction. 2017 statistics using CDC's WIQARS Fatal Injury Reports: White Males 15-29 18,876,039 population 949 homicides 5.8% of US population / 4.86% of total homicides 5.03/100K ra
  2. Wife and I both had COVID back in November, I tested positive on the 25th. Both of us had about the same 6 days symptoms, wife's were a little less extreme. Mine were hell; fever, sweats, complete exhaustion and the worst aches and back and joint stiffness I've ever had, it really kicked my ass. Those symptoms resolved and I felt pretty good for 4 days and then shortness of breath set in, pulse-O2 dropped into the upper 80's and went to the hospital and spent 5 days there, receiving Remdesivir and Dexamethasone. I had a few weeks into the end of January of not feeling right, general weakne
  3. That's funny. My interactions with you end with you banning yourself, by abandoning your statements and position and just running away . . . I've been enjoying on-line political debate for 30+ years, started on USENET in talk.politics.guns. Liberals used to be able to debate, actually debate back them; now all it is snark and personal attacks and smug unearned, undeserved air of superiority in ignorance. Liberals back then at least ran their positions through the logical part of their brains; today's LEFTISTS are incapable of logical thought and utterly i
  4. It's real, I'm just being sarcastic. Here's the Congressional page, it has one co-sponsor, Crazy Maxine! https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1598/text
  5. But, but, but, that was in that horribly biased article and it was uploaded to scribd by the author of that horribly biased article in the OP! How do you know it is real?
  6. And look what you did, you went off and googlefuckedyourself and brought back completely irrelevant info and misrepresented it as being directly 'on topic'. What you drug back here doesn't speak to the subject of the article in the OP and only has a tangential relationship to the topic of the thread -- in a kinda-sorta-kinda, 'here's what states and cities are doing when they restrict employers asking about criminal history' . . . Overall, a half-hearted attempt with sub-mediocre results not worthy of all the cockstrutting and preening you are doing . . . At least yo
  7. No, you didn't. That gives info on the laws that exist in some states and cities, it does not speak to the proposed federal law.
  8. The law as written makes no such allowance. Because the dumbasses who wrote the law are career politicians, assisted by restorative justice / social justice warriors who have never held an actual job let alone run a business and would understand the implications of the law hey are writing. What money???? The JAG grant being withheld isn't just for background checks . . . anymore than the highway funds threatened to be withheld if states didn't adopt a 55mph speed limit was the money to pay for 75mpg speed limit signs . . . It was for, is for, everything!
  9. The article linked in the OP is a straight news piece. There is no slant, bias or steering. I can understand why you feel withdrawing from the discussion is the correct move for you, I agree.
  10. That's not the condition, it isn't "rescinded it's offer". I accept your point that his law speaks to running the check before employment. This means the applicant MUST be hired without any consideration (or even knowledge) of their criminal history. That criminal history is not a recognized exclusionary fact for hire, it can't be a justification for termination, thus, any termination because of a now employee's criminal history is wrongful, thus the employer is open to legal action. Well, read the law. I barely skimmed the article, I read the law (in the pdf
  11. You have posted 426 words in this thread in 6 messages and haven't said a word about the law or its effect . . . and now you are at TTTTTTTTTTrump!
  12. That "right-wing bias" is decried by Raw Story is the kind of cognitive dissonance that makes discussion impossible. Never address the reporting, only denigrate the reporter, that's what serves as "debate" with the left.
  13. By all means, link a story giving the left-leaning take on this law. That only "biased" outlets are covering a story is sometimes proof that outlets leaning the other way are ignoring the story (usually because it exposes flaws in reasoning or abandonment of principles). That reporting on this law can't be found in the DEMedia doesn't mean it isn't a proposed law or even that the "biased" outlet's reporting is wrong. Just dismissing out of hand all reporting coming for opposing sources is insular and perpetuates ignorance. If you have an issue with the reporting, st
×
×
  • Create New...