FOX tries to be “fair and balanced.” That means they’re going to ask questions conservatives want answered and questions liberals want answered. Don’t ignore the left’s talking points. Address them. And Cruz was brilliant, as usual, pointing out why the question is a distraction – meant to take attention away from the real issue.
August 27, 2015 at 8:30am
“the sole goal of those Fox moderators was to bring down Trump’s candidacy” – jeffersen
They asked him a few tough questions (really only one) and suddenly their sole goal is to bring down Trump? Really?
Whoever gets the republican nomination is going to be accused of: the war on women, hating the poor, wanting dirty air and water, getting into bed with the wealth, etc., etc. You know – the typical talking points of the DNC. These debates are as much a vetting process as anything else. We want to (WE NEED TO) see how these candidates are going to stand up to that heat. So far Trump is not acting presidential.
I “get” that people are tired of politicians. I “get” that they want someone who will just answer the !$^#%^&* question. I “get” that they want someone who is going to go to war with the establishment.
But do you really want to take someone who can’t keep his cool with Megyn Kelly over one tough question and put him in control of the largest nuclear arsenal on the planet?
[-1] August 21, 2015 at 4:20pm
Hey J-Mo… how about you just keep writing response after response stating that they were breaking the city noise ordinance. Even though you have no evidence whatsoever of that. Surely people will buy into it after a while. What did the KGB say: “Tell a lie a thousand times and it becomes the truth.”
They weren’t cited for exceeding noise limits.
 August 21, 2015 at 4:17pm
The article states they were using “small amplifiers” and the citations listed say nothing about exceeding sound limitations. If they were cited for exceeding some specified sound limit this wouldn’t be a story. They’d have been told to turn their amp down to reasonable level and continue – but they were told to stop using them altogether.
Don’t get me wrong, I’ve been around people who did this who were incredibly rude (and some who weren’t) but it’s not the police officer’s place to do anything about it.
August 21, 2015 at 4:08pm
“In the end, neither complied and Karns was reportedly issued a summons, with Magnusen allegedly being arrested for not furnishing an I.D.; Magnusen was also given a summons for using a sound device without a permit”
Perhaps you should have actually read the article. Neither were cited for exceeding sound level restrictions.
August 19, 2015 at 11:04am
“accused the president of lying to the American public”
When you decide that the end justifies the means it makes pesky details like morality less important.
 August 18, 2015 at 11:46am
People ELECT to murder other people. Do you think the fact that they “choose” to do this makes it ok?
 August 18, 2015 at 11:43am
Your reasoning here seems to be that since 50 million people have done it, it can’t be wrong. A similar argument could be made for illegal immigration, smoking in public, or cheating on your taxes. It doesn’t make any of those right either.
 August 18, 2015 at 11:39am
Nothing was more toxic than tackling the issue of slavery. It led to the bloodiest conflict of our history (speaking strictly about the U.S. here). Are you saying that Abraham Lincoln should have left that issue alone?
What’s worse: slavery or infanticide.
What’s more important: standing up for what’s right or winning an election?
Do the ends justify the means?
 August 18, 2015 at 11:27am
Git-R-Done is correct. Women who are pregnant are expected by our society to not drink, get prenatal care and take reasonable precautions to safeguard their unborn child.
Post a picture of a pregnant woman drinking heavily on a social site and see what sort of response you get.
 August 18, 2015 at 11:23am
Past expenditures do not figure into future worth calculations. This is a fundamental principal of economics. People notoriously hold on to ideas/projects they’ve invested heavily in even when better alternatives present themselves. If you want to argue that the mother is worth more than the child you need to do better. And even if it is conceded, unless the mother’s life is in danger it’s not and either/or proposition.
 August 18, 2015 at 11:17am
A pregnant deer was run over on the road to where I work. In the lunch room everyone was talking about the “poor baby deer.” To play the devil’s advocate I stated “That was no baby deer.” Several angry eyes immediately tracked my way in questioning defiance and I simply stated “The supreme court says it’s just a blob.”
 August 18, 2015 at 11:10am
If the right doesn’t have the right to decide it’s a baby then the left doesn’t have the right to decide it’s not.
 August 18, 2015 at 11:08am
Well played sir. Well played indeed.
Your argument seems to be that if we conclude that an unborn child is, indeed, a person deserving equal protection under the law that the government might take that too far and prosecute the mother for not providing an ideal environment of growth for the baby? But that argument could be applied to ANY law – so to avoid the possibility of the government going overboard we shouldn’t allow them to enforce anything! Does that sound reasonable to you?
 August 18, 2015 at 10:50am
Do you really believe that public opinion has any correlation to right and wrong? Beliefs change radically across cultures and from nation to nation – conflicting radically with each other. It’s logically inane to suggest they could all be correct. It’s just as nonsensical to suggest that a majority (or legal) opinion settles a question of morality.
That must mean conservatism is right and liberalism is wrong?
 August 18, 2015 at 10:21am
Don’t forget that most Iranians like the west. The Iranian people are not our enemy and they don’t like their leadership any more than we do.
Having the courage to say we’re at war with radical Islam, having the courage to stand up and say we need to start behaving like we intend to win this war and not bury our heads in the sand – these are good things. But let’s be careful not to throw our allies out with the trash.
August 18, 2015 at 10:14am
There is a kernel of truth here. While I fear Trump as president would do more harm than good, I do believe he’d clean house.
@DrFrost -- If he "cleans house" and breaks the stranglehold that this corrupt system that is ruling the American people has, what do you perceive he could do that would out weigh that?
[-3] August 18, 2015 at 10:12am
Personally I don’t like it when artists take a political stance. Before I want to hear your thoughts on a matter, tell me why I should value your opinion. If you’re not an expert then I’m really not interested. You have every right to speak and I have every right to ignore you.
Did you read the article. Matisyahu did not offer an unsolicited opinion. He is on no crusade to push a Pro-Israeli stance. Rather, he appears to have been singled out because of his religion and required to sign a political statement.
Your comment is better directed at the festival organizers who were inserting politics into music.
August 11, 2015 at 3:08pm
This is also a vetting process. Megyn asked a question that will most certainly be asked by the democratic nominee should Trump win the republican nomination. We want to see how he responds and how he handles the situation.
August 11, 2015 at 2:42pm
Matt 19:9 “I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
These are the words of Jesus apparently listing sexual immorality as valid grounds for divorce.