the correct question is “what is your definition of a mountain?”
if you are talking purely in the physical – a topographical landmass? or you talking a spiritual or emotion or even mental “mountain”?
a mountain is a seemingly insurmountable object..something so large, so vast, so encumbering that it is easier to go around than over or simply to just settle in at the bottom of it and deal with the situation.
a person with Stage 4 Terminal cancer that doctors tell has months if not weeks or days to live that is still walking, talking, and playing with their children and/or grandchildren has overcome a “mountain” as their cancer stays in remission for years and even decades.
a person that turns the hurt and anguish of losing their entire family in some tragedy yet goes on to build something great or serve others going through similar trials and finds eventually that their “family” has grow exponentially despite the grief they feel daily, coming to a peace after years or decades…that is a mountain…
these mountains are FAR GREATER to overcome than a physical object made of rock and dirt and vegetation.
There is a problem with reading the Bible with today’s vocabulary and supposedly “educated” minds…there was a different way of talking 2000 years ago…a different way of explaining issues…Jesus was talking for HIS time but his words echo for ALL time..
take the camel and the eye of a needle…NOT a sewing needle to Jews of the time
 March 30, 2015 at 5:19pm
NOTHING in any law can violate the Constitution and the 1st….BECAUSE it is the most important…Amendment…
“Congress (and since the Courts and MSM and Liberal scum have pervert the 14th and forgotten the 9th and 10th…that means States too) SHALL MAKE NO LAW establishing a religion or PROHIBITING the free exercise thereof…”
Which means if I want to NOT serve someone for ANY reason, YOU CAN’T FORCE ME TO THROUGH A LAW..PERIOD!! Call me any name you wish, try and boycott me, piss and moan and whine and biotch every day out front…BE MY GUEST…but you can NOT compel me to violate my conscience or my religious beliefs…..I don’t care what you think of them…THEY AREN’T YOURS…POUND SAND!…
If a gay man or woman comes into my shop and buys a cookie or cake or coffer or whatever fine…but if they come in and say ” make me a wedding cake for my gay lover” I can say “NOPE…SORRY…I reserve the RIGHT to refuse service to anyone for any reason…there is a baker down the street that might help you, have a good day”
IF you don’t like it TOUGH!!…It isn’t homophobia, it isn’t illegal, and it certainly is not a violation of your Rights, Civil or otherwise….it is MY RIGHT to run my business HOWEVER I see fit…and take the consequences in the FREE MARKET for those believes and policies.
You and Zappa are FULL OF IT on this and you know it which is why you run and get your panties in a bunch and cry “discrimination”..SO WHAT. NOT ILLEGAL
March 30, 2015 at 4:14pm
The 3 wise men or 3 kings…depending on who you listen to….”king” would simply mean a man of high station from a foreign land that had subjects (slaves, household members, etc).. they would identify them as kings simply by look not because they actually were “kings” of a nation…at that time…there were MANY nations in Israel (the Roman region of Palestine included ancient Israel and modern Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, northern Saudi Arabia, and western Turkey)…..
the 3 wise men…brought Joseph and Mary 3 gifts…Gold, Frankincense, and Myrrh… Gold was a standard gift to a “king” of another nation – you “pay” tribute to the “king”….I am sure that Mary and Joseph lived off that money during their “hiding” exile in Egypt….
Frankincense and Myrrh were prized oil used by only the richest of people to adorn themselves – due to their pleasant fragrances in a time when people rarely bathed and went to the bathroom outside with the animals. They were also used to adorn those that were just born – at their presentation to the Temple and naming and during their death.
They were given to Jesus because the 3 wise men KNEW the significance of Jesus and were presenting Mary and Joseph with gifts to adorn Jesus at his Temple presentation and death. Even the poorest Jew would have welcomed these expensive oils due to their “purification” characteristics at these two times of life.
I am sure they didn’t think as far ahead as the 3 wise men saw through the Grace of God.
 March 30, 2015 at 3:31pm
how nice that you think so but it we pay attention to all those people that you like to quote…you know…the MSM people…the predominantly Socialist-Progressive-big Government types…even they put the Bible in the NON FICTION side of the library and book stores.
And yes, the wording has changed from time to time, usually due to translation errors or confusion.
That is why all these “common language” translations are a joke because people like you and ass-er…or axer…oops…tend to think that since somebody decided to right a new version, it means the Bible language changed. No, it was just the translator being ignorant or trying to appeal to a certain population. I am sure if there was a LGBT sanctioned Bible, all references to sexual deviancy would be removed as would any passage that talked about “unnatural sex” acts or sexuality.
The ONLY TRUE Bibles are the ones that go back to the oldest texts we have available, in whole or in parts, and then a translation is made and checked and verified by multiple sources. Those Bibles use codex that date to the 300-500 AD range with fragments that date to early 2nd Century AD.
You would have to look at the Darby, KJV-w/Apocrypha, Douai-Rheims, and a few others.. Bible’s that have not changed their printed text in nearly 500 years and were written using the Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus…texts actually in Ancient Latin and Ancient Greek.
March 30, 2015 at 3:13pm
saw parts of it…couldn’t bring myself to watch the whole thing straight through…there are large gaps in the narrative that fit with Bill’s Populist view of the world and faith and governments.
most of the actors were arabic, not Jew, and spoke with thick arabic English accents. they were more Egyptian then Judean.
I understand that Bill was trying to do a “human” Jesus not a “religious” or “Divine” Jesus but he went TOO far in the other direction. You can’t only have a human Jesus and tell the story accurately.
I took a class in college, taught by a former Pastor and high ranking member of the Methodist Church. He was on their council that reviewed the Bible and decided on the “red letter” versions (the actual WORDS of Jesus as opposed to narrative). He left his church and them because they wanted to “rewrite” entire sections of the Bible and preach against what he saw the TRUE meaning to be. He had multiple doctorates, in Ancient History, Theology, and could read the Ancient Greek and Hebrew texts. The man was awesome. The class was called “The History of Jesus of Nazareth” and we were told day one that we would HAVE to use the Bible as well as non religious texts to verify and discover factual evidence. He WELCOMED those and called them out that first day that were either completely closed minded atheists, literal Bible thumpers, or not truly there to apply the rules of evidence, fact, and science.
My teacher was a Historian, Bill is a HACK.
 March 30, 2015 at 3:00pm
absolutely Gonzo and scooter…feel the same way…he is on the same level of Catholic as Pelosi – ignorant of the teachings of their faith or what Whore House Harry Reid is to Mormons.
i don’t care which Faith they are part of, you either support and abide by the teachings, tenants, and dogma/traditions or you don’t. If you don’t and PUBLICLY stand against them, you AREN’T a member of that Faith, PERIOD.
O’Reilly is a Populist Secular Humanist One Worlder…that is his religion and faith…anything else out of his mouth is pure bloviation….typical NYC elitist academia windbag…
 March 30, 2015 at 2:30pm
O’Reilly is a Populist, big government, elitist, self reported “man of the people.”
He does these books supposedly to “separate out” the fog of partisanism but they are really just his brand of opinion, in his elitist mindset – his view is the correct one and only his view.
His books are no better that Oliver Stone’s movies about historical situations, JFK for instance. It is just an opinion piece. The “Killing” series of books are nothing more than Bill’s personal spin on history – from the “NO Spin Zone” man himself.
As for your comment about “qualify his belief in Catholic moral teaching”, what does that have to do with anything? A backhanded slap to the Catholic Faith? What his opinion doesn’t count as much because of the church he attends? And trust me, O’Reilly might be a Catholic by birth and attending a church, but just like Pelosi and several other Democratic and GOP leaders, they ARE NOT Catholic. You can’t publicly stand against the teachings of the Church and still call yourself a Catholic.
O’Reilly is for what he would call “legal and safe” abortions (murder of a human life), gay marriage (an oxymoron), and being a quasi-Socialist “Populist” he also believes in many of the “social justice” Progressive garbage. While certain sects of the RCC promote the same Socialism (social justice), they are NOT Catholic either. They stand AGAINST the teachings of GOD and Jesus in the Bible and have PERVERTED the Truth and will hopefully repent or be damned.
 March 27, 2015 at 4:10pm
shouldn’t have this been settled with the Citizens United vs Clinton case were Hillary sued them to stop the publish and distribution of the video showing how much of a MORON and Fascist she was? Didn’t the SCOTUS side with the FREEDOM OF SPEECH side even and including the day of the elections? Weren’t there similar case about SuperPACs running campaign commercials within time periods of elections and the SCOTUS said.. TOUGH…that is exactly what the 1st Amendment was made for…even the Commie Liberal judges sided against the whiners?
So then shouldn’t a small business and private entity be given the same rights? You can tell a LEO that in your opinion he is a “baby killing racist maggot POS” and he can’t do anything other than smile and say “have a nice day citizen”…not my opinion but you are PROTECTED in saying it…
Our Constitution LIMITS the government and what it can do AGAINST the Citizens…NO LAW on ANY government level can FORCE or COMPEL a citizen to violate their RIGHTS protected by the Constitution. Unfortunately we let this happen daily at all levels because we are BULLIED and MALIGNED and ABUSED by the MSM and the Courts and every whiny little Biotch group out there about “their rights” that somehow supercede mine/ours simply because we discriminate or don’t follow their perversion of mind and body. They ROB us of our RIGHTS daily.. HOW DOES IT FEEL YOU Jackwagons?? YOU POS TYRANTS cloaked in your perverted mindset and group think?
 March 27, 2015 at 3:32pm
I have a great example for you little P(brain)Gehrmann…wow Matt, that is fun…
How will your socialist progressive mindset deal with the “protected classes” if a gay couple walks into a Muslim “halal” bakery or grocery story that is Sharia compliant (meaning the gays are to be stoned to death)? Can you arrest the patrons and the owner or workers for beating the gay couple to death – after all, they are only practicing their “protected class” Sharia beliefs? I know, there are those “murder” laws on the books but those don’t apply to “honor killings” and such, after all, just check out all the special courts that are being allowed to set up in Dearborn or any other large Muslim community, say where that nice mosque is in Boston, you know, just minutes from where the Boston bombers lived and prayed and were radicalized?
Or what if they just run them out of the store and tell them that “Allah will kill all gays” or “You will burn in the fire of the Infidels” or whatever other choice statement they wish?
Do you side with your Islamofascist friends or your Homofascist friends? How can the court side with both and still not discriminate? Hmmm…
See…little idiotic arguments about discrimination and how it is not allowed don’t work in reality with thinking humans
 March 27, 2015 at 3:11pm
F’ing awesome article and logic and reasoning…unfortunately…this is all lost on the Progressive entitlement mindset….he is simply a homophobe and that is all they need to say to force the courts to give them what they want…simply because the courts would be homophobic if they didn’t and then the judges would have to be recalled, oh and the bailiff and the clerks and anyone else in the building that didn’t goosestep to their gay fascism…I LOVE THAT TERM…
Stand tall..Stand proud..Say it LOUD.. I DISCRIMINATE and I AM PROUD OF IT…GOD GAVE ME THE RIGHT and the INTELLECT to do so…
Gay rights people refuse to acknowledge that there is a difference between a business owner refusing to serve any gay person and a business owner refusing to service a gay wedding which they believe to be an abomination. It is really a simple concept to understand, but they say they don't see any difference between the two situations.
do we have a MAN-date to BOY-cott all GAY activists who are overly de-MAN-ding superior RIGHTs over the Common MAN's equal (butt Inferior) rights?? what would the Missionary position on This look like? Come one, come all. Lets put Them in their place.
Maybe you are merely senile... No one is demanding anything from your cowardly, narrow-minded, saggy butt...they're asking for equal rights just like the bigots like you have. Not special, not different just fair equal treatment under the law. You seem pretty fascinated with the mechanics of gay sex...are you scared and excited all at the same time?
@ Jackson, The law of marriage always has been between man and woman. When a state changes that law to suit gays, there is a problem.
The world was considered flat for hundreds of years, it always had been. The people were ignorant of the truth and afraid of change...just like you are now. Marriage is between two people, it isn't owned by religion and it doesn't require a narrow definition.
'Come one, come all. Lets put Them in their place.'
I have no doubt you have spent many an hour thinking about putting another man in 'their place.'....
Terms like "gay fascism" have nothing to do with reason. Whining and crying about being a straight person under gay oppression is just ridiculous. Meanwhile, there are still young gay and lesbian people driven out of their homes and taking their own lives as a result of being bullied and pushed out of their communities.
But no, clearly what we have to worry about is Matt Walsh's feelings.
God might have give you the intellect but he commanded you to love your brother as yourself. If you go around hating people because they're different then you're missing the boat and falling into the Devil's trap of pride thinking you know better than God. If you're still stuck in the Old Testament it's time to read the WORDS OF CHRIST JESUS! You can hate the sin but you should love the sinner. Some people have a problem with the gays because it's how they feel inside themselfs and they are being extra mean just to hide their unnatural love. Look at all them hate preaching preachers who got caught out. Jim Bakker, Ted Haggard, and who knows who else? Hate is hiding the truth.
Terms like “gay fascism” have nothing to do with reason.
Gay: of, relating to, or exhibiting sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one's own sex; homosexual:
Fascism: a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
Reason: a basis or cause, as for some belief, action, fact, event, etc.:
Care to retract that statement now?
"Whining and crying about being a straight person under gay oppression is just ridiculous."
Because everyone loves a good oppression.
Meanwhile, there are still young gay and lesbian people driven out of their homes and taking their own lives as a result of being bullied and pushed out of their communities.
And yet, there are young straight men and women who have to watch what they say and/or write while the humocommunity can make death threats, publicly rally and destroy businesses with thunderous applause and cheers suppressing the majority into a shackled silence. THIS will not happen to the Muslim community and yet the humocommunity is not only quiet about it but also trying to say how great they are and how unfair is to criticize them. By the time the body count from Muslim attacks towards humosensuals reach the point of rallies and protests, it will fall on deaf ears and no media coverage. Attack the real threats, not us.
 March 27, 2015 at 1:55pm
yeap…and the buses that pick them up 9 out of 10 times have NO HEATERS at least that are effective for anyone not in the first 3 rows by the driver…and NO AC in the summer or hotter months either…
there are no vents under each bench seat…typically NO seatbelts either…school buses are rolling DEATH TRAPS for children and should be BANNED…BANNED I say…think of the safety of the children…. ;-)
 March 27, 2015 at 12:36pm
They voted against it because it doesn’t “balance the budget” until the end of the NEXT decade…meaning 2030. WHAT A JOKE!!
Sean Hannity’s “Penny Plan” would balance the budget in 6 years! Within ONE Senators term in office and one two term Presidency. It would also then allow for paying down the debt with the surplus if the plan was continued AND it ACTUALLY CUTS spending by doing away with the IDIOTIC budget rules that the government works under. They NEED to go to ZERO SUM budgeting instead of this Baseline Budget CRAP where they call a “reduction in growth” a cut instead of just what it is SLOWER/LESS growth.
The Federal Government should have to behave like any other business or citizen does. NO MONEY in the bank, NO SPENDING!! and they shouldn’t be able to loan to themselves by approving it themselves.. WTF is that!!!
This is nothing more than the Paul Ryan plan from 2010/11 which took 15 years to balance the budget and relied HEAVILY on a 3-4% or more growth in the National Economy to accomplish that but never REALLY cut spending to any program or did away with any programs.
I think even the Penny Plan is a joke because it doesn’t REMOVE or CUT any staffing, Fed employees, or agencies from the government trough. We can balance the budget TOMORROW be FIRING ALL NON ESSENTIAL Federal employees, dismantling the Dept of ED, EPA, FEMA, and a host of other alphabet soup agencies that DO THE SAME THING AS A STATE LEVEL agency already does, oh..And all that waste 2
March 27, 2015 at 10:48am
Speak you are technically correct..there was no legislation pending at the time of South Carolina’s secession…
There was however a growing movement of Abolitionists in the North and sentiment in the South to just let slavery die out – no new slaves being imported and trading of them outlawed. Abraham Lincoln was at worst a “closet” Abolitionist and the fear was that once elected President, even though he spoke to the contrary, he would force through some sort of outlawing of the owning of slaves all together.
There was also the fear that his election would increase the radicalism of the Abolitionist movement and lead to an increase in “stealing” of slaves or runaway slaves through organizations like the Underground Railroad – which has many Southern sympathizers.
I believe there were extremists on both sides of the issue, in the North and the South, that were pushing for a fight. Add to that the Big Farm – little farm mindsets (slave owners being akin to modern Corpo-Farming vs non slave owning ma and pa generational farmer) and the industrialization in the North going faster than in the South.
This was not a 1 issue cause but many facets in both regions pushing for power and control. Fears that Lincoln would side with the Northern business interests and Abolitionists gave fuel to the opposite side in the South and I believe lead SC and other states to jump the gun and secede.
Plenty of blame on both sides with Lincoln caught in the middle as a new party leader.
Importing new slaves into the any of the United States was outlawed in 1807. However some smugglers continued to do so. So in 1819 the importation of slaves into the U.S. was officially declared an act of Piracy by the U.S. Congress. An act that was punishable by death for anyone caught doing so. This nearly eliminated international slave trading in the U.S. although there are a few modern historians using vague and questionable circumstantial evidence to claim otherwise. But point being you including in your argument that the South feared a ban on the importation of new slaves is without merit. The practice of slave importation was and had been illegal for over forty years before the war began and had NO bearing on the issue of continuing slavery what so ever. They were procreating just fine.
I appreciate you being cordial in your reply. And while not making excuses for the practice of Slavery which in my view was wrong and a huge mistake, however your perceptions are based on the massive amount of erroneous material that has been propagated about the Civil War. Prior to the war over eighty percent of the U.S. government’s revenues were coming from the Slave holding states (and to the disgust of the South were being spent in the North) and Lincoln and Congress were not about to jeopardize their Southern Gravy Train over the issue of Slavery regardless of how they may have personally viewed the practice. Continued…
In fact it was this prospect of the sudden loss of revenue by the secession of the Southern States that made the war necessary for the Northern States. They would have soon gone bankrupt without Southern revenues. Remember there were no income taxes prior to the Civil War. And due to changes in the economy and improved farm implement technology slavery was already becoming more and more unprofitable in the South. I’ve personally handled letters from the 1850s that discussed the increasing unprofitability of owning slaves and of people having trouble trying to sell off their salves even at very low prices. And the 1860 U.S. census numbers prove that the percentage of slaves as to the percentage of the overall population of the Slave holding states was already decreasing compared to the 1850 census. Many Historians believe that slavery would have ended on it’s own accord by economic necessity within two more decades without the war. Which would have played out much better for blacks overall than dooming them to generations of poverty by dumping 4 million uneducated former slaves, who had never experienced independence, nor had to be self-reliant, out on their own into a war torn and devastated economy with hard racial feelings resulting from the war the and the government sanctioned antics of the “Reconstruction Period”. continued…
If you have the inclination to ever take the time to do the research into the period documents of the time, you will soon realize that nearly everything that is taught and believed by the mainstream about the Civil War is false. Especially about Abraham Lincoln himself. Most of his Northern contemporaries that actually new him disliked him-very much so! He wasn't viewed as a "great man" until romanticized as "The Martyred President" by people who had never even met him and only knew what they had read about him in the newspapers. And by the way, if you were a Northerner and printed a negative story about Lincoln or his war during the Civil War you could expect a visit from Union Troops. (Lincoln tightly controlled the press during his tenure).
While overlooking the obvious inflammatory rhetoric and just focusing on the factual data given in this following linked article you'll get some idea of the kind of president Abraham Lincoln really was. https://southernsentinel.wordpress.com/lincolnwas-a-war-criminal/
And for a more in-depth look there is this:
March 27, 2015 at 9:55am
As a boy from So Cal…I would be labeled a Yankee Northerner but at least I am from Southern CA and totally agree with you. I have read, researched, and loved the Civil War time period for decades and I would fly the Dixie, put it on my license plate or even on the roof and doors of my 73 Challenger, if I had one. =)
Just listen to the “Dukes of Hazard” theme song…
just some good ole boys
never doing no harm
just trying to live their lives the only way they know how
it isn’t about slavery…they were poor farmers and moonshiners…they just wanted the government… “the Man”…to leave them alone and let them live their lives…as did 75% of Southerners during the Civil War…
people don’t know because they aren’t taught it in schools that most of the slave owners were much the same as big Corpo-Farming today…they forced out, stole, or coercised the little farmers off their lands and so they needed labor – slaves – to manage it all…that wasn’t the South…it was more like Big Corporation vs Main Street mom and pop shops today….that is the TRUE picture of the South from the Civil War period…we focus, as always on the BIG GUYS and forget the little guys just trying to live free from government restrictions
March 27, 2015 at 9:45am
As a CA born and raised boy, I was always interested in the Civil War. I read everything I could about it, from both sides. I have full collections of books even today, 30 years later, on the subject. I have researched and read about the reasons and viewpoint from both sides. There has always been that double edged sword on both sides of the conflict. Pro-slavery interest and Pro-States rights or Pro-National and Anti-slavery. This isn’t a black or white issue, pardon the verbage.
There has always been a special place in my heart and mentality for the Southern expressed State’s Rights argument that I believe even today and the Constitutional argument that Secession is not only allowed but encouraged if the Federal government does not obey the Constitution.
My uncle found a Dixie bandana and framed it with a Dixie pin and iridescent Dixie sticker and gave them too me for my birthday when I was about 12 or 13. I still have those framed items to this day and they used to hang on my wall before I was married and had kids. Once we bought a house and moved, many of my bachelor pad items were stored and just haven’t been taken out due to space concerns but I would PROUDLY fly the Dixie on my wall, hang my framed items as well, and put one on my license plate or bumper sticker or wherever I wanted.
One thing many “yankees” don’t know, even many blacks in the “old south” still fly and respect the Dixie – it is their HERITAGE, HISTORY, and past – good and bad.
 March 26, 2015 at 5:31pm
And YES, I know those lines are in the Declaration of Independence and Progressive A-holes don’t think the Constitution has anything to do with the Declaration but AGAIN, maybe you should read some of the Founding Fathers’ writings and thoughts about the documents THEY wrote.
You could not have had the Constitution WITHOUT the Articles of Confederation and you could not have the Articles WITHOUT the Declaration.
And for those that wish to use the “they were all racist white rich guys…”..Do you know that BEFORE the Constitution we had 8 Presidents under the Articles? Do you know that there were BLACK Founding Fathers and BLACK members of Congress under the Articles? In fact the first president under the Articles, John Hanson, was partially black!
Just because we all don’t goosestep to your one world fascist ideals does not mean we are trying to sanitize the world.
 March 26, 2015 at 5:21pm
Under the 1st Amendment, I – AS A PRIVATE CITIZEN – can discriminate AGAINST ANYONE I see fit for ANY REASON. I can think what I like, act how I like,and say what I like (as long as it is not criminal or infringes on another’s rights). That IS what the 1st Amendment is all about.
STOPPING the Gov – at ALL levels – from forcing me to do ANYTHING against my conscience, my beliefs, and my values or from SPEAKING out against my government when it TRIES TO FORCE ME to do things that violate the same.
Are you DAFT?? Do you pay attention and read?? Do you realize that the Constitution PROTECTS US from the Government?
“We hold these TRUTHS to be SELF-EVIDENT that ALL Men are CREATED equal and ENDOWED by their CREATOR with certain UNALIENABLE RIGHTS, among which are the PRESERVATION of LIFE, LIBERTY, and the PURSUIT of HAPPINESS”
See people like to say “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” but the tend to MISS the two words that come before that. Preservation of Life means we RESPECT the RIGHT of another Human Being to not be deprived of Life without Due Process of Law (so Abortion is UNCONSTITUTIONAL and murder because you are violating the RIGHT of the child to Preservation of Life). Liberty refers to me being able to LIVE how I wish unless I violate the laws, the Constitution being SUPREME LAW of the Land. Pursuit of Happiness (originally said Property) means HOWEVER I deem to be successful in my LIFE, the Gov or YOU, can’t STOP ME, again as long as not criminal.
 March 25, 2015 at 12:47pm
Check out how many colleges have instituted policy for “parental complaints” and actually had to hire staff for Parent Complaint Centers to handle when helicopter mom and skirt wearing dad come down to find out why little Susie and Johnny got a F or D or usually B+ grade but they ALWAYS used to get A’s before they took that professors class. SERIOUSLY…I am DEAD serious..this is happening ALL over the US college system….
Forget that the student is now an adult…forget that they usually are not living at home…forget that they are probably there on loans that they will never pay back (80% of college loans are NEVER paid back even though they can garnish wages to get the money and seize tax refunds is any since they are Federally Guaranteed loans)…
Parents feel that their ANGEL is PERFECT and only fails because of the “big bad mean ole white guy” teaching them…and since they pay usually a small percentage of the college bill, they get to have a say in how the professor grades, teaches, and treats their little baby…
IT IS absolutle FUNNY when the mentality built by the Progressive IDIOTS in Academia come back to bite them in the A$$ over and over..problem is..they just think MORE control and management is the answer….pass NEW laws and regulations to control the stupidity THEY created in the first place…
March 25, 2015 at 12:38pm
EXACTLY…beat the tar out of the two little BIOTCHES and then go to their home in the projects and do the same to their mamas and baby daddys …
and did anyone else notice..the school sent out a response talking about how much they care about the “security and safety of our students” but when the parent COMPLAINED FOR TWO MONTHS about the bullying.. NOTHING was done to stop it or deal with the little TRASH that was doing it…
Isn’t BULLYING the new Civil Rights Violation…or is that only when the bully is white and the bullied is female, gay, transgender, minority, or some other special class? (already know that answer, was rhetorical)
I have told my boy with the few boys and a girl or two have bullied him that he has a 3 step process to stop the issue…
1 – Walk away and tell whatever adult is present in the area
2 – If they continue when you walk away or the behavior does not stop on subsequent encounters, tell them to stop or you will retaliate.
3 – Retaliate SWIFTLY and WITHOUT further warning -preferrably when they are not expecting it- to the bridge of the nose, throat, groin, or knee cap and CONTINUE to retaliate until an adult stops you physically and then I and my lawyer will defend you with the adult present, principal, and school board until they are forced into “sensitivity training” and stripped of all pension and employment in education forever as they professional and personally pay for his private schooling until age 22.
 March 25, 2015 at 12:25pm
screw the $3K..ILLEGALS being hired in CA as COPS..with GUNS..to enforce the Rule of Law.. WHAT???
Welcome to the new amerika, pay no attention to what you see or hear. We will tell you what you see and hear, and what you think.
Smug & VRW the cops part is pure bunk, and the $3K isn't really an incentive. If the company hires illegals they don't have to pay an ACA penalty, since the illegal aliens aren't eligible for Obamacare. Not that they should be able to hire illegals, which is also illegal, but that's another rant.
I know that the $3,000 incentive comes in the form of a tax break to employers. I just wanted to make that clear. As to your point about Illegal Aliens being put into law enforcement, I would like to find out more about that. But if it's true (and at this point nothing would surprise me) than yes, that would be pretty disturbing......MSSMUG