You'd think google search, based as it is on complicated math, would recognize something as simple as a geometrical figure---would be able to distinguish between, say, a circle and an oblong. Right? Nope.
I plugged this in to find some more shapes like it:
I even provided a clue by naming the image "pentagonal kite." No use, google image search i.d.'d it as
Of course, the ultimate irony is, right THERE, in the first textual hit, it describes a triangle. It can't even count the sides on the pentagon. {face/palm}
Typical
liberal magic thinking: For nearly 230 years, presidential elections
have been determined by Article II, Section 1 of the United States
Constitution. No effort was made to amend this section of the
Constitution, even after 2000, the last time
the Democrats "won" the popular vote but lost the election. Sixteen
years transpired; nothing.
Elections were held in 2004, 2008, and 2012,
all under the same rules that governed presidential elections since the
ratification of the Constitution. Campaign strategies were formulated,
candidates' travel and appearances were scheduled, and campaign funds
were allocated, all with the express goal of winning a majority of
electoral votes.
The election of 2016 was no exception. But because
the Democrat candidate failed to win a majority of the electoral votes,
and because her supporters really, really don't like the winner (even
more than they disliked George W. Bush in 2000), well, then, all they
have to do is change the rules (retroactively and without the benefit
of a constitutional amendment) and voila! Problem solved: SHE WON!
Too bad Chris Wallace didn't ask Hillary if SHE would abide by the
results of the election! But that wouldn't matter to her loyal
supporters. After all, that was then; this is now. Heads we win; tails
you lose. Like I said, typical liberal magic thinking. (From a friend's FB post)
"The inner world of the gifted is very well-developed. They are quickly
and easily hurt, and so tend to keep others at a distance. Some avoid
parties and other social gatherings because the topics of conversation
bore them or because they have been rejected for being “different” in
the past. People with high IQs also have trouble finding others who are
like them, which can lead them to become even more isolated."
Find the whole eye-opening article here.
Collecting stones, he lost a diamond.
But an A in imagination. (Is that progress?)
I found this guy at the shore the other day. I have ZERO idea what he is (looks like a pig's ear variation, tho more realistically, maybe some sort of coral? It's not a slug, since they don't attach to rocks {snort}).
Running him thru the "faithful" google image search function, I was greeted by this result.
The babies in the womb...and eventually it escalated into the Holocaust.
It puzzles me to no end how seemingly highly intelligent and insightful thinkers are ignorant of legal precedent. If you say that the MOST HELPLESS humans on the planet are not human and therefore not covered by the Constitutional promise of the right to LIFE, then you are setting up a precedent of allowing the feds, sooner or later, to do what happened in Germany between '33 and '45. There, it started in 1920 with legalization of prenatal slaughter, followed by the Hungerhaeuser (starvation institutes) that whole decade, followed in the mid-30's by Hitler's penal labor camps (not yet the death camps of the '40's), followed by his euthanasia program, culminating in the Shoah.
If you truly care about liberty, then you should also care about the slaughter of unborn babes.
PS: Imagine this happening to Christina.
