Dave Murchison

@SparksN123 What study? By who? Paid for by who? References please.

Demrat stupid.

@ScottPresler You have seen God’s genitals? Tell us more!

I FOUND IT! Here’s the video of democrat James Talarico calling God non-binary. “God is both masculine & feminine & everything in between.” In the same breath, Talarico said, “[Trans children] are perfect, beautiful, & they are sacred.” No, Talarico. God isn’t non-binary.

@tedcwagner @robinmonotti I am old enough to have learned Geosynclinal Theory, which preceded Plate Tectonics. I was student of geology as the consensus changed.

@DMurchison @robinmonotti I remember when scientific consensus debunked continental drift.

FREEMAN DYSON Emeritus Professor, Princeton Institute for Advanced Studies: THERE IS NO GLOBAL WARMING, THERE IS ONLY REGIONAL WARMING (AND IT'S A GOOD THING!) "The change that’s now going on is very strongly concentrated in the Arctic. In fact in three respects, it’s not global, which I think is very important. First of all, it is mainly in the Arctic. Secondly, it’s mainly in the winter rather than summer. And thirdly, it’s mainly in the night rather than at the daytime. In all three respects, the warming is happening where it is cold, not where it is hot. The people in Greenland love it. They tell you it’s made their lives a lot easier. They hope it continues. I am not saying none of these consequences are happening. I am just questioning whether they are harmful. There’s a lot made out of the people who died in heat waves. And there is no doubt that we have heat waves and people die. What they don’t say is actually five times as many people die of cold in winters as die of heat in summer. And it is also true that more of the warming happens in winter than in summer. So, if anything, it’s heavily favorable as far as that goes. It certainly saves more lives in winter than it costs in summer. So that kind of argument is never made. And I see a systematic bias in the way things are reported. Anything that looks bad is reported, and anything that looks good is not reported. A lot of these things are not anything to do with human activities. Take the shrinking of glaciers, which certainly has been going on for 300 years and has been well documented. So it certainly wasn’t due to human activities, most of the time. There’s been a very strong warming, in fact, ever since the Little Ice Age, which was most intense in the 17th century. That certainly was not due to human activity. And the most serious of almost all the problems is the rising sea level. But there again, we have no evidence that this is due to climate change. A good deal of evidence says it’s not. I mean, we know that that’s been going on for 12,000 years, and there’s very doubtful arguments as to what’s been happening in the last 50 years and (whether) human activities have been important. It’s not clear whether it’s been accelerating or not. But certainly, most of it is not due to human activities. So it would be a shame if we’ve made huge efforts to stop global warming and the sea continued to rise. That would be a tragedy. Sea level is a real problem, but we should be attacking it directly and not attacking the wrong problem."

@tedcwagner @robinmonotti Sure. Because until sea floor spreading at mid ocean ridges was discovered, there was no viable mechanism to move continents. Plate tectonics was recognized and within a few years became the scientific consensus.

@FloraLuzz_ So when will we see Trump’s tax returns documenting all this charity?

Obama donated NONE of his salary. Michelle had a staff of 23. Trump donates ALL of his salary. Melania has a staff of 4. In life there are givers and there are takers.…

@Infocadl2015 @robinmonotti Gee whiz, “Fysicus” I guess the 800 on the SAT Physics test was just a fluke. But think what you like, of course.

@DMurchison @robinmonotti What a pity that your knowledge of physics is nonexistent. You are no match for professionals.

@Infocadl2015 @robinmonotti Read the Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn and keep your ignorance to yourself. Respectfully.

@DMurchison @robinmonotti Consensus is not science. Science Is not consensus. Confusing the two is a show of ignorance

@12th_tim britannica.com/topic/Southern…

Political realignment happened via voter sorting on race, culture, economics, and federal power—normal in democracies. Coded appeals existed on all sides, but claiming the GOP platform became "racist" under Nixon distorts the evidence. Both parties evolved; neither owned racism exclusively. No, this is not accurate—it's a significant oversimplification and exaggeration of a real but nuanced political shift. The U.S. South was solidly Democratic ("Solid South") for decades after Reconstruction, largely due to white Southern resistance to Republican-led Reconstruction and federal civil rights efforts. Democrats dominated the region, with many Southern Democrats (Dixiecrats) fiercely defending segregation and Jim Crow laws. Nixon's 1968 Campaign and "Southern Strategy" Nixon (and strategist Kevin Phillips) targeted disaffected white voters in the peripheral/Outer South (e.g., Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Tennessee) with themes of: "Law and order" (responding to riots and crime). Opposition to forced busing for school integration. "States' rights" and federalism (limiting Washington overreach). "Silent majority" appealing to working/middle-class Americans tired of upheaval. This was not an explicit embrace of racism or segregation. Nixon ceded the Deep South to segregationist George Wallace (independent, who won Alabama, Mississippi, etc., with overt appeals). Nixon won the presidency with a national strategy, including the Outer South, but not by running on a racist platform. The 1968 Republican platform endorsed equal opportunity, enforcement of civil rights laws, and attacking "racism, hatred, and violence. "Phillips noted Republicans wouldn't win most Black votes (post-Goldwater drop) but could gain from white realignment as Blacks shifted Democratic—standard electoral math, not a unique "racist" innovation. Nixon's Actual Record as President Nixon's administration advanced civil rights in practice: School desegregation: Black students in segregated Southern schools dropped from ~68-70% in 1968 to ~8-9% by 1972-1974—more progress than under prior administrations. He Expanded minority business ownership ("Black Capitalism"), affirmative action elements (Philadelphia Plan), and aid to Black colleges. Signed extensions of the Voting Rights Act. He Enforced anti-discrimination in federal contracts. Nixon's public policy and platform were not "racist." He positioned as a moderate against Wallace's extremism and Humphrey's liberalism. The Broader Realignment The South's shift to Republican presidential voting accelerated in the 1970s-1980s (with exceptions like Carter), driven by multiple factors: economic growth, suburbanization, national conservative appeal (Reagan), religion, taxes, defense, and cultural issues—not solely or primarily "racism." Black voters had already largely left the GOP by 1964. Democrats retained many Southern congressional seats for decades. The "Southern Strategy" as "adopting racism de facto" is a partisan narrative popularized later. It ignores: Wallace (Democrat-turned-independent) as the explicit racist in 1968. Earlier Democratic racism in the South. Republican consistency on civil rights pre-1964. Nixon's desegregation achievements are not racists. Hope this helps.

Easy choice

@12th_tim You minimize the importance of racism in the political shift in the South. Republicans had tried all those economic, crime, and family values arguments ever since 1932 and they never got much of a foothold with it. What worked was racism, which does not have to be overt.

@12th_tim And then the Southern Democrats became Republicans. Not all at once, but over about the next ten years Nixon’s Southern Strategy adopted racism as a de facto part of the Republican platform.

NO, a faction of conservative Southern Democrats actively led the opposition and attempted to block the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by launching a 60-day filibuster in the Senate. However, the bill was ultimately championed and passed by a coalition of Northern Democrats and Republicans.

@andy_lion007 When a man has lost in court, and lost every appeal. He is guilty and he must pay the price.

HONEST QUESTION: Should a woman go to jail... for falsely accusing a man of RAPE? A. Yes B. No

@4thOfJuly365 Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose. Nothing ain’t worth nothing but it’s free.

This is so true.

@Milajoy Trump lost every case against Ms Carroll. He is a cheap crook.

If you support prosecuting E. Jean Carroll for filing a false rape lawsuit without any witnesses or evidence and 30 years after when she said it occurred, against President Trump, put a👍 in comments.

@ronsterd89 Fresh oranges.

@mark_dow @mehdirhasan Resignation would be nice. And if he paid people what he owes. And maybe less whining?

Trump has won this war 7 times. He’s negotiated a peace settlement 12 times. And he’s opened the Strait of Hormuz at least 4 times. What more do you want from him?

@BhattiLaib9960 Yes, it’s a work of imagination. He is stealing with both hands and whining when people point it out. And, by the way, who are you BhattiLaib9960? Where are you? Who pays you?

@TheFollowingPro @SecScottBessent @irs Trump is a rapist. Why support a rapist?

If E. Jean Carroll had a $7,000,000 litigation bill covered by Reid Hoffman, that is taxable income. She SHOULD have paid roughly $2.5M in tax fees. Does @SecScottBessent and the @IRS know whether she "forgot" that too?

@Write4Republic Why do you hide your name?

Why do democrats hate America?