Pretentious And Progressive

It's funny how the party who criticizes Bernie Sanders for promising "free stuff", want to strengthen our military and fight a war that we can not win, while we are in $16 trillion of debt, without making people pay a penny more in taxes. Free stuff, am I right?

Often times, when you have sex, eggs get fertilized and simply do not attach to the womb. If you want to cut funding on planned parenthood because you believe that life begins at conception, just know that, by your logic, you have likely committed infanticide. Good luck repenting for that.

Chris Chistie- "Oh you want to know what I want to eat? Well I'll tell ya one thing. I certainly DO NOT WANT WHAT HILLARY CLINTON IS HAVING!!"

Ok wait, so cops are outraged that Quentin Tarantino spoke out against police brutality? Shouldn't cops be against police brutality too? Shouldn't literally everyone on earth be against police brutality?

If you are voting for Ben Carson because he swears to make America a Christian nation (which is a legitimate part of his platform), you are in the wrong country. If you want to live in a country that is governed on religious principles, I suggest moving to Iraq.

I'm glad that everyone who doesn't care about veterans is suddenly pretending to care about veterans!

When you go on television and blatantly lie to 20 million people, saying that Planned Parenthood sells baby parts and a far right, anti-choice conservative shoots up a Planned Parenthood saying "no more baby parts", it's safe to say that you are at fault.

Argument #5- "gun control will only take away law abiding gun owners firearms." Translation- "I don't actually even know what gun control is or what it does but Obama talks about and Obama is a Muslim so I don't agree with it."

Also, if Jesus existed, he didn't look like a hippie who listened to the Grateful Dead. He looked more like a Syrian refugee.

I'm not one to accommodate conspiracies but the DNC's attempt to sabotage Bernie Sanders is actually the saddest, most blatant thing I think i've ever seen. I support Bernie. That said, I have no problem with Hillary. If she was winning fair and square, I would have no problem, but burying debates on Saturdays (the day that is notorious in politics for hiding things that you don't want people to see) and exploiting a non-scandal that was really your fault to try and discredit the Sanders campaign is not "fair and square". Bernie's already gaining in the polls at an incredibly fast pace, imagine where he'd be if the race was being conducted in a way that was even remotely objective.

@ The latest mass shooting that occurred in San Bernadino was noteworthy for a multitude of reasons: It marked more mass shootings than days in the year 2015, it was the largest terror attack on United States soil since 9/11, and it offered a lot more leverage for both political parties to further their agendas, given that this one involved people in cahoots with ISIL. Being the die-hard, fed up liberal that I am, I took to Facebook to argue the same arguments for gun control that everyone, liberal or conservative, has heard 1,000 times. I, as well as my like-minded colleagues, argued that, statistically, countries with more guns have more gun violence, I pointed out that Britain and Australia have still yet to see any mass shootings since they banned guns, I asserted that there was no reason for ordinary citizens to have assault weapons and I even called out the sheer lunacy in allowing someone on the no-fly list to buy a gun. Let’s face it guys, as logical as these arguments may be, they’re getting redundant. For the past several years we’ve heard these same refutes over and over again. Isn’t it time for something new? Thankfully, we now have an argument that has absolutely no holes, it is powerful and irrefutable, completely objective and entirely reasonable. It is sure to decimate any and all pro-gun arguments that even the most stubborn of conservatives can concoct. Who is the liberal mastermind who came up with this ingenious plan, you ask? Was it Bernie Sanders? Jon Stewart? Oprah? Nope. It was GOP presidential candidate, Marco Rubio. Rubio began his fateful Fox and Friends appearance with a completely illogical tangent against “liberal media”, to reassure his colleagues that though he will soon propose the most effective argument for gun control the world has ever seen, he is still, undoubtedly, Republican. After this unwarranted, inappropriate digression, Rubio introduced his revolutionary argument. “I don’t hear anyone talking about bomb control”, he started in, before informing the panel that the terrorists had homemade bombs that did not end up detonating. Now, on the surface this may not seem as ingenious as I’ve made it out to be, but when we dive a little deeper, we see how utterly innovative it is. To understand how truly smart it is, you must first be familiar with one of the right’s favorite pro-gun arguments: “If you make guns illegal, criminals will still get them”. In the United States, we have the most extreme form of “bomb control” that you can possibly have; They are entirely illegal. You can not go to the store and purchase a bomb with little to no regulation like you can with, for example, a candy bar, spray paint or a gun. Theoretically, the only way to get a bomb would be on the black market. Many conservatives, Marco Rubio included, suggest that the same would happen with guns. If you make them illegal, criminals could still get them on the black market. Now here’s the problem with that, as Rubio graciously pointed out. If criminals will still get illegal things when they’re illegal, why didn’t these terrorists, who were hellbent on killing people, just go buy RPG’s or some other form of military grade bomb? Why did they have to resort to homemade pipe bombs that proved completely and totally ineffective? Could it be, perhaps, because RPG’s are illegal and obtaining illegal things isn’t quite as easy as Republicans might want you to think?