Oh absolutely. I mean, I believe in treating all humans decently. I like to see people live comfortably and die painlessly whenever possible. But I don't make any notion of inalienable "human" rights. Those are American rights. We made them for ourselves, and nobody else. Other countries have their own rights that they sat down and came up with on their own. I understand that the UK has something similar to a Bill of Rights, based upon the Magna Carta just as ours is. But those aren't human rights either, they're British rights. They collectively, as a people, decided "this is how we want to live".
So yes, our politics are very much tailored towards American interests, not human interests.
I want salami and pepperoni now, ya bastard. To be honest, I stopped seriously reading this properly at "I was listening to Rush Limbaugh"
HOOKED ON DIABLOL, GOOD TIMES ARE BEING HAD
while I skimmed most of that information vs what you wrote, what i did notice you sure like to have your own spin on comments and interpretations, picking and choosing things, and your continued use of disparaging remarks to somehow attempt to demonize a stance not your own is really annoying and makes it hard to take you seriously
saying what many would consider "common sense laws" about control equates to anti gun rights is silly
I find that Dems throw their own base under the bus in much more overt ways:
1. Many leftists blame Isreal in the Isreal-Palestine issues despite Jewish Americans being predominantly dems. Isrealis live in fear of Palestinians randomly mortaring their cities every day, yet this isn't really news to the rest of the world because its everyday activity. When Isreal retaliates, they're the ones who get blamed.
2. Many on the left mock Catholic views like their pro-life beliefs despite the fact Catholics are most often democratic votes. Blacks and hispanics in particular are a very large block of Catholics.
3. Gay-marriage is often battled in court where feminist views are that marrital laws were specifically designed for protection of women from men. Despite what many think, religious views are not admissible in these kind of court decisions. Feminists want for matters like alimony/child support/child custody to be hard and fast rules: men pay these things to women and give custody to women. With gay marriage being legal, this ceases to be a hard and fast rule when not every marriage is a man and a woman.
I'm about to contribute nothing to this thread, but I just had to chime in that I stopped reading at Rush Limbaugh.
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/characte...amutx/advanced
"Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Sometimes those opinions are wrong though." Daxxarri