Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

kalm wrote:Pure evil!!!

Cluck U wrote:

kalm wrote:Pure evil!!!

Well, the II.n1. part seems to be the thing that really confuses today's self-identified Liberals.

ASUG8 wrote:I had lunch with a friend and his 15 year old daughter yesterday and she started talking politics. She said "I think Clinton is the best candidate" and I said "why do you think that?". Her answer: "because the president said so."

Baldy wrote:

ASUG8 wrote:I had lunch with a friend and his 15 year old daughter yesterday and she started talking politics. She said "I think Clinton is the best candidate" and I said "why do you think that?". Her answer: "because the president said so."

I weep for my country.

ASUG8 wrote:

Baldy wrote: I weep for my country.

It was an educational moment that her liberal dad wouldn't seize on so I enlightened her about Obama's lack of transparency and Clinton's lack of truthfulness. Her dad didn't say a word.

Baldy wrote:

ASUG8 wrote:
It was an educational moment that her liberal dad wouldn't seize on so I enlightened her about Obama's lack of transparency and Clinton's lack of truthfulness. Her dad didn't say a word.

Well, what could he say?

CAA Flagship wrote:

Study Confirms: Weaklings More Likely to Be Liberal
Often science confirms the intuitively obvious.

For example:
Men who are strong are more likely to take a right-wing stance, while weaker men support the welfare state, researchers claim.

Their study discovered a link between a man’s upper-body strength and their political views.
Scientists from Aarhus University in Denmark collected data on bicep size, socio-economic status and support for economic redistribution from hundreds in America, Argentina and Denmark.

The figures revealed that men with higher upper-body strength were less likely to support left-wing policies on the redistribution of wealth.