You found an elected democrat who used the word racism in a sentence. That's better than almost anything you have provided so far. However you insist that this comes up in response to people criticizing President Lawnchair. Can you point to what he said that in response to? The FoxNews link you gave (yes, I actually clicked on it) does not. He was interviewed on CNN state of the union, so you would be better off citing this instead

I can find the quote in there, but he is not responding to a specific GOP statement or person. You have repeatedly claimed that allegations of racism come up "whenever Obama is criticized" but this doesn't even seem to be in response to anyone criticizing Obama, as best I can tell. He's talking about the immigration bill that is not coming up for a vote in the house. If you don't want to connect immigration with race, you can make that decision for yourself. However, connecting this to someone criticizing Obama is a pretty large leap of faith.

Language rules are critical to communication. Eventually if too many linguistic rules and word meanings are discarded, communication becomes essentially impossible as statements don't have the same meaning to both parties in the discussion. There are some rules that don't make a lot of sense, but they are what they are and mostly need to be adhered to in order to ensure that communication can happen.

The US has been raising illiterates for decades (if not longer). In this metric we can truly shout

We're number one!
We're number one!
We're number one!

I doubt they could catch up with our functional illiteracy rates even if they tried.

I haven't seen you post a link to a legitimate (ie, not just another conservative blog catering to conspiracy theorists) news site that links Harry Reid to this. Please, enlighten us. We know that by virtue of the consonant after his name you hate him just as much as you hate President Lawnchair. I'd like to know though if there is a legitimate connection between Reid and the BLM going after this ranching family.

Most Americans may "need" to drive to work. But most don't need to be on a cell phone while they are driving.

Does the NSA really ask the President's permission to exploit any given loopholes in their work? If the President had to authorize all their auctions than this would seem to be both rather damning for the president and a bit of a waste of his time.

For many just the act of talking while driving is a distraction.

Yes . As cattle.

You like to eat and have fire, right? Sure, something as esoteric as a "particle physics research engineer" wont help in this 'world', but science is in everyday life and helps keep people alive.

And create it... From start to finish, they control your entire media world.....

A nineteenth-century schoolbook addresses this question. Post-apocalyptic society might not be too different from that of a "colony." Farmers, millers, carpenters, blacksmiths, masons, shoemakers, doctors, school-masters make the cut; barbers, just barely; silversmiths, soldiers, dancing-masters, lawyers, politicians, and "gentlemen" do not.

[note.â"Mr. Barlow one day invented a play for his children, on purpose to show them what kind of persons and professions are the most useful in society, and particularly in a new settlement. The following is the conversation which took place between himself and his children.]
Mr. Barlow. Come, my boys, I have a new play for you. I will be the founder of a colony; and you shall be people of +different trades and professions, coming to offer yourselves to go with me. What are you, Arthur?
Arthur. I am a farmer, sir.
Mr. Barlow. Very well. Farming is the chief thing we have to depend upon. The farmer puts the seed into the earth, and takes care of it when it is grown to ripe corn. Without the farmer, we should have no bread. But you must work very +diligently; there will be trees to cut down, and roots to dig out, and a great deal of hard labor.
Arthur. I shall be ready to do my part.
Mr. Barlow. Well, then I shall take you +willingly, and as many more such good fellows as I can find. We shall have land enough, and you may go to work as soon as you please. Now for the next.
James. I am a miller, sir.
Mr. Barlow. A very useful trade! Our corn must be ground, or it will do us but little good. But what must we do for a mill, my friend?
James. I suppose we must make one, sir.
Mr. Barlow. Then we must take a mill-wright with us, and carry mill-stones. Who is next?
Charles. I am a carpenter, sir.
Mr. Barlow. The most +necessary man that could offer. We shall find you work enough, never fear. There will be houses to build, fences to make, and chairs and tables beside. But all our timber is growing; we shall have hard work to fell it, to saw boards and planks, and to frame and raise buildings. Can you help in this?
Charles. I will do my best, sir.
Mr. Barlow. Then I engage you, but I advise you to bring two or three able +assistants along with you. William. I am a blacksmith.
Mr. Barlow. An +excellent companion for the carpenter. We can not do without cither of you. You must bring your great bellows, +anvil, and +vise, and we will set up a forge for you, as soon as we arrive. By the by, we shall want a mason for that.
Edward. I am one, sir.
Mr. Barlow. Though we may live in log-houses at first, we shall want brick-work, or stone-work, for +chimneys, +hearths, and ovens, so there will be employment for a mason. Can you make bricks, and burn lime?
Edward. I will try what I can do, sir.
Mr. Barlow. No man can do more. I engage you, Who comes next?
Francis. I am a +shoe-maker, sir.
Mr. Barlow. Shoes we can not well do without, but I fear we shall get no +leather.
Francis. But I can dress skins, sir.
Mr. Barlow. Can you? Then you are a useful fellow. I will have you, though I give you double wages.
George. I am a tailor, sir.
Mr. Barlow. We must not go naked; so there will be work for a tailor. But you are not above mending, I hope, for we must not mind wearing +patched clothes, while we work in the woods.
George. I am not, sir.
Mr. Barlow. Then I engage you, too.
Henry. I am a silversmith, sir.
Mr. Barlow. Then, my friend, you can not go to a worse place than a new colony to set up your trade in.
Henry. But I understand clock and watch making, too.
Mr. Barlow. We shall want to know how the time goes, but we can not afford to employ you. At present, I advise you to stay where you are.
Jasper. I am a barber and hair-dresser.
Mr. Barlow. What can we do with you? If you will shave our men's rough beards once a week, and crop their hairs once a quarter, and be content to help the carpenter the rest of the time, we will take you. But you will have no ladies' hair to curl, or gentlemen to powder, I assure you. Louis. I am a doctor, sir.
Mr. Barlow. Then, sir, you are very welcome; we shall some of us be sick, and we are likely to get cuts, and +bruises, and broken bones. You will be very useful. We shall take you with pleasure.
Stephen. I am a lawyer, sir.
Mr. Barlow. Sir, your most obedient servant. When we are rich enough to go to law, we will let you know.
Oliver. I am a +school-master.
Mr. Barlow. That is a very respectable and useful profession; as soon as our children are old enough, we shall be glad of your services. Though we are hardworking men, we do not mean to be ignorant; every one among us must be taught reading and writing. Until we have employment for you in teaching, if you will keep our accounts, and, at present, read sermons to us on Sundays, we shall be glad to have you among us. Will you go?
Oliver. With all my heart, sir.
Mr. Barlow. Who comes here?
Philip. I am a soldier, sir; will you have me?
Mr. Barlow. We are +peaceable people, and I hope we shall not be obliged to fight. We shall have no occasion for you, unless you can be a +mechanic or farmer, as well as a soldier.
Richard. I am a dancing-master, sir.
Mr. Barlow. A dancing-master? Ha, ha! And pray, of what use do you expect to be in the "backwoods?"
Richard. Why, sir, I can teach you how to appear in a drawing-room. I shall take care that your children know """precisely how low they must bow when saluting company. In short, I teach you the science, -which will +distinguish you from the savages.
Mr. Barlow. This may be all very well, and quite to your fancy, but / would suggest that we, in a new colony, shall need to pay more attention to the raising of corn and +potatoes, the feeding of cattle, and the preparing of houses to live in, than to the +cultivatioa of this elegant "science" as you term it.
John. I, sir, am a +politician, and would be willing to edit any newspaper you may wish to have published in your colony.
Mr. Barlow. Very much obliged to you, Mr. Editor; but for the present, I think you may wisely remain where you are. We shall have to labor so much for the first two or three years, that we shall care but little about other matters than those which concern our farms. We certainly must spend some time in reading, but I think we can obtain +suitable books for our +perusal, with much less money than it would require to support you and your newspaper.
Robert. I am a gentleman, sir.
Mr. Barlow. A gsntlemanl And what good can you do us?
Robert. I intend to spend most of my time in walking about, and +overseeing the men at work. I shall be very willing to assist you with my advice, whenever I think it necessary. As for my support, that need not trouble you much. I expect to shoot game enough for my own eating; you can give me a little bread, and a few """vegetables; and the barber shall be my servant.
Mr. Barlow. Pray, sir, why should we do all this for you?
Robert. Why, sir, that you may have the credit of saying that you have one gentleman, at least, in your colony.
Mr. Barlow. Ha, ha, ha! A fine gentleman, truly! When we desire the honor of your company, sir, we will send for you.

If so I'd be interested to know where you think I attacked your integrity this time.

Are you hoping you can recruit her to help with another of your conspiracy theories? Obviously the departure of an HHS secretary is an offense that warrants immediate removal of the POTUS, right?

The GOP keeps bitching about budgets and controlling government spending (ignoring the fact that any budget that doesn't give them what they want is dead in the water when it reaches the chamber they control). Now you are talking about consuming incredible amounts of resources pursuing conspiracy theories that have no factual evidence to support their necessity of investigation. I'm merely pointing out how wildly inconsistent you are with your aim to control government spending, an aim you have no trouble discarding when it fits your will and desire.

Which is at best a subjective statement based on which sources you like versus which ones you do not. Even more so, it becomes a really convenient excuse for you to discard published information based solely on who published it.

But why would you read results from the house and not from the senate? What if the players in the house who you regard most highly were to lose their seats this election cycle and the second government investigation were to finish without them? What if some time in the future the GOP holds the senate and the democrats hold the house - would you still trust only the house and never the senate?

Your notion of who is "reliable" does not seem to be defined any better than "conservative==reliable" and "democrat==unreliable==evil".

That might explain why the conservatives, even in their aspiration to be a "big tent" party, don't welcome non-christians, while the less conservative democrats have a few in their ranks. I'm sure you wouldn't advocate for corrective therapy on the matter or anything, though...

I may have missed part of the news coverage on this matter. Could you tell me who you believe "came for Eich"? The quote implies government or military forces driving the rounding up of people.

It was overturned by the courts, as I recall. I don't see a connection between prop 8 being overturned and Eich leaving his job, though. To the best of my understanding the courts at no time stated that it was illegal to support prop 8, just that prop 8 was unconstitutional.