Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's always sadly amusing when leftwing whackjobs who supposedly Celebrate Diversity dance a jig at the prospect of somebody they dislike being attacked for Being Diverse.
let's see if you can follow this...
no one cares if he's gay. at least no one on the left....
they care if he's gay and spends his time trying to divest other gays of their rights.
it's the hypocrisy that's the problem... not the 'diversity'.
nice try.
Graham is no conservative. He supports cap and tax and amnesty.
So what? Pricing a quantity to better reflect social costs is a market mechanism; same principle as the pollution taxes favored by Milton Friedman. And supporting amnesty just makes him Reaganesque.
It's always sadly amusing when leftwing whackjobs who supposedly Celebrate Diversity dance a jig at the prospect of somebody they dislike being attacked for Being Diverse.
let's see if you can follow this...
no one cares if he's gay. at least no one on the left....
they care if he's gay and spends his time trying to divest other gays of their rights.
it's the hypocrisy that's the problem... not the 'diversity'.
nice try.
I can follow this. It's like when obama bitches about rich people and then lives like rich people or like when jeramiah wright bitches about white people and then move into a gated white community,, just like that..
I don't get why these republicans always have to hide it, just come out. If they did come out, they would save a lot of time and heart ache.
It's always sadly amusing when leftwing whackjobs who supposedly Celebrate Diversity dance a jig at the prospect of somebody they dislike being attacked for Being Diverse.
It's always sadly amusing when leftwing whackjobs who supposedly Celebrate Diversity dance a jig at the prospect of somebody they dislike being attacked for Being Diverse.
let's see if you can follow this...
no one cares if he's gay. at least no one on the left....
they care if he's gay and spends his time trying to divest other gays of their rights.
it's the hypocrisy that's the problem... not the 'diversity'.
nice try.
What "gay rights" Jillian? Specifically.
- Support the constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. (Aug 2008)
- Voted YES on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. (Jun 2006)
- Voted YES on banning gay adoptions in DC. (Jul 1999)
- Rated 0% by the ACLU, indicating an anti-civil rights voting record. (Dec 2002)
- Rated 0% by the HRC, indicating an anti-gay-rights stance. (Dec 2006)
- Rated 11% by the NAACP, indicating an anti-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006)
- Amend Constitution to define traditional marriage. (Jun 2008)
I'm good, that's a fight I'm winning.That being said, my suggestion to homosexuals is "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". Not your sexual preferences, your political party. They might let you in the military, but they will fight tooth and nail to use your sexuality against you if you don't have a "D" in front of your name.
It's always sadly amusing when leftwing whackjobs who supposedly Celebrate Diversity dance a jig at the prospect of somebody they dislike being attacked for Being Diverse.
let's see if you can follow this...
no one cares if he's gay. at least no one on the left....
they care if he's gay and spends his time trying to divest other gays of their rights.
it's the hypocrisy that's the problem... not the 'diversity'.
nice try.
Gays have the exact same rights as everyone else. And you know it.
The idea that they are somehow some underprivileged class is utter nonsense. It's just an attempt for the left to manufacture a cause.
It's always sadly amusing when leftwing whackjobs who supposedly Celebrate Diversity dance a jig at the prospect of somebody they dislike being attacked for Being Diverse.
let's see if you can follow this...
no one cares if he's gay. at least no one on the left....
they care if he's gay and spends his time trying to divest other gays of their rights.
it's the hypocrisy that's the problem... not the 'diversity'.
nice try.
Gays have the exact same rights as everyone else. And you know it.
The idea that they are somehow some underprivileged class is utter nonsense. It's just an attempt for the left to manufacture a cause.
That's a hard one.let's see if you can follow this...
no one cares if he's gay. at least no one on the left....
they care if he's gay and spends his time trying to divest other gays of their rights.
it's the hypocrisy that's the problem... not the 'diversity'.
nice try.
Gays have the exact same rights as everyone else. And you know it.
The idea that they are somehow some underprivileged class is utter nonsense. It's just an attempt for the left to manufacture a cause.
Are you lying or simply woefully ignorant?
Tort reform is a liberal idea. No true conservative would ever vote to give a special interest group more benefits and protections from the government and take away rights of the citizens.
That is a no brainer and anyone that claims to be a conservative and supports tort reform has no clue what conservatism is.
Very disturbing, scary.
"Direct tort costs account for almost 2 percent of GDP in the United Statesthat's the highest in the world," said McQuillan. "These high costs impact American businesses when firms have to divert revenue to fight lawsuits. But all of us ultimately shoulder the burden through higher prices and insurance premiums, lower wages, restricted access to health care, less innovation, and higher taxes to pay for court costs."
"If lawmakers want to put people back to work, without costing taxpayers another penny for so-called 'stimulus', they should enact needed lawsuit reform," added Abramyan. "Job growth was 57 percent greater in the 10 states with the best tort climates than in the 10 states with the worst tort climates."
Read more: And the Best, Worst States for Tort Liability Costs Are...
Tort reform is a liberal idea. No true conservative would ever vote to give a special interest group more benefits and protections from the government and take away rights of the citizens.
That is a no brainer and anyone that claims to be a conservative and supports tort reform has no clue what conservatism is.
Very disturbing, scary.
It depends on how you look at it and how you apply it.
My idea of tort reform is to ensure one has fear of fianncial repercissions if their lawsuit is deemed by a judge to be frivilous.
As you know, Inusrance companies analyze the cost/benefits of defending a suit...and many realize that it would be becost effective to settle as opposed to follow through with the suit; even if it is a sure win.
With this knowledge, Ambulance chaser attorney's with nothing better to do, "take the chance" and charge the client nothing to bring a suit...and only ask for a percentage of the settlement.
In the end, sure...an insurance company can counter sue for puntiive damages and court costs...but from an image standpoint....that would never be in the best interest of the insurance company.
So to me, to allow a judge (or a jury or peers) to determine if a suit is frivilous and levy on the false complaintant a fine that is forwarded to the defendant for his/her time and costs...and not have it be awarded via a counter suit....would most certianly minimize frivilous lawsuits WITHOUT interfering with ones right to sue.
