Jump to content
Clarify for me: Are you suggesting gays have a higher risk rate toward sexual abuse?
Because I'm going to have to insist you show your math.
While I'm horrified at the widespread sexual abuse in the organization, I think this is a similar set of circumstances to the current gun debate. I.e. passing legislation to "punish" law-abiding people. I don't think dismantling a group of many for the actions of a few is the right course.
A better example could be the Penn State scandal. I don't want to see the unaware students and staff punished for the crimes of a subset of their group.
I do however, think some drastic changes need to be made to the BSA. For starters, the top of the organization needs to be aggressively restructured. Anyone involved in covering up or participating in sexual abuse should be publicly banned from the organization and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Since when is it out of touch to suggest that an organization that receives federal assistance not be discriminatory?
For decades the BSA have received indirect federal support in the form of equipment and free use of government lands/property that other private organizations have to pay for. More recently they’ve received actual money from the Department of Housing(HUD project, $1million) and the US Mint($3.5million). What other private organizations do we allow to receive government funding but still be discriminatory?
It's 2013. It's time for everyone to grow up and stop caring if someone is different from you.
One of the quickest and easiest ways to determine if a website is on the level: look for their SSL certificate. If you look at the web address bar, most sites begin with http://. An encrypted website will begin with https:// . You can see an example of this on your bank or utility company websites.
That 's' in the URL means the website has a valid encryption certificate, which requires the website be reviewed by a reputable web security company. This guy's website would have failed immediately and been red flagged as a scam. Those certificates are extremely difficult to forge. The odds of a website having one and still being a threat are practically non-existent. If you do not see that 's', do not put in your password and certainly do not begin transferring money through that site.
My link was not a lie. Everything I posted was absolutely true. Now admittedly, you did post newer data. I personally don't think the updated estimate is gospel, given that it was built with the anticipation of a Republican repeal. But that's neither here nor there.
The debt was brought up. I pointed out that ObamaCare does not increase US debt. So far you have only posted information that still shows I am correct. Now granted, you continue to object that its simply a tax hike. Given that the tax that pays for the overwhelming majority of the plan is a tax on wealthy health care plans, I'd call that a good tax. But I'm sure you'll grind your teeth in anger over that one. So let's agree to disagree there.
Let me put this back on you: Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid and Defense. 2.2 trillion dollars. You can pull your hair out over Obama's comparatively microscopic programs, but you're only highlighting your party's own ineffectiveness if you have no ideas on fixing the Big Three. So what's your idea on how to fix the actual problem with the US budget?
Did you even read your own article? Even with the CBO's revised predictions(which were operating from a standpoint of expecting a removal of a tax that is still not removed), ObamaCare still reduced the deficit by a few billion.
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
According to the Republican-created Congressional Budget Office, you're wrong. They estimate ObamaCare actually lowering the deficit by $124billion over ten years. But it's cool. I'm sure Neal Boortz has the real scoop.
And was the taco thing intended as a racist remark over my username? Cause I hate to break it to you, buddy: I'm whiter than Wonder Bread. I'm also gainfully employed, a homeowner and tax payer. But your xenophobia is duly noted.
But just for giggles. Let's reverse it and say ObamaCare COSTS $124billion over ten years. I know facts say it doesn't. But let's pretend. At 12.4billion a year, that comes out to .003% of the budget. That'll pay for a whopping six days of our yearly defense budget.
Okay, BuzzG. With the national debt being the concern you raised: enlighten us on which of Obama's new programs you think should be cut to fix our debt?
Last login: Thursday, August 1, 2013