PDA

View Full Version : Patriot posts


lonestar
09-20-2012, 12:01 PM
The ObamaNation Plantation
Calling Out Obama's Socialist Political Agenda

"Repeal that [welfare] law, and you will soon see a change in their manners. [I]ndustry will increase, and with it plenty among the lower people; their circumstances will mend, and more will be done for their happiness by inuring them to provide for themselves, than could be done by dividing all your estates among them." --Benjamin Franklin (1753)



Barack Hussein Obama's Leftmedia sycophants declared the Romney-Ryan presidential ticket DOA this week. The talking heads have convicted Mitt Romney for what they insist is a very offensive "political gaffe" uttered at a private campaign event back in May.

The colossal blunder in question? Romney identified the underbelly of Obama's socialist political agenda -- the fact that an ever-increasing number of "useful idiots" have been lured into subservience by generations of Socialist Democrat policies, are now dependent on a laundry list of government subsidies, and, consequently, they are very likely to vote for the candidate who will continue redistributing wealth to fund those subsidies. read more at..

http://patriotpost.us/alexander/14816/

sounds like quite a few on here..

Blart
09-20-2012, 12:05 PM
Earth to wingnuts - the year is 2012. The red scare is over. Global free trade has won.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
09-20-2012, 01:43 PM
Lonestar seeing to it that the Klan is represented on the OM. :mullet1:

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/296331_529213087096244_1949037645_n.jpg

lonestar
09-20-2012, 02:20 PM
well it took longer for the peanut gallery to show up than I thought is would.. I'm guessing more cartoons right? OR even wittier (so she thinks) comments about the far right..

TonyR
09-20-2012, 02:30 PM
Part of the reason so many Americans don’t pay federal income taxes is that Republicans have passed a series of very large tax cuts that wiped out the income-tax liability for many Americans. That’s why, when you look at graphs of the percent of Americans who don’t pay income taxes, you see huge jumps after Ronald Reagan’s 1986 tax reform and George W. Bush’s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. So whenever you hear that half of Americans don’t pay federal income taxes, remember: Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush helped build that. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/09/17/romneys-theory-of-the-taker-class-and-why-it-matters/?wprss=rss_ezra-klein

Blart
09-20-2012, 02:37 PM
lonestar, I'll critique this honestly. The reasoning may sound correct (people get free money and benefits, so they will vote to get more. Everyone loves free money!) but it's hard to say if something is true or not without evidence.

For example,

the fact that an ever-increasing number of "useful idiots" have been lured into subservience by generations of Socialist Democrat policies, are now dependent on a laundry list of government subsidies, and, consequently, they are very likely to vote for the candidate who will continue redistributing wealth to fund those subsidies.

It says it's a "fact" that an ever-increasing amount of people (or idiots, as he calls them) are lured into Socialist Democrat subsidies, and also vote for them.

For this to be a "fact", he needs to establish a few things:

A) That more people are going on welfare every year.
B) Those people are voting for Obama because of those specific policies (not some other reason, such as his killing of Bin Laden or his record amount of deportations)
C) Proof that A is causing B.

Since he's the one making the claim, it's his job to provide the evidence.

However - I'm feeling generous.


A) Average Monthly AFDC/TANF Benefit per Recipient in Constant 2006 Dollars
http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/indicators08/tanf2.gif



Figure TANF 1.
AFDC/TANF Families Receiving Income Assistance
http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/indicators08/tanf1.gif

http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/indicators08/apa.shtml#ftanf2
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_programs_in_the_United_States

B) Romney Has Support Among Lowest Income Voters

http://www.gallup.com/poll/157508/romney-support-among-lowest-income-voters.aspx

TonyR
09-20-2012, 02:39 PM
Obama’s gaffe was a minor tributary off the main story of the 2008 presidential campaign, which was the economic collapse. Romney’s adoption of the Fox-Rush neo-libertarian sensibility, and the remedies that it assumes, is the main story of the 2012 campaign.

He will have to defend his fantasy in the debates. He will have to say why he believes that 47% of the American public doesn’t want to “take responsibility” for their lives. He will have to say why the Republican policies at the heart of this problem–eliminating income taxes for the working class, expanding food stamps (a George W. Bush initiative), expanding Medicare to cover prescription drugs (Bush again)–are bad for the country.
http://swampland.time.com/2012/09/18/bitter-clinging-moochers/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+timeblogs%2Fswampland+%28TIME %3A+Swampland%29

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
09-20-2012, 02:56 PM
well it took longer for the peanut gallery to show up than I thought is would.. I'm guessing more cartoons right? OR even wittier (so she thinks) comments about the far right..

You lost all respect from the non-racist redneck population with the "plantation" bit.

Blart
09-20-2012, 03:31 PM
You lost all respect from the non-racist redneck population with the "plantation" bit.

Yeah that too.

lonestar
09-21-2012, 09:27 AM
Fast and Furious Report Card

"Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people." --John Adams

Ignorance is Holder's only defense

The report card is in for the Obama Justice Department and its "Fast and Furious" gunrunning operation, and the grade is an "F." Inspector General Michael Horowitz released his 500-page report this week, and, citing a "pattern of serious failures," it calls for 14 officials at the Justice Department and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to be reviewed for possible disciplinary action. Will we finally see the accountability we've been waiting for?

As our readers well know, Operation Fast and Furious resulted in thousands of American guns "walking" across the border to Mexican drug cartels under the not-so-watchful eyes of the ATF. Those guns were used to murder hundreds of Mexican citizens, as well as U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent Jaime Zapata. The report is no less harsh on Operation Wide Receiver, a similar program begun under the Bush administration, though we're not aware of a body count for Wide Receiver, which unlike Fast and Furious was run with the close cooperation of Mexican authorities.

read more at.. plus a link to a PDF file of the report..

http://patriotpost.us/editions/14835/

lonestar
09-21-2012, 09:28 AM
Government and Politics
Don't Worry About That Silly Debt

"[W]e don't have to worry about [the debt] short term." That's what Barack Obama told David Letterman this week. The late-night comedian had asked the president about the debt, even wondering what the total dollar figure was when Obama took office. It was rather odd for an Obamaphile like Letterman to ask such an inconvenient question, but Obama deceptively deflected, "Uh, I don't remember what that number was precisely, but..." Of course he remembers that the debt was $10.6 trillion on Jan. 20, 2009, and that he and his Democrat buddies in Congress increased it to more than $16 trillion -- more than 50 percent -- in less than four years.

It's nice to know that the president isn't stressing himself out about the national fiscal disaster that he and his party largely created.



read more at
http://patriotpost.us/editions/14835/

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
09-21-2012, 09:52 PM
^

L0L @ you thinking there's anything patriotic about the plutocracy you cheer lead.

You've been kneeling and bobbing for your globalist puppet masters so long you don't know which way is up.

http://www.bartcop.com/fox-constipated_33.jpg

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
09-21-2012, 09:57 PM
MSNBC beats FOX in Ratings
Nobody's watching Thurston's ship sink

Link (http://sulia.com/channel/all-politics-causes/f/ced6d771-dbed-41b0-8ab1-66ec422674b5/?source=twitter)
<big style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><big><small></small></big></big><big style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><big><small>
MSNBC kicked FOX's ass in the prime time ratings twice this week...

The Willard Romney "47%" debacle could be the beginning of the end of right wing domination of the debate in this country. The reason is obvious; what people are finding out is, what Romney said isn't exactly a new idea for the GOP; in fact, it's been the Republican meme for more than 30 years.

One sign of a crack in the right wing armor is the ratings since this story broke is in the cable news ratings.

It seems that MSNBC has beaten Fox News (adults 25-54) in prime time twice this week. </small></big></big>

http://www.bartcop.com/romney-not-worried-47.jpg

nyuk nyuk
09-23-2012, 11:34 PM
Earth to wingnuts - the year is 2012. The red scare is over. Global free trade has won.

Earth to the undereducated. Marxism applied to culture and race relations are also at issue. Marxism seeks the destruction of nations, cultures, religions, and yes, the family. Anything in the way of "Socialist progress" is an enemy. Unfortunately even with the general demise of Marxism (excluding China, etc), it's social offspring live on and continue the fight, even if the offspring aren't economic Marxists. Its fingerprints are all over left social movements.

lonestar
09-23-2012, 11:36 PM
Earth to the undereducated. Marxism applied to culture and race relations are also at issue. Marxism seeks the destruction of nations, cultures, religions, and yes, the family. Anything in the way of "Socialist progress" is an enemy. Unfortunately even with the general demise of Marxism (excluding China, etc), it's social offspring live on and continue the fight, even if the offspring aren't economic Marxists. Its fingerprints are all over left social movements.

WAY OVER THEIR HEADS..

Rohirrim
09-24-2012, 07:13 AM
Earth to the undereducated. Marxism applied to culture and race relations are also at issue. Marxism seeks the destruction of nations, cultures, religions, and yes, the family. Anything in the way of "Socialist progress" is an enemy. Unfortunately even with the general demise of Marxism (excluding China, etc), it's social offspring live on and continue the fight, even if the offspring aren't economic Marxists. Its fingerprints are all over left social movements.

Just because you were a big enough boob to fall for the romance of Marxism, doesn't mean everybody else does as well. The average person studies Marxism in college and comes away with the logical conclusion, "Well, that would never work." And yet you come in here not only spluttering with fear that this failed religion is taking over the world, but wearing the robes of the Marxist apostate as if it were a badge of honor. It's not. I'm sure you did great with poli sci 101. Now I suggest you move on to 102.

BroncoInferno
09-24-2012, 07:16 AM
Just because you were a big enough boob to fall for the romance of Marxism, doesn't mean everybody else does as well. The average person studies Marxism in college and comes away with the logical conclusion, "Well, that would never work." And yet you come in here not only spluttering with fear that this failed religion is taking over the world, but wearing the robes of the Marxist apostate as if it were a badge of honor. It's not. I'm sure you did great with poli sci 101. Now I suggest you move on to 102.

LOL Yeah, nyuk nyuk must be 70 years old. There haven't been any self-professed "Marxists" around since the 60s.

Rohirrim
09-24-2012, 07:31 AM
LOL Yeah, nyuk nyuk must be 70 years old. There haven't been any self-professed "Marxists" around since the 60s.

I'm sure there are a couple still hiding out at a university or two with their grey ponytails and Trotskyite glasses perched on the ends of their noses. I know I ran into a few of them. ;D

barryr
09-24-2012, 08:06 AM
LOL Yeah, nyuk nyuk must be 70 years old. There haven't been any self-professed "Marxists" around since the 60s.

No, they'd rather hide behind the "progressive" label is why.

BroncoInferno
09-24-2012, 08:19 AM
No, they'd rather hide behind the "progressive" label is why.

You mean similar to how fascists such as yourself hide behind the "conservative" label?

Rohirrim
09-24-2012, 12:55 PM
No, they'd rather hide behind the "progressive" label is why.

What a dolt. You don't even know where "progressive" comes from. Well, it doesn't come from Marx. It comes from Teddy Roosevelt. And FDR. And JFK.

houghtam
09-24-2012, 01:19 PM
You mean similar to how fascists such as yourself hide behind the "conservative" label?

LOL

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
09-24-2012, 02:05 PM
Nothing "patriotic" about the party lonestar and epicdramanyuk support...

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/581365_418185568240528_19726157_n.jpg
https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/384012_534487893243393_2065822058_n.jpg
https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/533603_534413659917483_1147081601_n.jpg

barryr
09-24-2012, 06:23 PM
You mean similar to how fascists such as yourself hide behind the "conservative" label?

LOL, with what you believe, you are more in line with fascism. All liberals are. It wasn't long ago you liberals were telling us all how important and being an "American" it was to dissent, but as soon as a demo gets in the WH, how that changed. You bozos are a joke and the reason I don't bother reading most of your silly rants, much less waste time responding to most of them. You liberals really think you are changing anyone's mind around here. All you are doing is preaching to your choir and back slapping each other since you seem to need constant reassurance and constant last words, such as "I won" or "I'm right" settling disputes.

Unlike you bozos, I don't feel the need to have to spend so much time here reading each and every moronic post you guys make, nor responding to each insult. But just so you know, I do find it funny you idiots kep proving me right what IK say about liberals. "Oh, you're wrong" then you go on to do exactly what I have stated many times you guys do every day, all day. Oh, but you are sure showing me alright LOL Thanks :thumbsup:

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
09-24-2012, 09:46 PM
What a dolt. You don't even know where "progressive" comes from. Well, it doesn't come from Marx. It comes from Teddy Roosevelt. And FDR. And JFK.

L0L! :laugh:

Add this to the long list of reasons why no one should ever take Dinglebarry seriously.

http://www.bartcop.com/romney-admits-4-lying.jpg

lonestar
09-24-2012, 10:00 PM
LOL, with what you believe, you are more in line with fascism. All liberals are. It wasn't long ago you liberals were telling us all how important and being an "American" it was to dissent, but as soon as a demo gets in the WH, how that changed. You bozos are a joke and the reason I don't bother reading most of your silly rants, much less waste time responding to most of them. You liberals really think you are changing anyone's mind around here. All you are doing is preaching to your choir and back slapping each other since you seem to need constant reassurance and constant last words, such as "I won" or "I'm right" settling disputes.

Unlike you bozos, I don't feel the need to have to spend so much time here reading each and every moronic post you guys make, nor responding to each insult. But just so you know, I do find it funny you idiots kep proving me right what IK say about liberals. "Oh, you're wrong" then you go on to do exactly what I have stated many times you guys do every day, all day. Oh, but you are sure showing me alright LOL Thanks :thumbsup:


hell just put the morons on Iggy solves that problem instantly.. I did.. makes for much shorter threads.. In fact if you had not quoted that one I would not have seen it either..

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
09-24-2012, 10:03 PM
hell just put the morons on Iggy solves that problem instantly.. I did.. makes for much shorter threads.. In fact if you had not quoted that one I would not have seen it either..

I think lonestar has put reality on ignore.

:D

BroncoInferno
09-25-2012, 07:18 AM
LOL, with what you believe, you are more in line with fascism. All liberals are. It wasn't long ago you liberals were telling us all how important and being an "American" it was to dissent, but as soon as a demo gets in the WH, how that changed. You bozos are a joke and the reason I don't bother reading most of your silly rants, much less waste time responding to most of them. You liberals really think you are changing anyone's mind around here. All you are doing is preaching to your choir and back slapping each other since you seem to need constant reassurance and constant last words, such as "I won" or "I'm right" settling disputes.

Unlike you bozos, I don't feel the need to have to spend so much time here reading each and every moronic post you guys make, nor responding to each insult. But just so you know, I do find it funny you idiots kep proving me right what IK say about liberals. "Oh, you're wrong" then you go on to do exactly what I have stated many times you guys do every day, all day. Oh, but you are sure showing me alright LOL Thanks :thumbsup:

How about you give one example of the bolded? You can't. Because you just make up non-existant strawmen and then argue against them. If you even attempted to post something factual on here I think I'd have a heart-attack. You are a twisted, delusional little man. Thankfully, folks that think like you are on the lunatic fringes of society.

BroncoInferno
09-25-2012, 07:20 AM
I think lonestar has put reality on ignore.

:D

Yep. He's probably the only person on the board dumber and more deluded than ol' barry.

Rohirrim
09-25-2012, 01:29 PM
LOL, with what you believe, you are more in line with fascism. All liberals are. It wasn't long ago you liberals were telling us all how important and being an "American" it was to dissent, but as soon as a demo gets in the WH, how that changed. You bozos are a joke and the reason I don't bother reading most of your silly rants, much less waste time responding to most of them. You liberals really think you are changing anyone's mind around here. All you are doing is preaching to your choir and back slapping each other since you seem to need constant reassurance and constant last words, such as "I won" or "I'm right" settling disputes.

Unlike you bozos, I don't feel the need to have to spend so much time here reading each and every moronic post you guys make, nor responding to each insult. But just so you know, I do find it funny you idiots kep proving me right what IK say about liberals. "Oh, you're wrong" then you go on to do exactly what I have stated many times you guys do every day, all day. Oh, but you are sure showing me alright LOL Thanks :thumbsup:

I for one, am not voting for Obama, and I've already said why: Because instead of going after Wall Street for their thievery and malfeasance, he rewarded them. And he continues the debacle in Afghanistan, with Americans losing their lives every day, for nothing, just to benefit himself politically. He's a bull****ter, in other words (or at least too sold-out to warrant my vote, or the vote of any progressive). And yet, he's still better than Romney. That says something about the Right, doesn't it?

Hell, a year ago, the Right Wing couldn't stand Romney. They hated his guts. They ran everybody they had in the party against him. Now, when he wins the nomination, they all fall in line like a bunch of sheep. Who are the tools?

BTW, for progressives out there, Bernie Sanders thinks that as soon as Obama gets reelected he's going to use the lame duck session to sell us out on SS and cave to the Right once again. Be ready for it.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
09-25-2012, 02:47 PM
I for one, am not voting for Obama, and I've already said why: Because instead of going after Wall Street for their thievery and malfeasance, he rewarded them. And he continues the debacle in Afghanistan, with Americans losing their lives every day, for nothing, just to benefit himself politically. He's a bull****ter, in other words (or at least too sold-out to warrant my vote, or the vote of any progressive). And yet, he's still better than Romney. That says something about the Right, doesn't it?

Hell, a year ago, the Right Wing couldn't stand Romney. They hated his guts. They ran everybody they had in the party against him. Now, when he wins the nomination, they all fall in line like a bunch of sheep. Who are the tools?

BTW, for progressives out there, Bernie Sanders thinks that as soon as Obama gets reelected he's going to use the lame duck session to sell us out on SS and cave to the Right once again. Be ready for it.

+1.

I'm not voting for Obama because of all the reasons listed above and because Obama's record on issues pertaining to civil liberties is worse than that of GW Bush.

For example, note the moves his administration has made in reference to the NDAA: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/we_won_--_for_now_20120917/

More evidence (in case anyone still needs it) that barryr and his pals are the real tools here.

nyuk nyuk
09-25-2012, 06:44 PM
How about you give one example of the bolded? You can't. Because you just make up non-existant strawmen and then argue against them. If you even attempted to post something factual on here I think I'd have a heart-attack. You are a twisted, delusional little man. Thankfully, folks that think like you are on the lunatic fringes of society.

I haven't posted on this forum until recently, however I have had several liberals tell me this elsewhere, so it's not some invention. Some people really were talking this way.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
09-25-2012, 06:47 PM
http://www.bartcop.com/dancing-horse-hyplevel.jpg

nyuk nyuk
09-25-2012, 06:54 PM
+1.

I'm not voting for Obama because of all the reasons listed above and because Obama's record on issues pertaining to civil liberties is worse than that of GW Bush.

For example, note the moves his administration has made in reference to the NDAA: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/we_won_--_for_now_20120917/

More evidence (in case anyone still needs it) that barryr and his pals are the real tools here.

Surprise!

I recall before the 2008 election liberals prattling on about how he was going to close Gitmo, ditch the Patriot Act and try Bush and Cheney on war crimes charges.

How effing hilarious. At the time I was thinking it was all bull**** and was telling them so, and I was right. I think he said a lot of crap to get elected that imo he never meant to follow through with, much like slimeball McCain and his waffling on the border.

Yeah - I disliked GW's civil liberties crap as it was. The NDAA is just one of several of Obama's abuses of power. Also I don't like the new stuff the TSA is doing; I flew to Florida this August and EVERYBODY was nude scanned. That didn't happen when I flew in 2009 and 2010. They aren't even using the metal detectors anymore.

lonestar
09-25-2012, 09:07 PM
Surprise!

I recall before the 2008 election liberals prattling on about how he was going to close Gitmo, ditch the Patriot Act and try Bush and Cheney on war crimes charges.

How effing hilarious. At the time I was thinking it was all bull**** and was telling them so, and I was right. I think he said a lot of crap to get elected that imo he never meant to follow through with, much like slimeball McCain and his waffling on the border.

Yeah - I disliked GW's civil liberties crap as it was. The NDAA is just one of several of Obama's abuses of power. Also I don't like the new stuff the TSA is doing; I flew to Florida this August and EVERYBODY was nude scanned. That didn't happen when I flew in 2009 and 2010. They aren't even using the metal detectors anymore.

you can request a pat down instead..

as for the scanners there is scary stuff going on in airports.. If they want to look at my junk more power to them, If my plane is not blown up..

I remember once back in the mid 80's was at LAX terminal 1, was checking in for a flight and happened to glance at the Xray CRT in the next aisle on my right.. while the person that was responsible for looking at was busy chatting (cackling) with a friend I saw a big old 45 type revolver in the brief case that was being scanned..

As I walked past the police that was standing there I told him what I saw and they arrested the guy that was trying to get it on the plane..

Ever since then I have become a VERY firm believer in almost a strip search.. for airports..

myMind
09-25-2012, 11:21 PM
These wpr threads have been hilarious for a couple months now. Keep it up everyone, maybe one day it will actually change the world.

BroncoInferno
09-26-2012, 07:08 AM
I haven't posted on this forum until recently, however I have had several liberals tell me this elsewhere, so it's not some invention. Some people really were talking this way.

Well, I've had several conservatives tell me that they honestly believe Obama's the anti-Christ. So, I guess that's what all conservatives believe. Gotta love those broad brushes.

TonyR
09-26-2012, 07:33 AM
Roh and LA, I understand your disappointments with, and criticisms of, Obama. And I share most of them. But if you're not voting for him who are you voting for? I realize that your individual votes aren't going to make a difference, but if too many people do what you're doing what's the result? Putting Romney/Ryan in office? That's what you have to think about. You have to do what's best for the country. Vote against Romney/Ryan, if that makes you feel better.

Rohirrim
09-26-2012, 07:52 AM
These wpr threads have been hilarious for a couple months now. Keep it up everyone, maybe one day it will actually change the world.

As much as the main forum threads will change the Broncos or the NFL. Did it ever occur to you that some people just like to discuss politics and religion? Ever hear of philosophical debate? It's as old as Greece. Why do people engage in it? To hone their own beliefs. To put their beliefs to the fire and see if they hold up. If you can't handle it, or don't see any value in it, why post here, or even come in here, for that matter?

Rohirrim
09-26-2012, 07:56 AM
Roh and LA, I understand your disappointments with, and criticisms of, Obama. And I share most of them. But if you're not voting for him who are you voting for? I realize that your individual votes aren't going to make a difference, but if too many people do what you're doing what's the result? Putting Romney/Ryan in office? That's what you have to think about. You have to do what's best for the country. Vote against Romney/Ryan, if that makes you feel better.

I'll probably vote for the Green Party. I'm sick of voting for the better of two bad choices. I'm going to start voting for the philosophy I believe in rather than sell out, election after election. **** it. Frankly, Obama is just another moderate Republican. Same as Clinton. Actually, given his views on privacy and presidential powers, he's worse than Nixon. I believe in progressive liberalism. That's how I'm going to vote. Bull Moose forever! ;D

Rohirrim
09-26-2012, 08:35 AM
BTW, this was the stated theme of the Bull Moose Party at the time: To destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.

houghtam
09-26-2012, 10:59 AM
I'll probably vote for the Green Party. I'm sick of voting for the better of two bad choices. I'm going to start voting for the philosophy I believe in rather than sell out, election after election. **** it. Frankly, Obama is just another moderate Republican. Same as Clinton. Actually, given his views on privacy and presidential powers, he's worse than Nixon. I believe in progressive liberalism. That's how I'm going to vote. Bull Moose forever! ;D

Not me, dude. Not that I'm happy about some of the decisions Obama has made...

But look at it this way. What's the only way we can affect change in the government? Voting. Which party is trying to take that right away? You can argue all you want about how voting doesn't matter, but if we lose the right to vote...what's the point? Now, I understand that most of us won't be targeted for removal from voter rolls or refused our right because we don't have the proper ID, even though we've voted at the same spot without issue for 30 years. But to stand by and watch these efforts, all by one political machine, to stifle the voices of voting blocs is not something I can do.

In a perfect world, I would vote for whomever was the candidate for the Pacifism party. But it's a throwaway vote, and since I would be voting for Obama if I did vote for the lesser of two evils, it really ends up being a vote for Romney.

I can't abide that.

TonyR
09-26-2012, 11:24 AM
...it really ends up being a vote for Romney.

I can't abide that.

That's where I'm at.

Rohirrim
09-26-2012, 12:12 PM
I don't buy that logic at all. Your vote should be an expression of where you stand on the issues that you care most deeply about. That's what democracy is supposed to be about, not triangulating your positions in accordance with the mathematics of a corrupt system. A vote for third party is not a vote for Romney. It's a vote against this corrupt and stinking status quo, of which Obama is a part. Until we get the special influences out that corrupt our government, it's only going to get worse. As long as people continue to play the two party rigged game, it will continue.

Since the 80s I've voted for a lot of Dems. What have they done over that timespan? Gone further and further Right. Gotten further corrupt. Hell, what does the Democratic Party even stand for anymore? They've triangulated so far that their identity has dissolved.

houghtam
09-26-2012, 12:17 PM
I don't buy that logic at all. Your vote should be an expression of where you stand on the issues that you care most deeply about.

It is. The number one issue I care most about is that "We the People?" actually have a vote.

If you don't get to vote, all other issues are immaterial.

Rohirrim
09-26-2012, 12:34 PM
It is. The number one issue I care most about is that "We the People?" actually have a vote.

If you don't get to vote, all other issues are immaterial.

Your argument doesn't hold up. The only way to vote for change is to continue to vote in the Democrats or Republicans? I don't think so. We've been doing that for forty years and they both just keep getting more corrupt. You can vote for whoever you want, but when they are elected, whoever they are, Goldman Sachs, Citibank, GE, the military industrial complex, etc. will be sitting right there in the oval office, waiting for whichever candidate of the two parties you elected to come in and do what they say. In those conditions, your vote is a farce.

houghtam
09-26-2012, 12:39 PM
Your argument doesn't hold up. The only way to vote for change is to continue to vote in the Democrats or Republicans? I don't think so. We've been doing that for forty years and they both just keep getting more corrupt. You can vote for whoever you want, but when they are elected, whoever they are, Goldman Sachs, Citibank, GE, the military industrial complex, etc. will be sitting right there in the oval office, waiting for whichever candidate of the two parties you elected to come in and do what they say. In those conditions, your vote is a farce.

Not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying the first step to voting for change is maintaining the right for everyone to vote.

Edit: And believe you me. If the blatant attempts to deny liberty had not been made, you and i would be having a much different conversation right now. My wife and I, who were both Obama supporters, had seriously discussed voting for Jill Stein as recently as May.

Fedaykin
09-26-2012, 01:01 PM
Your argument doesn't hold up. The only way to vote for change is to continue to vote in the Democrats or Republicans? I don't think so. We've been doing that for forty years and they both just keep getting more corrupt. You can vote for whoever you want, but when they are elected, whoever they are, Goldman Sachs, Citibank, GE, the military industrial complex, etc. will be sitting right there in the oval office, waiting for whichever candidate of the two parties you elected to come in and do what they say. In those conditions, your vote is a farce.

What is needed is a constitutional convention to amend voting laws to make it possible for other parties to compete.

Instant run off, etc. The bozos in charge aren't ever going to do that -- it'll take going around them to get it done.

myMind
09-26-2012, 01:03 PM
As much as the main forum threads will change the Broncos or the NFL. Did it ever occur to you that some people just like to discuss politics and religion? Ever hear of philosophical debate? It's as old as Greece. Why do people engage in it? To hone their own beliefs. To put their beliefs to the fire and see if they hold up. If you can't handle it, or don't see any value in it, why post here, or even come in here, for that matter?

I obviously cant handle the truth.

houghtam
09-26-2012, 01:14 PM
What is needed is a constitutional convention to amend voting laws to make it possible for other parties to compete.

Instant run off, etc. The bozos in charge aren't ever going to do that -- it'll take going around them to get it done.

Proportional representation is a great idea. Unfortunately it will never happen in the US, not just because the Dems and Reps will campaign against it to make sure they remain the only two parties. It's also because the American people will see it as something those socialist european countries do, and how could any of their ideas be any good?

The belief that the US has the greatest political system in the world, which has some credibility, has led to the belief that the US has the greatest political process in the world, which is very debatable.

lonestar
09-26-2012, 02:13 PM
September 26, 2012
The Foundation

"[T]he fiery and destructive passions of war reign in the human breast with much more powerful sway than the mild and beneficent sentiments of peace." --Alexander Hamilton
Editorial Exegesis
Dangerous terrorists, not responsible citizens

"Osama bin Laden's bodyguard may soon exit Guantanamo Bay, along with dozens of others. Bad idea. To keep the U.S. homeland safe, dangerous terrorists should check into Gitmo -- not check out. The American left has been squawking for years about the detention facility for captured terrorists set up after the 9/11 attacks, on U.S. territory at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, arguably the most comfortable POW camp in the history of warfare. ... As president, Obama found Gitmo came in handy, and reneged on closing it. The recent news that U.S. intelligence believes a 53-year-old Gitmo alumnus named Sufyan Ben Qumu, a leader of Libya's Ansar al-Sharia militia, helped organize the recent killing of Ambassador Chris Stevens is a reminder of the facility's importance. The 55 detainees getting Get Out of Gitmo Free cards include Idris Ahmad Abdu Qadir Idris, a bodyguard for the late al-Qaida terrorist chief Osama bin Laden.

more at

http://patriotpost.us/editions/14876/

Rohirrim
09-26-2012, 03:02 PM
I obviously cant handle the truth.

Truth? Truth has nothing to do with it. ;D

barryr
09-26-2012, 05:04 PM
Pretty funny stuff seeing staunch liberals pretending they won't vote for Obama. They spend 99% of their posts telling each other why Romney is such a bad candidate, even resorting to made up crap or his dog of all things. While defending anything Obama does or says with maybe a once a year timid "I don't like his foreign policy" post and somehow that is convincing enough for that one timid criticism they won't vote for Obama. Yeah, right. You liberals only fool yourselves if anybody. Not buying LOL

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
09-27-2012, 05:40 AM
Pretty funny stuff seeing staunch liberals pretending they won't vote for Obama. They spend 99% of their posts telling each other why Romney is such a bad candidate, even resorting to made up crap or his dog of all things. While defending anything Obama does or says with maybe a once a year timid "I don't like his foreign policy" post and somehow that is convincing enough for that one timid criticism they won't vote for Obama. Yeah, right. You liberals only fool yourselves if anybody. Not buying LOL

Can't help it if mental midgets like you can't tell the difference between supporting Obama and pointing out the lies the right tells.

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/272886_406352769423808_1844629255_o.jpg

lonestar
09-27-2012, 09:48 AM
LOL

blah blah blah..

I'm guessing, that you STILL absolutely nothing of value to say..

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
09-27-2012, 01:47 PM
^

Gotta L0L @ chuckleheads who put people on ignore only to continue responding to their every post.

You are obsessed. Ha!

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/403231_532445750106311_1176610995_n.jpg

lonestar
10-12-2012, 07:46 PM
Joe Was the Only One Laughing

"If a wise man has an argument with a fool, the fool only rages and laughs, and there is no quiet." --Proverbs 29:9

Joker Joe thought the whole night was hilarious

Conventional wisdom says that vice presidential debates don't move the needle in elections, and last night's debate was probably no exception. That said, Thursday night's debate couldn't have contrasted two more different candidates. Paul Ryan, the respectful, serious and earnest policy wonk, against Joe Biden, who behaved like a drunken clown and a jerk and paid due homage to the mascot of the Democrat Party -- the Jackass.

On substance, Ryan held his own against Vice President Chuckles, despite having to face a second debate opponent in "moderator" Martha Raddatz of ABC News. Yet on style, whether the subject was the terrorist attack on our Libyan embassy, the ailing economy or abortion, Biden smiled, laughed, sneered, rolled his eyes and strategically interrupted Ryan every time the congressman hit his stride on an answer. And if it wasn't Biden interrupting, it was Raddatz.

Biden is obviously a disciple of Saul Alinksy, who in his "Rules for Radicals," Rule No. 5, said, "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage." Clearly, the Obama team decided that the president's failure last week was that he was "too polite," and that Biden had to use ridicule to shore up their anxious base.

Read this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/editions/15043/

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-12-2012, 07:50 PM
^

L0L @ a shill for a party of extremists and economic terrorists pretending to be a "patriot."

You are a disgrace.

lonestar
10-12-2012, 08:45 PM
guessing we either have a cartoon or a personal attack from Mr cartoon man....

what a surprise..

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-12-2012, 09:31 PM
guessing we either have a cartoon or a personal attack from Mr cartoon man....

what a surprise..

You're living proof that you can wrap a traitorous POS in the flag......and he's still a traitorous POS.

mhgaffney
10-13-2012, 11:43 AM
You're living proof that you can wrap a traitorous POS in the flag......and he's still a traitorous POS.

Amazing how fast George W. disappeared from politics. Now you see him now you don't.

Too bad his legacy lives on.

Things will get worse - before they improve. If they ever do.

lonestar
10-13-2012, 12:39 PM
Amazing how fast George W. disappeared from politics. Now you see him now you don't.

Too bad his legacy lives on.

Things will get worse - before they improve. If they ever do.

I guess one could almost say that for Reagan, Bush 1, cliton, and carter also....

hell even Hilary did not want him involved in her campaign..

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-13-2012, 05:34 PM
I guess one could almost say that for Reagan, Bush 1, cliton, and carter also....

hell even Hilary did not want him involved in her campaign..

Wait a minute - you're trying to claim these other presidents disappeared from the world stage as quickly as your hero Dim Son?

Holy crap, I knew you weren't the brightest bulb in the chandelier, but this might be a new milestone on your road to retardation.

lonestar
10-29-2012, 01:35 PM
The Left

"[Barack Obama is] certainly not a very good debater. He showed it again [last] Monday night. Obama lost. His tone was petty and small. ... That spirit led Obama into a major unforced error. When Romney made a perfectly reasonable case to rebuild a shrinking Navy, Obama condescended: 'You mentioned ... that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military's changed.' Such that naval vessels are as obsolete as horse cavalry? Liberal pundits got a great guffaw out of this, but the underlying argument is quite stupid. As if the ships being retired are dinghies, skipjacks and three-masted schooners. As if an entire branch of the armed forces -- the principal projector of American power abroad -- is itself some kind of anachronism. 'We have these things called aircraft carriers,' continued the schoolmaster, 'where planes land on them.' This is Obama's case for fewer vessels? Does he think carriers patrol alone? He doesn't know that for every one carrier, 10 times as many ships sail in a phalanx of escorts? Obama may blithely dismiss the need for more ships, but the Navy wants at least 310 and the latest Quadrennial Defense Review Independent Panel report says that defending America's vital interests requires 346 ships (versus 287 today). Does anyone doubt that if we continue, as we are headed, down to fewer than 230, the casualty will be entire carrier battle groups, precisely the kind of high-tech force multipliers that Obama pretends our national security requires?" --columnist Charles Krauthammer

read more at http://patriotpost.us/editions/15213/

and yes I know a vowed to stay out of this section..

but since I started this thread

I thought this was more important to bring up, than allow it to be bypassed my the media..

BTW not sure it it was mentioned or not all the marines still use bayonets, as do all our special forces (maybe not bayonets but knives big enough to be them) and most of our special ops guys in the middle east still ride horses since that part of the world is still behind 1917.. ....

houghtam
10-29-2012, 02:05 PM
read more at http://patriotpost.us/editions/15213/

and yes I know a vowed to stay out of this section..

but since I started this thread

I thought this was more important to bring up, than allow it to be bypassed my the media..

BTW not sure it it was mentioned or not all the marines still use bayonets, as do all our special forces (maybe not bayonets but knives big enough to be them) and most of our special ops guys in the middle east still ride horses since that part of the world is still behind 1917.. ....

You do realize that President Obama said "fewer" bayonets and horses, right? There seems no limit to your stupidity.

The entire premise of that article is silly. Of course President Obama knows how naval task forces operate, he's the Commander in Chief. He just wants FEWER of them, as do many of us. And it's funny how the right, which for a long time refused to listen to its generals, now all the sudden wants to quote the Navy's request as gospel.

Not funny, actually. Sickening, and another example of the etch a sketch ideology they've claimed for themselves.

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
10-29-2012, 02:17 PM
ohh are we playing LABF favorite game and yalls didnt tell me well i may be late for the game but LABF has met his match
LEMME TELL YOU SOMETHING I AM THE MASTER OF THE INTERNET i can scour and scour the net noobs ill bury this thread under tons of cartoons and photo captions

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
10-29-2012, 02:18 PM
http://unaffiliatedparty.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/biden_libya_1.jpg?w=503&h=301

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
10-29-2012, 02:19 PM
http://www.commonsenseevaluation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/RAMclr-101612-brain-IBD-fir.jpg

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
10-29-2012, 02:20 PM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GUZ_6Sean2g/UHfBZ-345aI/AAAAAAAAkUo/-oI5uREEBgM/s1600/10-11-12%2B2.jpg

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
10-29-2012, 02:20 PM
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRprmQk4d2K_0iL1GLHgP4DzwTZ_ehx9 b-j8c4FhyojfySCG1KXb2t3oYnHRg

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
10-29-2012, 02:21 PM
http://www.politifake.org/image/political/small/1210/can-solve-this-libya-issue-obama-romney-biden-ryan-libya-politics-1349972439.jpg

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/joe-biden.jpg

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
10-29-2012, 02:25 PM
LABF your a joke ,a clown a funny man ROFL! please post more of your funny cartoons

lonestar
10-31-2012, 02:39 PM
Chronicle · October 31, 2012
The Foundation

"If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretence of taking care of them, they must become happy." --Thomas Jefferson

Big storm requires big government?

"We know liberals are worried that President Obama might lose next week, but are they so panicky that they want to suggest even before [Hurricane Sandy] has passed that Mitt Romney and Republicans are against disaster relief? Apparently so. ... [T]he liberals are excavating remarks from one of the early GOP debates. CNN's John King asked if 'the states should take on more' of a role in disaster relief as FEMA was running out of money. Mr. Romney: 'Absolutely. Every time you have an occasion to take something from the federal government and send it back to the states, that's the right direction. And if you can go even further and send it back to the private sector, that's even better.
Instead of thinking in the federal budget, what we should cut -- we should ask ourselves the opposite question. What should we keep? We should take all of what we're doing at the federal level and say, what are the things we're doing that we don't have to do?
And those things we've got to stop doing, because we're borrowing $1.6 trillion more this year than we're taking in.' This isn't an argument for abolishing FEMA so much as it is for the traditional federalist view that the feds shouldn't supplant state action. ...

Citizens in the Northeast aren't turning on their TVs, if they have electricity, to hear Mr. Obama opine about subway flooding. They're tuning in to hear Governor Chris Christie talk about the damage to the Jersey shore, Mayor Mike Bloomberg tell them when bus service might resume in New York City, and Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy say when the state's highways might reopen. Energetic governors and mayors are best equipped to handle disaster relief because they know their cities and neighborhoods far better than the feds ever will, and they know their citizens will hold them accountable. ...

The rush to use Hurricane Sandy to justify a bigger federal government makes us wonder if there's an excuse liberals won't use to grow Leviathan? The reality of the federal fisc is that whoever wins next Tuesday is going to have to choose between functions best done by the federal government and those that can be done better by others.

A government that can't distinguish between a big storm and Big Bird is simply too big." --The Wall Street Journal

more at

http://patriotpost.us/editions/15251/

lonestar
11-02-2012, 02:53 PM
Unemployment Is Up -- Will Obama Be Out?

"No country upon earth ever had it more in its power to attain these blessings than United America. Wondrously strange, then, and much to be regretted indeed would it be, were we to neglect the means and to depart from the road which Providence has pointed us to so plainly; I cannot believe it will ever come to pass." --George Washington

Is Obama sunk?

The much-awaited and final pre-election Bureau of Labor unemployment numbers were released this morning, and, for what that malleable number is worth, the rate ticked back up to 7.9 percent, taking some of the wind out of Barack Obama's "road to recovery" rhetoric.

Though Obama will find a way to take credit for private sector job growth with his socialist "we've created jobs" mantra, the fact is that job creation is more accurately a reflection of how resilient the private sector is despite Obama's interventionist economic policies.

As you recall, a few weeks before the Republican Convention in Tampa, Obama declared, "The private sector is doing fine," and insisted that we really need more government [read "union"] jobs. His Senate lap dog, Harry Reid, reiterated, "It's very clear that private sector jobs have been doing just fine. It's the public sector jobs where we've lost huge numbers." Actually, it's the public sector that's "doing just fine." That unemployment rate has fallen precipitously this year, and is now just 4.2 percent.

And tell black workers that things are "just fine." Unemployment among blacks was 13.4 percent in September but jumped to 14.3 percent in October -- almost a full percentage point.

As more Obama supporters remove their heads from their, er, sandboxes, Obama's propaganda machine is running full steam, endeavoring to complete a colossal makeover to maintain his "jobs president" façade in the remaining days of the campaign. That pig will require a lot of lipstick, given that four years of Obama's "stimulus programs" have produced 23 million unemployed or underemployed Americans and tens of millions more who are working but haven't received sufficient pay increases to even keep up with inflation.

Of course, (Memo to Mitt -- might want to mention that a couple times over the next few days.)

All of those economic indicators would be much worse if not for the aforementioned private sector resilience.


Read more of this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/editions/15288/

lonestar
11-05-2012, 10:56 AM
2012 Military Presidential Endorsements

Senior officers endorsing Barack Hussein Obama:

Gen. Wesley Clark, USA, Gen. Colin Powell, USA, Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, USA, Adm. Donald Gutter, USN, Adm. John Nathman, USN.

Senior officers and decorated personnel endorsing Mitt Romney:

Adm. James B. Busey, USN, Gen. James T. Conway, USMC, Gen. Terrence R. Dake, USMC, Adm. James O. Ellis, USN, Adm. Mark Fitzgerald, USM, Gen. Ronald R. Fogleman, USAF, Gen. Tommy Franks, USA, Gen. Alfred Hansen, USAF, Adm. Ronald Jackson Hays, USN, Adm. Thomas Bibb Hayward, USN, Gen. Chuck Albert Horner, USAF, Adm. Jerome LaMarr Johnson, USN, Adm. Timothy J. Keating, USN, Gen. Paul X. Kelley, USMC, Gen. William Kernan, USA, Adm. George E.R. Kinnear II, USN, Gen. William L. Kirk, USAF, Gen. James J. Lindsay, USA, Gen. William R. Looney III, USAF, Adm. Hank Mauz, USN, Gen. Robert Magnus, USMC, Adm. Paul David Miller, USN, Gen. Henry Hugh Shelton, USA, Gen. Lance Smith, USAF, Adm. Leighton Smith, Jr., USN, Gen. Ronald W. Yates, USAF, Adm. Ronald J. Zlatoper, USN, Lt. Gen. James Abrahamson, USAF, Lt. Gen. Edgar Anderson, Jr., USAF, Lt. Gen. Marcus A. Anderson, USAF, Lt. Gen. Buck Bedard, USMC, Vice Adm. A. Bruce Beran, USCG, Vice Adm. Lyle Bien, USN, Lt. Gen. Harold Blot, USMC, Lt. Gen. H. Steven Blum, USA, Vice Adm. Mike Bowman III, USN, Vice Adm. Mike Bucchi, USN, Lt. Gen. Walter E. Buchanan III, USAF, Lt. Gen. Richard A. Burpee, USAF, Lt. Gen. William Campbell, USAF, Lt. Gen. James E. Chambers, USAF, Vice Adm. Edward W. Clexton, Jr., USN, Lt. Gen. John B. Conaway, USAF, Lt. Gen. Marvin Covault, USA, Vice Adm. Terry M. Cross, USCG, Vice Adm. William Adam Dougherty, USN, Lt. Gen. Brett Dula, USAF, Lt. Gen. Gordon E. Fornell, USAF, Vice Adm. David Frost, USN, Vice Adm. Henry C. Giffin III, USN, Vice Adm. Peter M. Hekman, USN, Vice Adm. Richard D. Herr, USCG, Lt. Gen. Thomas J Hickey, USAF, Lt. Gen. Walter S. Hogle, Jr., USAF, Lt. Gen. Ronald W. Iverson, USAF, Lt. Gen. Donald W. Jones, USA, Vice Adm. Douglas J. Katz, USN, Lt. Gen. Jay W. Kelley, USAF, Vice Adm. Tom Kilcline, USN, Lt. Gen. Timothy A. Kinnan, USAF, Vice Adm. Harold Koenig, M.D., USN, Vice Adm. Albert H. Konetzni, USN, Lt. Gen. Buford Derald Lary, USAF, Lt. Gen. Frank Libutti, USMC, Vice Adm. Stephen Loftus, USN, Vice Adm. Michael Malone, USN, Vice Adm. Edward H. Martin, USN, Vice Adm. John J. Mazach, USN, Vice Adm. Justin D. McCarthy, USN, Vice Adm. William McCauley, USN, Lt. Gen. Fred McCorkle, USMC, Lt. Gen. Thomas G. McInerney, USAF, Vice Adm. Joseph S. Mobley, USN, Lt. Gen. Carol Mutter, USMC, Lt. Gen. Dave R. Palmer, USA, Vice Adm. John Theodore "Ted" Parker, USN, Lt. Gen. Garry L. Parks, USMC, Lt. Gen. Charles Henry "Chuck" Pitman, USMC, Lt. Gen. Steven R. Polk, USAF, Vice Adm. William E. Ramsey, USN, Lt. Gen. Joseph J. Redden, USAF, Lt. Gen. Clifford H. "Ted" Rees, Jr., USAF, Lt. Gen. Edward Rowny, USA Vice Adm. Dutch Schultz, USN, Lt. Gen. Charles J. Searock, Jr., USAF, Lt. Gen. E. G. "Buck" Shuler, USAF, Lt. Gen. Alexander M. "Rusty" Sloan, USAF, Vice Adm. Edward M. Straw, USN, Lt. Gen. David J. Teal, USAF, Lt. Gen. Billy M. Thomas, USA, Vice Adm. Donald C. "Deese" Thompson, USCG, Vice Adm. Alan S. Thompson, USN, Lt. Gen. Herman O. "Tommy" Thomson, USAF, Vice Adm. Howard B. Thorsen, USCG, Lt. Gen. William Thurman, USAF, Lt. Gen. Robert Allen "R.A." Tiebout, USMC, Vice Adm. John B. Totushek, USNR, Lt. Gen. George J. Trautman, USMC, Lt. Gen. Garry R. Trexler, USAF, Vice Adm. Jerry O. Tuttle, USN, Lt. Gen. Claudius "Bud" Watts, USAF, Lt. Gen. William "Bill" Welser, USAF, Lt. Gen. Thad A. Wolfe, USAF, Lt. Gen. C. Norman Wood, USAF, Lt. Gen. Michael W. Wooley, USAF, Lt. Gen. Richard "Rick" Zilmer, USMC, Major Gen. Chris Adams, USAF, Rear Adm. Henry Amos, USN Major Gen. Nora Alice Astafan, USAF, Major Gen. Almon Bowen Ballard, USAF, Major Gen. James F. Barnette, USAF, Major Gen. Robert W. Barrow, USAF, Rear Adm. John R. Batlzer, USN, Rear Adm. Jon W. Bayless, USN, Major Gen. John E. Bianchi, USA, Major Gen. David F. Bice, USMC, Rear Adm. Linda J. Bird, USN, Rear Adm. James H. Black, USN, Rear Adm. Peter A. Bondi, USN, Major Gen. John L. Borling, USMC, Major Gen. Tom Braaten, USA, Major Gen. Robert J. Brandt, USA, Rear Adm. Jerry C. Breast, USN, Rear Adm. Bruce B. Bremner, USN, Rear Adm. Thomas F. Brown III, USN, Major Gen. David P. Burford, USA, Rear Adm. John F. Calvert, USN, Rear Adm. Jay A. Campbell, USN, Major Gen. Henry Canterbury, USAF, Rear Adm. James J. Carey, USN, Rear Adm. Nevin Carr, USN, Rear Adm. Stephen K. Chadwick, USN, Rear Adm. W. Lewis Chatham, USN, Major Gen. Jeffrey G. Cliver, USAF, Rear Adm. Casey Coane, USN, Rear Adm. Isaiah C. Cole, USN, Major Gen. Stephen Condon, USAF, Major Gen. Richard C. Cosgrave, USANG, Rear Adm. Robert Cowley, USN, Major Gen. J.T. Coyne, USMC, Rear Adm. Robert C. Crates, USN, Major Gen. Tommy F. Crawford, USAF, Rear Adm. James P. Davidson, USN, Rear Adm. Kevin F. Delaney, USN, Major Gen. James D. Delk, USA, Major Gen. Robert E. Dempsey, USAF, Rear Adm. Jay Ronald Denney, USNR, Major Gen. Robert S. Dickman, USAF, Rear Adm. James C. Doebler, USN, Major Gen. Douglas O. Dollar, USA, Major Gen. Hunt Downer, USA, Major Gen. Thomas A. Dyches, USAF, Major Gen. Jay T. Edwards, USAF, Major Gen. John R. Farrington, USAF, Rear Adm. Francis L. Filipiak, USN, Rear Adm. James H. Flatley III, USN, Major Gen. Charles Fletcher, USA, Major Gen. Bobby O. Floyd, USAF, Rear Adm. Veronica Froman, USN, Rear Adm. Vance H. Fry, USN, Rear Adm. R. Byron Fuller, USN, Rear Adm. George M. Furlong, USN, Rear Adm. Frank Gallo, USN, Rear Adm. Ben F. Gaumer, USN, Rear Adm. Harry E. Gerhard Jr., USN, Major Gen. Daniel J. Gibson, USAF, Rear Adm. Andrew A. Giordano, USN, Major Gen. Richard N. Goddard, USAF, Rear Adm. Fred Golove, USCGR, Rear Adm. Harold Eric Grant, USN, Major Gen. Jeff Grime, USAF, Major Gen. Robert Kent Guest, USA, Major Gen. Tim Haake, USAR, Major Gen. Otto K. Habedank, USAF, Rear Adm. Thomas F. Hall, USN, Rear Adm. Donald P. Harvey, USN, Major Gen. Leonard W. Hegland, USAF, Rear Adm. John Hekman, USN, Major Gen. John A. Hemphill, USA, Rear Adm. Larry Hereth, USCG, Major Gen. Wilfred Hessert, USAF, Rear Adm. Don Hickman, USN, Major Gen. Geoffrey Higginbotham, USMC, Major Gen. Jerry D. Holmes, USAF, Major Gen. Weldon F. Honeycutt, USA, Rear Adm. Steve Israel, USN, Major Gen. James T. Jackson, USA, Rear Adm. John S. Jenkins, USN, Rear Adm. Tim Jenkins, USN, Rear Adm. Ron Jesberg, USN, Rear Adm. Pierce J. Johnson, USN, Rear Adm. Steven B. Kantrowitz, USN, Rear Adm. John T. Kavanaugh, USN, Major Gen. Dennis M. Kenneally, USA, Major Gen. Michael Kerby, USAF, Rear Adm. David Kunkel, USCG, Major Gen. Geoffrey C. Lambert, USA, Rear Adm. Arthur Langston, USN, Rear Adm. Thomas G. Lilly, USN, Major Gen. James E. Livingston, USAF, Major Gen. Al Logan, USAF, Major Gen. John D. Logeman Jr., USAF, Rear Adm. Noah H. Long Jr, USNR, Rear Adm. Don Loren, USN, Major Gen. Andy Love, USAF, Rear Adm. Thomas C. Lynch, USN, Rear Adm. Steven Wells Maas, USN, Major Gen. Robert M. Marquette, USAF, Rear Adm. Larry Marsh, USN, Major Gen. Clark W. Martin, USAF, Major Gen. William M. Matz, USN, Rear Adm. Gerard Mauer, USN, Rear Adm. William J. McDaniel, MD, USN, Rear Adm. E.S. McGinley II, USN, Rear Adm. Henry C. McKinney, USN, Major Gen. Robert Messerli, USAF, Major Gen. Douglas S. Metcalf, USAF, Rear Adm. John W. Miller, USN, Rear Adm. Patrick David Moneymaker, USN, Major Gen. Mario Montero, USA, Rear Adm. Douglas M. Moore, USN, Major Gen. Walter Bruce Moore, USA, Major Gen. William Moore, USA, Major Gen. Burton R. Moore, USAF, Rear Adm. James A. Morgart, USN, Major Gen. Stanton R. Musser, USAF, Rear Adm. John T. Natter, USN, Major Gen. Robert George Nester, USAF, Major Gen. George W. Norwood, USAF, Rear Adm. Robert C. Olsen, USN, Major Gen. Raymund E. O'Mara, USAF, Rear Adm. Robert S. Owens, USN, Rear Adm. John F. Paddock, USN, Major Gen. Robert W. Paret, USAF, Rear Adm. Robert O. Passmore, USN, Major Gen. Earl G. Peck, USAF, Major Gen. Richard E. Perraut Jr., USAF, Major Gen. Gerald F. Perryman, USAF, Rear Adm. W.W. Pickavance, USN, Rear Adm. John J. Prendergast, USN, Rear Adm. Fenton F. Priest, USN, Major Gen. David C. Ralston, USA, Major Gen. Bentley B. Rayburn, USAF, Rear Adm. Harold Rich, USN, Rear Adm. Roland Rieve, USN, Rear Adm. Tommy F. Rinard, USN, Major Gen. Richard H. Roellig, USAF, Rear Adm. Michael S. Roesner, USN, Rear Adm. William J. Ryan, USN, Major Gen. Loran C. Schnaidt, USAF, Major Gen. Carl Schneider, USAF, Major Gen. John P. Schoeppner, Jr., USAF, Major Gen. Edison E. Scholes, USAF, Rear Adm. Robert H. Shumaker, USN, Rear Adm. William S. Schwob, USCG, Major Gen. David J. Scott, USAF, Rear Adm. Hugh P. Scott, USN, Major Gen. Richard Secord, USAF, Rear Adm. William H. Shawcross, USN, Major Gen. Joseph K. Simeone, USAF and ANG, Major Gen. Darwin Simpson, ANG, Rear Adm. Greg Slavonic, USN, Rear Adm. David Oliver "D.O." Smart, USNR, Major Gen. Richard D. Smith, USAF, Major Gen. Donald Bruce Smith, USAF, Rear Adm. Paul O. Soderberg, USN, Rear Adm. Robert H. "Bob" Spiro, USN, Major Gen. Henry B. Stelling, Jr., USAF, Rear Adm. Daniel H. Stone, USN, Major Gen. William A. Studer, USAF, Rear Adm. Hamlin Tallent, USN, Major Gen. Hugh Banks Tant III, USA, Major Gen. Larry S. Taylor, USMC, Major Gen. J.B. Taylor, USA, Major Gen. Thomas R. Tempel, USA, Major Gen. Richard L. Testa, USAF, Rear Adm. Jere Thompson, USN, Rear Adm. Byron E. Tobin, USN, Major Gen. Larry Twitchell, USAF, Major Gen. Russell L. Violett, USAF, Major Gen. David E.B. "DEB" Ward, USAF, Major Gen. Charles J. Wax, USAF, Rear Adm. Donald Weatherson, USN, Major Gen. John Welde, USAF, Major Gen. Gary Whipple, USA, Rear Adm. James B. Whittaker, USN, Rear Adm. Charles Williams, USN, Rear Adm. H. Denny Wisely, USN, Rear Adm. Theodore J. Wojnar, USCG, Rear Adm. George R. Worthington, USN, Brig. Gen. Arthur Abercrombie, USA, Brig. Gen. John R. Allen, USAF, Brig. Gen. Loring R. Astorino, USAF, Brig. Gen. Richard Averitt, USA, Brig. Gen. Garry S. Bahling, USANG, Brig. Gen. Donald E. Barnhart, USAF, Brig. Gen. Charles L. Bishop, USAF, Brig. Gen. Clayton Bridges, USAF, Brig. Gen. Jeremiah J. Brophy, USA, Brig. Gen. R. Thomas Browning, USAF, Brig. Gen. David A. Brubaker, USAF, Brig. Gen. Chalmers R. Carr, USAF, Brig. Gen. Fred F. Caste, USAFR, Brig. Gen. Robert V. Clements, USAF, Brig. Gen. Christopher T Cline, USA, Brig. Gen. George Peyton Cole, Jr., USAF, Brig. Gen. Richard A. Coleman, USAF, Brig. Gen. Mike Cushman, USAF, Brig. Gen. Peter Dawkins, USA, Brig. Gen. Sam. G. DeGeneres, USAF, Brig. Gen. George Demers, USAF, Brig. Gen. Howard G. DeWolf, USAF, Brig. Gen. Arthur F. Diehl, USAF, Brig. Gen. David Bob Edmonds, USAF, Brig. Gen. Anthony Farrington, USAF, Brig. Gen. Norm Gaddis, USAF, Brig. Gen. Robert H. Harkins, USAF, Brig. Gen. Thomas W. Honeywill, USAF, Brig. Gen. Stanley V. Hood, USAF, Brig. Gen. James J. Hourin, USAF, Brig. Gen. Jack C. Ihle, USAF, Brig. Gen. Thomas G. Jeter, USAF, Brig. Gen. William Herbert Johnson, USAF, Brig. Gen. Kenneth F. Keller, USAF, Brig. Gen. Wayne W. Lambert, USAF, Brig. Gen. Jerry L. Laws, USA, Brig. Gen. Thomas J. Lennon, USAF, Brig. Gen. John M. Lotz, USAF, Brig. Gen. Robert S. Mangum, USA, Brig. Gen. Frank Martin, USAF, Brig. Gen. Joe Mensching, USAF, Brig. Gen. Richard L. Meyer, USAF, Brig. Gen. Lawrence A. Mitchell, USAF, Brig. Gen. Michael P. Mulqueen, USMC, Brig. Gen. Ben Nelson, Jr., USAF, Brig. Gen. Jack W. Nicholson, USA, Brig. Gen. Maria C. Owens, USAF, Brig. Gen. Dave Papak, USMC, Brig. Gen. Gary A. Pappas, USANG, Brig. Gen. Robert V. Paschon, USAF, Brig. Gen. Allen K. Rachel, USAF, Brig. Gen. Jon Reynolds, USAF, Brig. Gen. Edward F. Rodriguez, Jr., USAFR, Brig. Gen. Roger Scearce, USA, Brig. Gen. Dennis Schulstad, USAFR, Brig. Gen. John Serur, USAF, Brig. Gen. Joseph L. Shaefer, USAF, Brig. Gen. Graham Shirley, USAF, Brig. Gen. Raymond Shulstad, USAF, Brig. Gen. Stan Smith, USAF, Brig. Gen. Ralph S. Smith, USAF, Brig. Gen. Donald Smith, USA, Brig. Gen. David M. Snyder, USAF, Brig. Gen. Michael Joseph Tashjian, USAF, Brig. Gen. Richard Louis Ursone, USA, Brig. Gen. Earl Van Inwegen, USAF, Brig. Gen. Terrence P. Woods, USAF, Brig. Gen. Mitchell Zais, USA, Brig. Gen. Allan Ralph Zenowitz, USA

more at..http://patriotpost.us/perspective/15311


kind a looks like real men know who will be watching their backs..

Jetland
11-05-2012, 11:20 AM
I am only interested in the Patriot Post if is
A: Right
B: Free
WHAT are saying it is both.....well gosh it must be my lucky day

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
11-05-2012, 11:26 AM
but lonestar dont you know if it isnt reported on CNN or MSNBC, ABC, CBS ,NBC news it doesn't count .
and Benghazi ,if its only on FOX then its all made up and fake .
i bet Benghazi debacle was really started by conservatives, GOP ,Romney to make the president look bad
here look at this its republicans attacking American Consulate in Benghazi

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ejHQYZti8D0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
11-05-2012, 11:27 AM
but seriously go to youtube and read the description and the translation of what they are saying

lonestar
11-05-2012, 11:53 AM
I am only interested in the Patriot Post if is
A: Right
B: Free
WHAT are saying it is both.....well gosh it must be my lucky day


A: for the most part yes they are correct all the time..
B : yes it is free


What I love about them are the daily quotes from our forefathers..

lonestar
11-07-2012, 03:18 PM
Chronicle · November 7, 2012
The Foundation

"I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. 'Tis the business of little minds to shrink, but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death." --Thomas Paine

Publisher's Note: The Real Road Forward

Patriots, as the sun rises on this morning after a battle lost, when considering the seemingly insurmountable odds we face in our quest to restore Liberty and the Rule of Law enshrined in our Declaration and Constitution, find strength in these words from the most noble of Founding Patriots, George Washington.

In 1777, at a very dark moment amid defeats in the first quest for Liberty -- and just before the fall of Philadelphia and the brutal Winter at Valley Forge, Washington wrote one of his generals: "We should never despair, our Situation before has been unpromising and has changed for the better, so I trust, it will again. If new difficulties arise, we must only put forth new Exertions and proportion our Efforts to the exigency of the times."

I am reminded of the words of Thomas Paine from his Revolutionary pamphlet, The American Crisis: "These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman."

When Samuel Adams signed the Declaration, he said, "We have this day restored the Sovereign to whom all men ought to be obedient. He reigns in heaven and from the rising to the setting of the sun, let His kingdom come."

Indeed, God is Sovereign in the affairs of men.

As for the challenges we face, hold fast to this wisdom from James 1:2-4: "Consider it pure joy, my brothers and sisters, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith produces perseverance. Let perseverance finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything."

Patriots, we have lost a battle, not the war. Hold your head high and redouble your courage and resolve. Remain steadfast in your devotion to Liberty and hold the line.

more at..

http://patriotpost.us/editions/15364/

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
11-07-2012, 04:36 PM
sigh leave it up to big cities to F things up i dont think im gonna bother to ever vote again nothing ever goes my way well the legalize weed and that too got F ed up . and dont get me started on the F up on spiderman that idiot i mean editor in cheif did to my favorite hero
HE MADE A DEAL WITH THE DEVIL my favorite hero MADE A DEAL WITH THE DEVIL ever since then i consider spiderman dead to me

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
11-07-2012, 04:37 PM
next time lets run Chuck Norris as president .first person to pop in here and say the name steven sagal will be smacked in the mouth lol

lonestar
11-08-2012, 12:41 PM
Alexander's Column – November 8, 2012
Halftime Is Over ... We're Back in the FIGHT!
the After Action Report

"Honor, justice, and humanity, forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we received from our gallant ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to receive from us. We cannot endure the infamy and guilt of resigning succeeding generations to that wretchedness which inevitably awaits them if we basely entail hereditary bondage on them." --Thomas Jefferson (1775)

Distress signal

Tuesday, the final ballot-box battle to unseat Barack Hussein Obama was narrowly repelled, but in the process, his socialist cadres exposed the full range of weapons and tactics in their arsenal. While our unceasing efforts to defend Liberty would have received an assist by a Romney-Ryan victory, our mission in support of Liberty is not predicated upon who sits in the White House or on Capitol Hill.

While the Obama-Biden ticket's marginal victory certainly does not constitute a mandate, Obama will pursue his statist agenda as if he had won every vote rather than just the slim 50.4 percent majority. His objective remains "fundamentally transforming the United States of America," and he will pursue the centerpiece of that objective, breaking the back of free enterprise, with vigor.

American Patriots across the nation have and will continue to engage his socialist cadres every time they step onto the field.

Future Battle:

Election Results

Obama: 60.6 million or 50.4 percent. Romney: 57.8 million, 48.1 percent. Turnout was down 14 million votes and Obama got almost 10 million fewer votes than in 2008. Romney received two million fewer votes than McCain in 2008, but final counts are not in yet. Voter turnout of three Democrat constituencies, black, Latino and 18-30-year-old voters, was up almost 6 percent from average election turnouts in recent decades, and that 6 percent put Obama over the top. Exit polls in key swing states won by Obama indicated that there were significantly fewer votes cast by faith-motivated voters.

read more at..http://patriotpost.us/alexander/15387/

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
11-08-2012, 12:49 PM
^

Lone Nut, Dan, et al, are doing more to help Democrats get elected than the Dems themselves!

Keep up the good work, little fellas! :thumbs:

lonestar
11-13-2012, 01:17 PM
Brief · November 12, 2012
The Foundation

"We must take human nature as we find it, perfection falls not to the share of mortals." --George Washington
Opinion in Brief

David Petraeus

"David Petraeus's resignation [as CIA Director] marks the end of one of the great postwar military and government careers.... But for now, the explanation of Petraeus's resignation unfortunately raises more questions than it answers, in a number of significant ways: Fairly or not, questions will be raised why this Washington-style Friday-afternoon resignation occurred after rather than before the election -- a question that does not necessarily suggest that Petraeus did not take the proper nonpartisan course. But just days after [the election], we are already beginning to hear of all sorts of 'sudden' news: the Iranian attack on a U.S. drone; the plight of the Hurricane Sandy victims ... as much more severe than we were led to believe; the sudden publicity of the 'fiscal cliff'; and the Benghazi hearings. In that unfortunate politicized landscape comes the Petraeus bombshell. We were beginning to sense that the crime of Benghazi ... and the cover-up ... were not the entire story of the 9/11/2012 attack.... If rumors are true that the liaison may have involved biographer Paula Broadwell, co-author of an extremely favorable biography of Petraeus, then there are additional ethical issues that, fairly or not, call into question Broadwell's bona fides as an author and the portrait of Petraeus in her warmly received book. And if the FBI was involved, then additional questions arise over the reasons they also became interested -- when, why, how, and on whose prompt? Because of both Petraeus's sterling reputation and his high office, infidelity takes on greater importance than if it were -- how absurd to write this -- merely that of a lesser figure like Bill Clinton, whose serial miscreant conduct was taken for granted, even when he was a sitting president. If the affair occurred while Petraeus was general, it contradicted the code of military justice; if while at the CIA, it posed a potential security breach. For most of us, however, Petraeus is forever frozen as the hero of 2007-8, when, battered by the congressional hearings ... and ad hominem attack ads in the New York Times ... he nonetheless pressed ahead and broke the back of the insurgency -- in part due to his competence, his unmatched reputation, and the talented circle around him. ... [T]he truth was always that he sought to serve his country regardless of politics." --historian Victor Davis Hanson

http://patriotpost.us/editions/15429/

It also seems that the FBI with held this info till after the election..

Lets hope that congress will hold full blown investigations into this and most of the rest of nobamas sleazy administrative deals..

Fedaykin
11-13-2012, 04:34 PM
http://patriotpost.us/editions/15429/

It also seems that the FBI with held this info till after the election..

Lets hope that congress will hold full blown investigations into this and most of the rest of nobamas sleazy administrative deals..

More bull****, Cantor (house maj. leader, R) was made aware of the situation in October.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/11/us/petraeus-cia-resignation/index.html

Try again. Throw enough **** against the wall and something will stick.

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
11-13-2012, 04:40 PM
^

Lone Nut, Dan, et al, are doing more to help Democrats get elected than the Dems themselves!

Keep up the good work, little fellas! :thumbs:

hello pot kettle says hi

lonestar
11-13-2012, 05:26 PM
More bull****, Cantor (house maj. leader, R) was made aware of the situation in October.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/11/us/petraeus-cia-resignation/index.html

Try again. Throw enough **** against the wall and something will stick.

again your quoting CNN sure thing.. that is almost as bad as msnbc..

but then your gullible.... some day you'll grow out of it..

Fedaykin
11-13-2012, 10:37 PM
again your quoting CNN sure thing.. that is almost as bad as msnbc..

but then your gullible.... some day you'll grow out of it..

You mean a CNN article talking about a Times article that was acknowledged as accurate?

But, I wouldn't expect an idjit like you to do anything but the kind of crap you're trying to pull by attacking the source.

Odysseus
11-14-2012, 02:15 AM
next time lets run Chuck Norris as president .first person to pop in here and say the name steven sagal will be smacked in the mouth lol

Don't you mean Steven Seagal?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Seagal

lonestar
11-15-2012, 08:50 PM
Alexander's Column – November 15, 2012
Mapping the Right Road Forward
Big Problems Require Big Solutions

"[T]he crisis is arrived when we must assert our rights, or submit to every imposition, that can be heaped upon us, till custom and use shall make us as tame and abject slaves." --George Washington (1774)

I've heard that fruit doesn't fall far from its tree, and have often found that to be true. A bright young Patriot, who also happens to be my high-school daughter, demonstrated this principle just yesterday.

In a post-election summary to our fellow Patriots last week, I included images of election maps that exposed some facts Obama and his Leftist cadres don't want you to contemplate.

Chief among those facts are that the assault on Liberty we witnessed in the presidential election was led, as in 2008, primarily by urban dwellers, most of whom reside on "government plantations," and subsist on the spoils of what Obama calls "redistributive justice." That collectivist constituency now accounts for almost 50 (FIFTY) percent of Obama's voter base. Socialist Democrats have mastered the practice of co-opting (read: "buying") their allegiance and getting them to the polls. The good news is that about nine million fewer Obama voters showed up in 2012.

The county-by-county election (http://patriotpost.us/pages/288)maps clearly revealed the geographical delineation between the Left-leaning urban centers and the Right-leaning rest of the nation. Naturally, I observed that this delineation formed reasonable lines for secession, and I recalled these words from fellow Tennessean Nathan Bedford Forrest on the Second War for Independence (as it was known in the South): "I loved the old government. I loved the old Constitution. I do not hate it; I am opposing now only the radical revolutionists who are trying to destroy it."

So, you ask, what does this have to do with fruit trees?

My daughter walked into my home study (affectionately called "The Man Cave" around our house), and she was sporting one of those expressions that conveyed she was on a mission. She asked, "Can I sign a petition for our state to secede?"

Apparently, as you may have heard, some despondent souls across the nation, still licking their wounds after Obama's re-election, are preparing to surrender the future of the Republic. They have launched official secession petitions from all 50 states on the most illogical of places to undertake such folly -- Obama's White House "We the People" page for online petitions, which promises a response from the president to every petition that gathers more than 25,000 signatures.

Those petitions are closing in on a million signatures.

My daughter got wind of this, and she's now ready to grab her M-4 and a case of 5.56 and start over, with her brothers at her side! I love her spirit. She's one of those "quiet girls," but if you're on the wrong side of Liberty, you'd best get out of her field of fire.

After telling her that she most certainly could sign a petition for secession (just not one managed by Obama's lemmings), we had a discussion about the frustrations that have led some of our countrymen to give up on ever restoring Rule of Law.

I explained that nine of the secession petitions on the White House website have already exceeded the 25,000 signature threshold, and I anticipate Obama's response will be some version of what he has already said about grassroots conservatives -- something about those Tea Party people being an "angry mob" who are "waving their little tea bags around" while "they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

Obama and his sycophantic Leftmedia will have a good laugh with these understandable but ill-conceived petitions -- and that's unfortunate, because the petitions provide an opening for Obama to further marginalize legitimate grievances about the Left's collective disregard for our Constitution.

Now, please don't flood our website's "Comments" page with a defense of these petitions. I happen to agree with old N.B. Forrest in his assessment of the principle cause of the first attempt at secession, and I take exception to the gubmint schools' uncritical and unflinching idolization of Abe Lincoln, whose reckless disregard of our Constitution exceeds that of any president in our history, with the possible exception of Barack Obama.

read more at..

http://patriotpost.us/alexander/15495/

W*GS
11-15-2012, 08:56 PM
Heya lonestar...

Go ****ing move somewhere else.

lonestar
11-15-2012, 10:34 PM
Heya lonestar...

Go ****ing move somewhere else.

Once again Wild Assed Guess. Another class post.

Again With no input or dialog.

It is Sad when folks are so ingrained in their own Male Bovine Excrement they are unwilling to think.

Please oh please put me on IGGY. So I do not have to look at your post.

Unless I misunderstood this is still a forum where ideas are exchanged.. It is not like you are being forced to read them.

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
11-15-2012, 10:56 PM
Don't you mean Steven Seagal?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Seagal

yeah bad spelling my bad

Spider
11-16-2012, 12:48 AM
The ObamaNation Plantation
read more at..

http://patriotpost.us/alexander/14816/

sounds like quite a few on here..

boy you're nuttier than squirrel ****....

lonestar
11-16-2012, 07:25 PM
The Heavy Burden of ObamaCare

"Society in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one." --Thomas Paine

Now that the reality of Barack Obama's re-election is settling in, the U.S. economy is shifting and making the necessary adjustments to brace for four more agonizing years of Hope 'n' Change™. In the last 10 days, we've seen news of the fallout in everything from the stock market plummeting to jobless claims skyrocketing and the poverty rate spiking. Thanks to Obama's assault on job creators, the list of businesses announcing layoffs, cuts and closings is growing daily. But not to worry: Obama says the "private sector is doing fine."

There are two policies that bear primary blame: ObamaCare and the fiscal cliff. Markets and business owners are struggling to prepare for these two gut punches. With the fiscal cliff, of course, higher taxes could cripple particularly small businesses' ability to hire or expand. But ObamaCare is doing much the same thing in a way that will only worsen as the tentacles of regulation extend ever further.

There are many more mandates in the law besides the infamous individual mandate to buy health insurance. For example, businesses of 50 or more employees face the potentially crushing burden of providing full, approved benefits to employees that work more than 30 hours -- considered "full-time" employees per the decree of the new law -- or fines of $2,000 per employee if they don't comply. The response is entirely predictable: Businesses avoid hiring that 50th employee, they reduce hours for their current employees or they pay the penalty, which is often cheaper than insurance, though it leaves employees on government exchanges.

Darden Restaurants, the chain that owns Olive Garden, Red Lobster, Longhorn Steakhouse and others, falls into the latter category. The chain announced in October that it would begin limiting employee hours in some markets. McDonald's, White Castle and Denny's, among others, are looking to do likewise. Both Darden and McDonald's were recipients of ObamaCare waivers two years ago. So much for that. John Schnatter, CEO of Papa John's, estimates that ObamaCare will cost the company between $5 million to $8 million annually, translating to reduced employee hours and higher prices.

These businesses are between the proverbial rock and a hard place. ObamaCare will cost them a fortune, but cutting employee hours and benefits and raising prices to account for it leaves them serving as the lightning rod -- by design. On top of that, businesses could very well face retribution from the White House. Washington, DC, employment law attorney Robert B. Fitzpatrick said as much when he noted that if businesses are "just playing with the numbers, playing with the hours to try to avoid compliance ... there are going to be consequences." By "consequences," of course, Fitzpatrick means lawsuits -- just one more way that ObamaCare was a huge bone thrown to trial lawyers.

Meanwhile, states must setup federally mandated insurance exchanges by Dec. 14, a deadline pushed back twice already. Republican governors stalled on implementation, hoping that Obama would be defeated and his abomination of a law could be repealed.

Leftists say that because the states are the ones doing the work, this is a great example of federalism, right? Wrong. The federal government has no constitutional authority to dictate to states what they must do. Many states are taking this position and refusing to set up the exchanges. Important decisions will be dictated from Washington anyway, so why provide them cover as faux deputies? This peaceful revolt of sorts could help ObamaCare collapse under its own weight, and, though that won't be pretty, it may provide leverage for undoing the law.

Obama's campaign slogan was Forward, borrowed from his Marxist predecessors in Europe. The American people were Forewarned, but 60 million voters still bought his snake oil, and now many individuals, families and businesses will pay a high price for that decision. Yet those of us who cherish Liberty and Rule of Law must not give up.

http://patriotpost.us/editions/15513/

lonestar
11-16-2012, 07:30 PM
Chronicle · November 14, 2012
The Foundation

"The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse." --James Madison

Obama's energy policy

"Sometimes the revolution politicians seek isn't the one they get. Consider the irony -- and the opportunity -- in Monday's report that the U.S. is likely to surpass Saudi Arabia as the world's largest oil producer as early as 2020. In its annual world energy outlook, the Paris-based International Energy Agency (IEA) says the global energy map 'is being redrawn by the resurgence in oil and gas production in the United States.' The U.S. will increase its production to about 23 million barrels a day in 10 years from about 18 million barrels a day now, the IEA predicts. ... The biggest potential threat may come from federal regulation in Mr. Obama's second term. Though he tried to take credit for the fracking revolution in his second debate with Mitt Romney, his EPA has long wanted to supplant state regulators and will grab any opportunity to do so. Perhaps the election of pro-fracking Democrats like soon-to-be Senator Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota (home to the monster Bakken Shale field) can give the new energy revolution some needed bipartisan buy-in. Historians will one day marvel that so much political and financial capital was invested in a green-energy revolution at the very moment a fossil fuel revolution was aborning. But politicians failing to spot the trend until they start taking credit for it is an old story. Let's hope they don't ruin it now that they've noticed." --The Wall Street Journal

more at

http://patriotpost.us/editions/15474/

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
11-16-2012, 08:19 PM
but but obama care is supposed to bring forth a era of utopia so what if you have to pay for it even rich poeple who can afford health care its UTOPIA heaven on earth . alkaida is no more oops Benghazi well betray us fell on that sword for obama .and it was because of a video .thank god they got that guy in prison.
they couldn't of sent any help to those people nah time they went thru airport security it be too late. the drone video, well obama thought it was a action movie no wait no drone it was all fiction yeah.
Benghazi never ever happen move along you repukaton liar racist homophobe .

lonestar
11-29-2012, 12:14 AM
Brief · November 26, 2012
The Foundation

"The hand of providence has been so conspicuous in all this, that he must be worse than an infidel that lacks faith, and more than wicked, that has not gratitude enough to acknowledge his obligations." --George Washington

Faith and Family
Contrast between our first and latest presidents

"Yet again, President Obama's Thanksgiving message eschewed any direct reference to thanking God, making this the fourth straight year in which the President of the United States has ignored the central message of the holiday in favor of political grandstanding. This year, Obama's central message was that now that he's been re-elected, Americans should agree with all of his policies. His unity routine sounds strangely empty after a campaign in which he focused on dividing Americans. ... No mention of thanking God. None. But, of course, we're used to this. In 2011, there was no mention of God at all. In 2010, Obama was closer, but still missed the mark ('we'll spend some time taking stock of what we're thankful for: the God-given bounty of America, and the blessings of one another'). In 2009, Obama didn't thank God, either. Compare that to Obama's Thanksgiving Day proclamations, which he does not read or speak. Those are filled with God -- at least for the last three years. In his first year, filled with the vim and vigor of his original election, Obama preferred to eschew any direct thanking of God even in his proclamation. Of course, nobody sees these proclamations, so Obama doesn't have to be embarrassed about them. It's no wonder that this President's Democratic National Committee platform tried to remove God. He's not a big fan of the Big Guy. Even on Thanksgiving. After all, what need do you have for God when you've got the state?" --columnist Ben Shapiro

Read this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/editions/15626/

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
11-29-2012, 03:41 AM
^

You're no patriot.

You're a chicken head who services globalist robber barons.

ghwk
11-29-2012, 04:25 AM
Actually he's just another POS from Texas, that's about all.

houghtam
11-29-2012, 06:46 AM
Read this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/editions/15626/

Thank you SO much for posting this.

I never thought a sitting president would have it in him to neglect to mention God in an official speech.

My opinion of Obama just went up due to this. I know what I'm thankful for :)

DenverBrit
11-29-2012, 09:48 AM
Read this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/editions/15626/

"Yet again, President Obama's Thanksgiving message eschewed any direct reference to thanking God,

Thank god!!

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
11-29-2012, 10:33 AM
Obama just dont like using the word god very much.
no big deal but it sorta maybe gives one a lil insight into his thinking which is he dont like using the word god . fine with me.
i dont like using the word President when saying the words barrack obummer i mean Obama just saying .
try not to rage ok if you people are ok he dont say god you should be ok i dont use the word president when describing ohdumber i mean obummer obama.

DenverBrit
11-29-2012, 11:13 AM
http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/28664468.jpg

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
11-29-2012, 01:50 PM
^

As in "trying to read and write above a third-grade level."

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
11-29-2012, 03:23 PM
hey i dont mind if obama doesn't say god in his speeches, and i dont mind if i dont use the word president and obama in the same sentence .
its not a big deal for me if that obama guy dont want to use the word god or terrorist either .

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
11-29-2012, 03:30 PM
oh lone its no big deal if obama has a hard time saying the G word or the T word i be a hypocrite if i got on him for not using those words.
i got a problem using the P word as in President .
when i talk about him.
now if only the others here can refrain from raging because i cant use the P word when i talk about that ohudumber guy i mean ohbummer ohscummer i mean ohblunder obama yeah thats it ohdumber i mean obama. there got it right im sorry have a hard time spelling that word ohscummer .

lonestar
11-29-2012, 06:04 PM
Alexander's Column – November 29, 2012
American Patriots and Guns
All Patriots Are Obligated to Be Armed and Ready

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic." --Joseph Story

On the most recent "Black Friday," the day after Thanksgiving, which has become the biggest commercial sales day of the year, despite the continuing economic decline, there were record sales in one notable product category: Guns.

According to Stephen Fischer, director of the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System, "NICS experienced its highest number of transactions processed since system inception [in 1998], with 154,873, which is nearly 20 percent over the 129,166 processed on Black Friday 2011." This year's total checks will undoubtedly beat last year's record of 16.4 million.

In fact, the top 10 record gun sales days have occurred since Barack Obama's election in 2008, and gun ownership has skyrocketed over the last four years. According to a worldwide survey conducted the year before Obama's election, though the United States had only 5% of the world's population, Americans owned 50% of the world's guns. Of course, unlike virtually every other nation, Americans are ensured the incontrovertible right to arm themselves.

The current estimate of legally and privately held guns in the U.S. is more than 250 million (the average gun-owning household having three guns).

With that as a backdrop, I was asked this week if Patriots have an obligation to arm themselves -- to be gun owners, and be proficient at the use of arms. I thought at first the question was rhetorical, but after some consideration, I realize that there are millions of grassroots Patriots who are NOT among the 60 million plus Patriots who are already law-abiding gun owners.

Apparently, the question needs to be addressed, as the answer may not be as obvious to some folks as it should be. By way of responding to this question, let me first briefly reiterate the historical and enduring case for gun ownership, which is as relevant today and tomorrow as it was at the dawn of our national founding.

There are two foundational tenets of Essential Liberty that all American Patriots must understand and embrace in order to sustain Liberty and extend it to the next generation.

First, it is "self-evident" that Liberty is an "unalienable right," innately assured as "endowed by our Creator." In other words, it is not awarded by men or government; it is the birthright of all people.

Second, as history records countless examples of men using the power of government to arbitrarily revoke Liberty and invoke tyranny, our Founders understood that, in the words of John Adams, "liberty must at all hazards be supported." Adams continued, "We have a right to it, derived from our Maker. But if we had not, our fathers have earned and bought it for us, at the expense of their ease, their estates, their pleasure, and their blood."

Thus, all American Patriots today, those imbued with the spirit of Liberty that has motivated Patriots since 1776, must be prepared to defend both individual and corporate Liberty, to defend the Rule of Law over the rule of men.

Of the ability to defend Liberty, James Madison wrote, "The ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone. ... The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation ... forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition." (Federalist No. 46)

To ensure that advantage, our Founders enumerated a constitutional prohibition on government interference with that barrier, the Second Amendment, affirming, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

In his exhaustive "Commentaries on the Constitution," Madison's Supreme Court Justice, Joseph Story, wrote, "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."

In other words, gun ownership is not about "the tradition of hunting" as Barack Obama claimed recently, unless he was referring to hunting those who infringe on the inalienable rights of man. Of course, Liberty is the antithesis of statism, which is why Obama and his socialist Democrat cadres are endeavoring to undermine the Second Amendment.

Read this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/alexander/15685/

lonestar
12-03-2012, 08:45 PM
Brief · December 3, 2012
The Foundation

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic." --Joseph Story

Re: The Left

"[C]olumnist Jason Whitlock of Fox Sports ... blamed the Second Amendment to the United State Constitution for the murder/suicide of Jovan Belcher, linebacker for the Kansas City Chiefs. Calling for the NFL to have cancelled the Chiefs' Sunday game, Whitlock wrote: 'I would argue that your rationalizations speak to how numb we are in this society to gun violence and murder. We've come to accept our insanity. We'd prefer to avoid seriously reflecting upon the absurdity of the prevailing notion that the second amendment somehow enhances our liberty rather than threatens it. How many young people have to die senselessly? How many lives have to be ruined before we realize the right to bear arms doesn't protect us from a government equipped with stealth bombers, predator drones, tanks and nuclear weapons? Our current gun culture simply ensures that more and more domestic disputes will end in the ultimate tragedy, and that more convenience-store confrontations over loud music coming from a car will leave more teenage boys bloodied and dead.' Whitlock never lays responsibility for Jovan Belcher's murder of his 22-year-old girlfriend and his suicide at the feet of Jovan Belcher. In fact, he describes Belcher as 'A 25-year-old kid,' which is simply asinine -- at age 25, you are no longer a 'kid.' You are a man, with real responsibilities -- Belcher had a three-month-old child. ... If Belcher wanted to kill his girlfriend and then himself, he didn't need a gun to do it. And no matter how much Whitlock propounds that 'Handguns do not enhance our safety,' Kasandra Perkins would have had a much better shot at life if she'd been the one with the handgun." --Breitbart's Ben Shapiro

Editor's Note: Not only is Whitlock dead wrong, as was NBC's Bob Costas in quoting him during Sunday Night Football, but, as Mark Alexander argued Thursday, all Patriots are obligated to be armed and ready.

Read this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/editions/15728/

lonestar
12-03-2012, 09:51 PM
Digest · November 30, 2012

Gambling With the Nation's Future

"No government, any more than an individual, will long be respected without being truly respectable." --James Madison

Democrats' fiscal offer

Good news, America: Those who believe that our nation has "barbarians at the gates" are dead wrong. The bad news: The barbarians are already well inside the gates, running the federal government. The Barbarian-in-Chief himself recently served up this point by lamenting, "I cannot just impose my will on Congress ... even though sometimes I wish I could." Tyrants like to impose their will on legislative branches. Thank goodness this president would never really do that.

Within that context, we consider the fiscal cliff and related debt ceiling. A little history: The cliff looms not just because of expiring tax cuts, but because of a deal to raise the debt ceiling in 2011, in which certain cuts would happen automatically if Congress couldn't hammer out better details. Naturally, Congress displayed its usual inability to come up with even puny cuts, so here we are.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner offered House Republicans the first post-election White House deal: $1.6 trillion in higher taxes over 10 years (higher rates on the wealthy will generate only $80 billion annually, if that), $180 billion in new spending and vague promises to cut entitlement spending (growth) at an indeterminate future date, all while giving the president the power to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling, perhaps permanently. Sounds to us like he might be trying to "impose his will on Congress."

Obama, of course, is promising the same thing Democrats always do: Higher taxes now and mythical spending cuts later. Picture Lucy pulling the football away from Charlie Brown and you get the idea.
Read this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/editions/15705/

lonestar
12-06-2012, 12:56 PM
Alexander's Column – December 6, 2012
The Fiscal Bluff
The !@#$%^&* Caucus's 'Grecian Formula' for Economic Collapse

"The multiplication of public offices, increase of expense beyond income, growth and entailment of a public debt, are indications soliciting the employment of the pruning knife." --Thomas Jefferson (1821)

Have you heard about this "fiscal cliff" thing -- I mean have you heard ENOUGH about it?

Well, for 16 months I have dutifully avoided devoting any time and bandwidth to the tax increases and budget cuts scheduled for January 2, 2013, if Barack Hussein Obama fails to sign pre-emptive legislation. However, now that the dust has settled on Obama's landslide 50.9 percent re-election and the status-quo reseating of Republican House and Democrat Senate majorities, it's time to put Obama's Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA) "deal" into proper Patriot perspective.

In August of 2011, Obama signed this agreement into law in order to get a debt ceiling increase of $2.1 trillion. That in turn allowed him to borrow more money from the Red Chinese to fund his runaway socialist entitlement programs and bloated "stimulus spending" boondoggles -- and, moreover, it allowed him to avoid default and another downgrade of U.S. credit.

In return for more spending ability, Obama agreed to caps on discretionary spending growth to "save" $950 billion over 10 years. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid refer to those caps as "cuts." He also agreed to establish a Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (a.k.a. "super committee") to implement another $1.5 trillion in "savings." If, however, the super committee didn't come to an agreement by November of 2011, Obama's suggested sequestration trigger -- automatic cuts to the budget of $1.2 trillion over the next decade -- would commence on January 2, 2013. (To view mandatory versus discretionary spending, click here.)

Republicans passed the BCA hoping to slow down Obama's "Grecian Formula" economic plan -- his second-term strategy to break the back of free enterprise, crushing it under the weight of mounting taxes, regulations and debt, and ultimately, "fundamentally transforming the United States of America" into a collectivist state under the irrevocable dominance of his Socialist Democrat Party.

In his first term, Obama made significant progress toward that transformation. Much of his massive deficit spending was allocated for increased government employment. When Obama took office, federal, state and local government jobs were 33 percent of all employment. Government jobs now constitute 39 percent of all employment, and Obama wants to grow that number to more than 50 percent with additional "stimulus spending," irrevocably socializing the American economy.

Free enterprise, one of the foundational pillars of Liberty, is the nemesis of Obama's transformational plan, as implicit in his "you didn't build that" condemnation of entrepreneurship and his ridiculous assertion that "The private sector is doing fine," but we need more spending to create "public sector" jobs.

Though the super committee arrived at no agreement on budget cuts to stave off sequestration in January, the Republican House recently passed an extension of the Bush tax cuts, again. (It's the potential expiration of those cuts that Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke warned would constitute a "massive fiscal cliff.")

However, Obama is holding the Bush tax breaks extension hostage, calling his class warfare "tax the rich" rhetoric "a balanced, responsible approach to deficit reduction" and using it as a smoke screen to obfuscate his real agenda -- avoiding the third rail of American politics, "entitlement reforms," and any substantive spending reductions.

Read more of this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/alexander/15780/

lonestar
12-09-2012, 02:48 PM
Digest · December 7, 2012
Government Economy Security Culture
Unemployment and the Fiscal Bluff

"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it might cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it." --Patrick Henry

Gaming the numbers

November's jobs numbers are out and, though they're "better than expected," they're far short of a real recovery. The U.S. economy added 146,000 jobs in November, and headline unemployment dropped to 7.7 percent, the lowest rate since December 2008. But that number is deceptive.

The rate dropped because some 542,000 people left the workforce. If labor participation remained the same as it was in January 2009, headline unemployment would be 10.7 percent. The U-6 rate, which includes the underemployed and those who have given up looking for work, is 14.4 percent. Notably, the unemployment for blacks, who gave Barack Obama 96 percent of the vote, is 13.2 percent. Additionally, September and October numbers were revised down by a total of 49,000 jobs -- awfully convenient now that the election is over!

At least one person thinks that unemployment is a huge boon for the economy. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) says that unemployment insurance benefits -- which by the way cost $520 billion over the last five years -- "probably are one of the most important stimuli for the economy." So if more people become unemployed, the economy will grow even faster. Problem solved.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics did note one bright spot: "[O]ur analysis suggests that Hurricane Sandy did not substantively impact the national employment and unemployment estimates for November." That's good news, but Hurricane Barack and the fiscal bluff certainly are depressing the recovery, such as it is. Some 23 million Americans remain unemployed or underemployed, and millions more who are working haven't received pay increases in years to keep up with inflation. The economy is in a holding pattern while politicos in Washington preen and pontificate about the cliff.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that under "current law," i.e., if (when) we go over the cliff, the federal budget will still increase by 55 percent over the next 10 years, while tax collection will soar to an all-time high of 21.4 percent of GDP. CBO estimates, however, assume no economic change from higher taxes, which is unrealistic. In other words, higher rates won't necessarily bring in the projected revenue because businesses and consumers will change their behavior to avoid taxes. Government spending is also a tax in the sense that every dollar spent by the government must first be taken out of the economy.

A final fiscal cliff note: Barack Obama is demanding a return of the top tax rates to those in effect during the supposed nirvana of the Clinton years, and he's likely to get all the rates of Clinton's era. In fact, that's what former DNC chief Howard Dean said is necessary. "[T]he truth is everybody needs to pay more taxes, not just the rich," Dean admitted. "[W]e're not going to get out of this deficit problem unless we raise taxes across the board, to go back to what Bill Clinton had and his taxes." They're coming for the middle class, too, and some of them aren't afraid to say so.

To get spending to Clinton levels, however, the federal budget would have to be cut by an astounding 37 percent. According to Breitbart, "Adjusted for inflation, Clinton spent $2.24 trillion in 1993; that level stayed relatively stagnant, rising to $2.41 trillion in 2001." Obama is now spending nearly twice that. So instead of the $1.2 trillion in baseline "cuts" over 10 years outlined in the sequester, Congress would need to make real cuts of that much this year alone.

As we all know, there's a greater chance that pigs will fly.

http://patriotpost.us/editions/15804/

lonestar
12-10-2012, 07:12 PM
Brief · December 10, 2012
The Foundation

"There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily." --George Washington
For the Record

"The more you drill down into the November jobs report, the worse it looks. ... 1. The two-tenths drop in the unemployment rate was because people gave up looking for work. The labor force participation rate fell to 63.6% from 63.8% in October. If it had just held steady since then, the unemployment rate would be back over 8%. Indeed, if the LFP rate was just where it was in November 2011, the unemployment rate would be 8.3%. Some 542,000 Americans left the labor force just last month. 2. If labor force participation was at its January 2009 level, the unemployment rate would be a whopping 10.7%. ... 3. In November, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose by 4 cents to $23.63. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have risen by 1.7%. Unfortunately, inflation -- as measured by the consumer price index -- has risen by 2.2% over the past year, meaning average hourly earnings have fallen by 0.5% in real terms. 4. The number of long-term unemployed remains at sky-high 40.1%, the same as in August. 5. Since the beginning of this year, employment growth has averaged 151,000 per month, about the same as the average monthly job gain of 153,000 in 2011. At that pace, the U.S. would not return to pre-Great Recession employment levels until after 2025.... Bottom line: The November jobs report showed job creation far too slow to get the labor market back to pre-recession levels or boost wages. Faster, please." --American Enterprise Institute's James Pethokoukis

Read this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/editions/15824/

DenverBrit
12-11-2012, 12:02 AM
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/zjqZ0aIAgFM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

http://ken1981.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/spam-1.gif?w=500

lonestar
12-11-2012, 02:56 AM
oh you are so cute. I'll bet you are so proud of yourself.

Typical liberal puke when they have no way to rebut something, they call names.

If you do not like what is posted. do not open the thread.

If anything your post was spam.

DenverBrit
12-11-2012, 07:46 AM
oh you are so cute. I'll bet you are so proud of yourself.

Typical liberal puke when they have no way to rebut something, they call names.

If you do not like what is posted. do not open the thread.

If anything your post was spam.

LOL

I certainly didn't call you names like: a spam driven, bigoted simpleton with the IQ of a walnut.

You on the other hand, can't help yourself.

lonestar
12-11-2012, 08:11 AM
LOL

I certainly didn't call you names like: a spam driven, bigoted simpleton with the IQ of a walnut.

You on the other hand, can't help yourself.

As I said when all liberals have nothing valid to say they change the subject and call names like you have by implication and in this case outright.

But I had guessed you were different, had more class.

My bad.

Requiem
12-11-2012, 10:02 AM
LOL

I certainly didn't call you names like: a spam driven, bigoted simpleton with the IQ of a walnut.

You on the other hand, can't help yourself.

This is the same guy who got his jollies harassing teenagers at Broncos Country. He would pick a fight with a cow turd if he could.

DenverBrit
12-11-2012, 10:36 AM
As I said when all liberals have nothing valid to say they change the subject and call names like you have by implication and in this case outright.

But I had guessed you were different, had more class.

My bad.

Like I said, I didn't call you names, but you sure did.

Typical liberal puke when they have no way to rebut something, they call names.

frerottenextelway
12-11-2012, 02:50 PM
blah blah blah...Read this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/editions/15705/

The debt limit isn't for future spending, it's for the actual paying of the spending that Congress has already approved and done. Which makes that entire post moderately retarded.

ghwk
12-11-2012, 03:52 PM
He's just an angry old man. Picture a muppet sitting in the balcony, but not as funny.

lonestar
12-12-2012, 11:53 AM
Chronicle · December 12, 2012
The Foundation

"The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man." --James Madison

Editorial Exegesis


"Michigan has passed a modest labor reform, and the result has been threats and violence from Democratic elected officials and their union henchmen. ... To hear the Democrats tell the tale, you would think that Governor Rick Snyder and Michigan's Republican-controlled legislature had abolished unions. In fact, the legislation merely prohibits unions from forcing workers to pay dues to them as a condition of employment, which is why such measures are called 'right-to-work laws.' The law imposes no limitation on unions' ability to organize, to engage in collective bargaining, or to strike. It merely forbids them to take money out of the pockets of workers who do not wish to join them. In response, Democratic legislator Douglas Geiss declared on the floor of the state house: 'There will be blood. There will be repercussions.' And indeed there were: Knife-wielding partisans brought down a tent on representatives from the conservative group Americans for Prosperity -- women and children among them -- and roughed up bystanders. Fox News contributor Steven Crowder was beaten by the same mob, punched repeatedly in the face. Michigan is the 24th state to enact a right-to-work law, and the most heavily unionized state to do so. ... Right-to-work laws do not necessarily hobble unions; rather, they force unions to compete for resources and prove their value to their workers. Some unions provide obvious value: In places in which private-sector unions already are strongly established, right-to-work laws have in fact had little effect on union membership. The critical difference is that workers have a choice. This is a principle that should be codified in law in every state, and at the federal level as well. ... The shrieking in Michigan isn't about working men's wages, but campaign coffers. That is why there is blood." --National Review



Upright

"First, this conservative success in Michigan is ... largely the result of liberal overreach. If the Dems and organized labor hadn't been so greedy in the election ... this probably wouldn't have happened, or at least not so fast. When the left goes too far it creates a counter-reaction from the right. That's what the 2010 midterms were about (but, alas, not the 2012 election). ... Second, and perhaps more important, facts will always drive public policy -- eventually. The plight of certain states will naturally lead to homegrown reforms. ... The fight in Washington may be bogged down, but the fights on the ground in the various states are going better than we might of hoped. Except of course in California, where you people are doomed." --columnist Jonah Goldberg

Get enlightened on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/editions/15864/

lonestar
12-12-2012, 11:54 AM
Like I said, I didn't call you names, but you sure did.

Actually I thought liberal puke would be a badge of honor for you..

lonestar
12-12-2012, 12:04 PM
He's just an angry old man. Picture a muppet sitting in the balcony, but not as funny.

ahahahahahaha Angry not a chance I have seen the ebb and flow of liberalism for decades..

I know it will reverse just like it did when carter fubared the economy back in the late 70's it is a matter of time before everyone figures it out and votes conservative the next time around..

I worked hard for many years and am quite happy with my life.. Retired making good money off of secure investments. Two houses paid for, cars all paid for, just completely remodeled this house (except for the converted garage, which is next to be done to make it my fitness room), ZERO DEBT as I stopped using charge cards a decade ago. Pool, hot Spa, sauna, Gourmet kitchen, have my 3D home theater to watch movies when I want, living the good life..

How about you?

DenverBrit
12-12-2012, 03:11 PM
Actually I thought liberal puke would be a badge of honor for you..

This coming from the whiner claiming to take the high road. ::)

W*GS
12-12-2012, 03:23 PM
I worked hard for many years and am quite happy with my life.. Retired making good money off of secure investments. Two houses paid for, cars all paid for, just completely remodeled this house (except for the converted garage, which is next to be done to make it my fitness room), ZERO DEBT as I stopped using charge cards a decade ago. Pool, hot Spa, sauna, Gourmet kitchen, have my 3D home theater to watch movies when I want, living the good life..

How about you?

You're living the life of a peasant in comparison.

houghtam
12-12-2012, 04:01 PM
ahahahahahaha Angry not a chance I have seen the ebb and flow of liberalism for decades..

I know it will reverse just like it did when carter fubared the economy back in the late 70's it is a matter of time before everyone figures it out and votes conservative the next time around..

I worked hard for many years and am quite happy with my life.. Retired making good money off of secure investments. Two houses paid for, cars all paid for, just completely remodeled this house (except for the converted garage, which is next to be done to make it my fitness room), ZERO DEBT as I stopped using charge cards a decade ago. Pool, hot Spa, sauna, Gourmet kitchen, have my 3D home theater to watch movies when I want, living the good life..

How about you?

Here you go again telling us how much better you are than us by how much money and stuff you have.

Here's a clue you don't even have to buy:

You live a sad life, and all your stuff will never compensate.

lonestar
12-12-2012, 05:03 PM
Here you go again telling us how much better you are than us by how much money and stuff you have.

Here's a clue you don't even have to buy:

You live a sad life, and all your stuff will never compensate.

ahahahahahahaha

you ****ing do not have a clue..

not even sure why I bother..

Here is Hoping you have had as a great life as I have when you retire..

Requiem
12-13-2012, 09:32 AM
Douche.

W*GS
12-13-2012, 09:34 AM
http://wpmu.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/trackback-spam.jpg

lonestar
12-13-2012, 09:44 AM
yet you seem not to have the intelligence or will power not to enter a thread you know is against your core beliefs..

who is the spammer..

W*GS
12-13-2012, 10:31 AM
who is the spammer..

You.

houghtam
12-13-2012, 10:55 AM
ahahahahahahaha

you ****ing do not have a clue..

not even sure why I bother..

Here is Hoping you have had as a great life as I have when you retire..

LOL now who's clueless? I'm in my early 30s and haven't had to work in over a year. I will definitely not be choosing to go back to work for another five years, and likely will never need to work another day in my life...all this 20 years before you, and all done while still being able to spend almost all my time with the wife and kids.

Keep buying stuff though...seems to be helping you cope with the emptiness in your life.

lonestar
12-13-2012, 05:16 PM
LOL now who's clueless? I'm in my early 30s and haven't had to work in over a year. I will definitely not be choosing to go back to work for another five years, and likely will never need to work another day in my life...all this 20 years before you, and all done while still being able to spend almost all my time with the wife and kids.

Keep buying stuff though...seems to be helping you cope with the emptiness in your life.

Well good for you..

I suspect that 98% of the others on here are not so lucky or talent as you were..

lonestar
12-13-2012, 05:21 PM
Alexander's Column – December 13, 2012
The 'NeoComs'
The Neo-Communist Economic Agenda

"We must make our election between economy and Liberty, or profusion and servitude." --Thomas Jefferson (1816)

"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of Socialism is the equal sharing of miseries. ... Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy." --Winston Churchill

Today, I have a new entry for the political lexicon to categorize the latest ideological iteration of Marxists in America: "Neo-Communists" or the abbreviated version, "NeoComs."

You're no doubt familiar with the label "Neo-Conservatives," and its shortened version, "NeoCons," to describe conservatives who have adapted to more interventionist foreign policies promoting democracy, and who support open trade policies. "Neo" differentiates these conservatives from the isolationist and non-interventionist conservatism of the 1930s -- until the attack on Pearl Harbor drew us into war with Japan and Germany.

At the other end of the political spectrum from the Ronald Reagan NeoCons are the NeoComs -- modern-day socialists who have risen, in the last decade, to dominate the Democrat Party. They have modified old Marxist doctrines and adapted them to current political platforms and policies using leftist propaganda more compatible with contemporary culture. Chief among these is the Democrat Party's tried and true "divide and conquer" disparity rhetoric, which foments discontent and division based on income, race, ethnicity, gender, education, occupation, etc.

However, bull pucky by any other name is still bull pucky. Democratic Socialism, like Nationalist Socialism, is nothing more than Marxist Socialism repackaged.

The objective of today's NeoComs is, as you by now know, "fundamentally transforming the United States of America," in order to "peacefully transition" from our constitutional republic and its free-enterprise economy to a socialist republic with a state-organized and regulated economy.

Ideological adherents of the American Communist Party made few political gains under that banner in the last century because the label "communist" was and remains "distasteful" to most Americans. Thus, NeoComs have infested the once-noble Democrat Party and are using it as cover for socialist policy implementation.

The political genes of the current cadres of NeoComs establish them as the direct descendants of the statist policies of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the programs he implemented under cover of the Great Depression.

Roosevelt, like most of today's wealthy liberal protagonists, was an "inheritance-welfare liberal" -- raised in a dysfunctional home and dependent on his financial inheritance rather than that essential spirit of self-reliance, which forms the core of American Liberty. Consequently, the "dependence ethos" irrevocably shaped by FDR's privileged upbringing is virtually indistinguishable from the dependence ethos of those who have been raised or inculcated with belief that they are reliant upon welfare handouts from the state.

way more to

Read this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/alexander/15881/

houghtam
12-13-2012, 05:34 PM
Well good for you..

I suspect that 98% of the others on here are not so lucky or talent as you were..

It has nothing to do with luck, nor talent (though I am quite talented both as a student and an employee). It's about what you value more. I never won the lottery, collected a trust fund or inheritance, and I never really made a ton of money working for either the stadium or the movie theaters.

I rent. I have one car which has almost 200,000 miles on it, and if we didn't need it for our kids, I'd give that away, as well.

However, I can name every one of my 3 year old's MILLION favorite characters and toys. I can carry on a conversation with him and understand every single thing that comes out of his mouth. My marriage has never been happier.

No thank you, I'm living the life. Jealousy is not in my nature.

lonestar
12-14-2012, 08:51 PM
Digest · December 14, 2012

A Defining Case for Marriage

"The foundation of national morality must be laid in private families." --John Adams

Marriage before the Court

The Supreme Court is set to hear a challenge against the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a statute passed by Congress in 1996 to protect marriage (i.e., to define it as a contract between one man and one woman). The case comes along with an appeal of the Ninth Circus Court's decision striking down California's Proposition 8, itself an attempt by state voters to inoculate against looming legal onslaughts that challenge marriage in its traditional meaning. Marriage, of course, is the building block of society. Thus, this case is of the utmost importance.

While DOMA may not be the best course of action as far as constitutional law is concerned -- the Constitution is silent on the issue of marriage, thus leaving it to the states -- its passage is certainly understandable. The law both protects states from having to recognize marriages formalized in other states and defines marriage for the purpose of federal law, specifically taxes. The latter is the section under challenge, and, frankly, not without justification under the Tenth Amendment.

Redefining the institution is a slippery slope that could end up being wide-open, anything-goes "marriage" between any two -- or more -- "things," whether humans or not. But the Left thinks they hold the trump card of "rights." Never mind the government's interest in having clearly discernible lines to legal benefits for those qualifying as being "married." Never mind decades of past legislative decisions that will have to be re-examined in light of these new "marriages." Never mind the state's interest in ensuring children don't grow up in dysfunctional homes. Also abandon any notion that states should have a say in the matter under the Tenth Amendment. No, the Left's operative issue is "gay" rights, above all others, and that makes it a federal case, almost by definition.

Although the Constitution is silent about marriage, neither Congress nor the Obama administration has been. Since both the legislative and executive branches are constitutionally restricted to those powers specifically enumerated within that document, neither should have any say as to what the term "marriage" means. Such definitions and decisions -- in a perfect world, at least -- are best left to the individual states. Couples can "vote with their feet" if they are unhappy with a given state's legislative policy regarding marriage.

One of the Founders' original ideas behind federalism was allowing each state to experiment with legislative policy so that those whose policies that worked would serve as trail guides to other states whose policies ended in failure. Their intent was never that the federal government should be the across-the-board arbiter of controversial decisions made by a state or group of states. Unfortunately, today's activists, judicial or otherwise, don't care about the Founders' intent.

Expect the SCOTUS decision to be 5-4 one way or the other. We suppose we'll hear a distorted reading of the Equal Protection Clause, using terms such as "rational basis," "important" and "compelling" interests and the like, each utterly fraught with subjective bars to clear -- or not clear. We do hope, however, that the decision won't further erode our federalist system.

Read more of this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/editions/15904/

W*GS
12-15-2012, 12:55 AM
Still pissed that miscegenation is allowed, eh, lonestar?

lonestar
12-15-2012, 01:52 AM
Still pissed that miscegenation is allowed, eh, lonestar?

Considering your commentary is full of Male Bovine Excretment as usual.

mis·ceg·e·na·tion [mi-sej-uh-ney-shuh n, mis-i-juh-] Show IPA
noun
1.
marriage or cohabitation between a man and woman of different races, especially, in the U.S., between a black and a white person.
2.
interbreeding between members of different races.
3.
the mixing or a mixture of races by interbreeding.


Just another Wild A ss Guess, in a long streak of them.

Typical liberal BS.

lonestar
12-17-2012, 10:51 PM
Brief · December 17, 2012
The Foundation

"May the father of all mercies scatter light, and not darkness, upon our paths." --George Washington


Publisher's Note: The Blood of Innocents
Newtown memorial

A week ago, I received a text message and photograph of the Columbine Memorial, a solemn place dedicated to the memory of 12 students and a teacher who were murdered by two sociopaths at Columbine High School in 1999. The text was from my son, who visited the memorial with several other AFA Cadets as an expression of homage, and to gain some sense of this terrible incident, which they were too young to remember.

My son was a six-year-old kindergartner at the time of Columbine.

Seeing that photograph brought up distinct memories from that April day, both the grief I felt for the victim's families, and the anger I felt toward those assailants who so casually took the lives of these young people, and wounded 23 others.

That was my backdrop for the terrible news on Friday that another murderous sociopath had entered an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, and killed 20 precious children and six adults, after he had murdered his own mother earlier that day. Those same feelings of grief and anger emerged again -- but this time somehow made worse not only because the numbers were greater than Columbine, but in the faces of those little children I saw my own children at that age.

Most parents I have spoken with this weekend felt the same degree of empathy for the parents and families of the Sandy Hook children -- particularly four members of our Patriot Team who have children the ages of those murdered in Newtown.

We have all prayed for those families, though none of us can really grasp the extent of their grief unless we have lost one of our own.

We have prayed also for the surviving children, who suffered great trauma -- and not only those children but also the emergency medical and law enforcement personnel who rushed to the scene of this massacre, only to find the damage had been done.

Having spent some years on call with a Critical Incident Stress Debriefing team working with first responders after mass casualty incidents, I can tell you the trauma those responders experience is often forgotten, but accounts for the high incidence of PTSD in their profession.

We continue to pray for all those who have experienced varying degrees of loss in this tragedy, and further, that they would be shielded in the coming days and weeks from the inevitable political machinations that attend such tragedies.

We also pray that these families will be shielded from the coming political crossfire between those on one extreme who believe all weapons should be banned, and those on the other who believe every teacher should be armed. We most assuredly want to live in a nation where neither of these extremes is necessary.



Disgraceful Political Theater

Before the bodies of murdered children had been removed from Sandy Hook Elementary on Friday, Barack Obama was, shamefully, stacking up the coffins of innocent kindergartners as a platform for his disarmament agenda, which he and his socialist cadres will conceal behind a thin façade of "concern for public safety."

Just one paragraph into his brief remarks about the murders in Newtown, Obama tearfully exclaimed, "We've endured too many of these tragedies in the past few years. ... We're going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics."

New York Demo Rep. Jerrold Nadler was less discreet in his insistence that Obama use the deaths of these children to advance the Left's gun prohibition agenda: "I think we will be there if the president exploits it." Sen. Charles Schumer added, "I think we could be at a tipping point ... where we might get something done."

Within hours of the deaths, Sen. Dianne Feinstein promised, "I'm going to introduce in the Senate -- and the same bill will be introduced in the House -- a bill to get ... weapons of war off the streets." That should solve the problem.

Read MUCH MORE on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/editions/15926/

DenverBrit
12-18-2012, 09:09 AM
Newtown shootings: NRA silent on gun laws
By Daniel Nasaw BBC News Magazine, Washington

Prominent pro-gun political organisations and US senators have kept quiet since the mass killing in Newtown, Connecticut. Why is the National Rifle Association leaving the floor to gun control advocates as a national debate takes shape?

The day after two teenagers killed 12 classmates and a teacher at Columbine High School in Colorado in April 1999, one of the chief spokesmen of the US gun rights movement was on television assigning blame.

Don't fault guns, he said. Instead, Americans should look at the moral breakdown in US society and at violence in Hollywood.

"We're increasingly looking away at behaviour that our parents would never have tolerated," Wayne LaPierre, executive vice-president of the National Rifle Association (NRA), said on MSNBC television.

"We're looking the other way at evil behaviour and we need to really focus on what would turn students into homicidal maniacs."

Since the latest American massacre, the Friday killings of 20 young children and seven adults by a 20-year-old man in Newtown, Connecticut, Mr LaPierre and his organisation have stayed silent.

Gun control advocates have blanketed the media calling for measures such as a renewed assault weapons ban. President Barack Obama has indicated he will back new policies "aimed at preventing more tragedies like this".

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, one of the most prominent gun control advocates in America, has publicly called on Mr Obama to propose specific legislation.

"The trouble is that the NRA is just never willing to have any restriction whatsoever, no matter how reasonable it is," Mr Bloomberg said.

To counter him, the show's producers invited 31 pro-gun US senators onto the show - but they all declined. By Monday morning one of the 31, Democrat Joe Manchin, publicly changed his tune on a US morning news show.

Virginia Senator Mark Warner, another Democrat, then joined his colleague.

Since Friday's shooting, the National Rifle Association, which did not respond to a request for comment, has kept silent on Twitter, pulled down a Facebook page, and cancelled an online chat with a country music star.

The organisation "appears to have staked out a strategy to take its brand out of the social media picture in the wake of a mass-shooting news event," commented AdWeek.

"The social media buzz after such events seems to be an unenviable conversation for the org to partake in."

The group has been so successful at shaping public opinion over the last dozen years it has nothing to gain by speaking out now, says Scott Melzer, a sociologist at Albion College in Michigan and author of Gun Crusaders: The NRA's Culture War.

"Action is not going to be taken in the next few days," he says.

"The organisation doesn't need to win the PR battle right now to be effective."

One of the NRA's major public arguments, repeated mantra-like by gun-control opponents over the years, is that guns do not kill people - people kill people.

"They would look cruel and inhumane coming out after this shooting and saying 'guns don't kill people', when there are 20 children about to be buried in Connecticut," says Peter Dreier, a professor of politics at Occidental College in Los Angeles and a critic of the NRA.

"They're sort of hiding. These guns were purchased legally, so they've got nowhere to go on this."

lonestar
12-20-2012, 10:50 AM
Alexander's Column – December 20, 2012
Semper Fortis Vigilate Paratus Fidelis -- et Gratus
Thank God for Patriot Brothers and Sisters

"In circumstances dark as these, it becomes us, as Men and Christians, to reflect that, whilst every prudent Measure should be taken to ward off the impending Judgments. ... All confidence must be withheld from the Means we use; and reposed only on that GOD who rules in the Armies of Heaven, and without whose Blessing the best human Counsels are but Foolishness -- and all created Power Vanity." --John Hancock (1775)

In the winter season, our East Tennessee mountaintop is sometimes shrouded in clouds that settle in for days, and that fog can persist for a week or more. The absence of sun and blue sky, or crisp and clear nights under bright stars, can take its toll on the spirit. However, my spirit is lifted high when I recall with certainty that above the fog and clouds, all the heavenly bodies shine bright. Eventually the weather will break and light will avail itself again.

I reminded my children that bleak winter weather obscuring the sunlight is an apt metaphor for the trials in our life, which can obscure the Son light.

Life itself can, at times, seem shrouded in fog and darkness. That is especially true if, like me, you bear a lifelong burden to support and defend our heritage of Liberty, which is now being assailed from many sectors. But our Creator, who irrevocably endowed us with Liberty, is always there, even if temporarily obscured by the fog of conflict.

I hold close these words from George Washington written early in the first American Revolution: "We should never despair, our Situation before has been unpromising and has changed for the better, so I trust, it will again. If new difficulties arise, we must only put forth new Exertions and proportion our Efforts to the exigency of the times."

These are difficult times for Patriots -- as in times past. We face daunting challenges from enemies foreign and domestic.

Occasionally I forget that this burden I bear on behalf of Liberty is also borne by tens of millions of fellow Patriots. Let us pause to remember who we are -- and the countrymen who stand with us.

We are American Patriots, defenders of First Principles and Rule of Law.

We are Sons and Daughters of Liberty -- Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, Coast Guardsmen and public servants standing in harm's way at home and around the world, who are loyal, first and foremost, to our revered oath to "support and defend" our authentic Constitution, not the so-called "living constitution" espoused by cadres of "useful idiots" on the Left.

We are grassroots leaders and local, state and national officeholders who, likewise, honor our sacred oath.

We are mothers, fathers and other family members nurturing the next generation of young Patriots. We are farmers, craftsmen, tradesmen and industrial producers. We are small business owners, service providers and professionals in medicine and law. We are employees and employers. We are in ministry at home and missionaries abroad. We are students and professors at colleges and universities, often standing alone for what is good and right.

We are Patriot sons and daughters from all walks of life, heirs to the blessings of Liberty bequeathed to us at great personal cost by our Patriot forebears, confirmed in the opinion that it is our duty to God and Country to extend that blessing to our posterity, and avowed upon our sacred honor to that end. We are vigilant, strong, prepared and faithful.

We are not defined by race, creed, ethnicity, religion, wealth, education, geography or political affiliation, but by our devotion to our Creator, and the Liberty He has entrusted to us, one and all.

In the Spirit of Christmas, and every day of the year, it is my fervent prayer that we, individually and as a nation, turn to the Light of our Creator for wisdom and peace.

In keeping with this blessed Christmas season, I invite you to visit our Patriot Christmas page, which provides some insight on the history and current context for the celebration of Christmas.

And in this last of the 2012 columns from this humble Patriot, you note that before attaching my signature to any essay, letter or e-mail, I close with a few words in Latin -- words that summarize my life's mission:

Pro Deo et Constitutione -- Libertas aut Mors
Semper Fortis Vigilate Paratus et Fidelis

To these I must add "et Gratus" -- and Grateful. I am eternally grateful to God for all His provisions, and that includes YOU, our Patriot countrymen.

Have a Merry Christmas and may God light shine bright upon you, your family and our great nation in the coming year!

Pro Deo et Constitutione — Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis

Mark Alexander

lonestar
12-20-2012, 02:17 PM
NRA Membership Explodes
Posted on December 20, 2012

121812_al_gunsales_640

The National Rifle Association, while staying mostly quiet in the immediate aftermath of the mass shooting in Connecticut, has registered an average of 8,000 new members a day since the tragedy, an NRA source told Fox News.

While this broadly aligns with trends seen after similar incidents in the past, the surge in membership this time is said to dwarf past trends.

The source, based on his access to an internal memo prepared by the organization’s membership division, said both the number of individual contributions to the NRA and their average amount have risen significantly in this period.

Amid the uptick, the NRA is planning what it describes as a “major” news conference on Friday. In its first public statement since last week’s shooting, issued Tuesday by an aide to NRA President Wayne LaPierre, the organization also conveyed condolences to the murder victims’ families and expressed the group’s willingness to offer “meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again.”



Read more: http://conservativebyte.com/2012/12/nra-membership-explodes/#ixzz2Fd4NPLcd

houghtam
12-21-2012, 01:47 AM
NRA Membership Explodes
Posted on December 20, 2012

121812_al_gunsales_640




Read more: http://conservativebyte.com/2012/12/nra-membership-explodes/#ixzz2Fd4NPLcd

Meanwhile, gun buyback programs are having their best days ever all across the country.

lonestar
12-21-2012, 10:09 AM
Meanwhile, gun buyback programs are having their best days ever all across the country.

yep steal a gun and then sell it no questions asked..

makes great sense..

DenverBrit
12-21-2012, 11:42 AM
yep steal a gun and then sell it no questions asked..

makes great sense..

It makes a lot of sense if that were to happen.

Get stolen guns off the streets and out of the hands of criminals.

lonestar
12-21-2012, 04:14 PM
Digest · December 21, 2012

Leftists Exploit Pain for Political Gain

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic." --Joseph Story

The nation is still reeling over the dreadful events in Newtown, Connecticut, one week ago. We mourn the tragic loss of life, and we weep and pray for the families who won't have a son or a daughter to open presents under the Christmas tree this year. We wish that we could, as one nation, just pause and reflect. The last thing we want is a political fight. But even so, we won't stand idly by while some use Newtown's pain to justify taking away our Liberty.

Evil exists in the world, and yet too many people seem shocked that an evil man would take the lives of 20 six- and seven-year-old children, six adults at the school and even the life of his own mother. That isn't to say that the horrific crime isn't shocking, but it is to say a sober view of reality is needed.

Instead, the Left is almost uniform in hiding the evil behind its implements. Evil often takes things -- sometimes very good things -- and twists and distorts them for its own ends. Rather than admit the existence of evil, the Left blames the thing itself. Hence the renewed efforts at "gun control" at the federal level. Our mission -- and it should be the mission of congressional Republicans -- is to stop those who would use evil acts as an excuse to take away our very means of defending against that evil; to stop Barack Obama and his ilk from stacking up the coffins of innocent little children as a platform for their vile disarmament agenda.

The Terms

We must begin by considering the terms of the debate, and refusing to cede the field to leftists. For example, we must not use the Left's lexicon when referring to crimes where assailants use guns. The sociopath who used a gun to kill kids in Newtown was not a "shooter" or a "gunman." Such words only put the emphasis on the tool, rather than the perpetrator. When we head to the range, we are shooters and gunmen. That sociopath was an "assailant" and "murderer."

Furthermore, those who don't have the first clue what they're talking about regarding guns shouldn't be the ones to craft legislation dealing with them. When Nancy Pelosi warns hysterically of "assault magazines," or when Carolyn McCarthy refers to a barrel shroud as "the shoulder thing that goes up," they have shown themselves to be incapable of good judgment on the issue.

When the Left frets about "high-capacity magazines" or "assault weapons," they know not of what they speak -- or worse, they deliberately misinform. Many guns, including handguns, have standard-capacity magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, which, inexplicably, seems to be their lucky number to solve "gun violence."

Rifles such as the AR-15 are not "assault weapons." The Defense Department says, "Assault rifles are short, compact, selective-fire weapons [i.e., machine guns] that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine-gun and rifle cartridges. Assault rifles have mild recoil characteristics and, because of this, are capable of delivering effective full automatic fire at ranges up to 300 meters." The AR-15 is a civilian semi-automatic weapon that fires intermediate-powered rounds -- one for each distinct pull of the trigger. Such rifles aren't "high-powered," either. Indeed, they aren't legal for deer hunting in many states because their firepower isn't sufficient to reliably take down a deer.



Read this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/editions/16010/

houghtam
12-21-2012, 06:48 PM
Digest · December 21, 2012

Leftists Exploit Pain for Political Gain

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic." --Joseph Story



Read this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/editions/16010/

LOL what a rube.

Who's exploiting pain for gain? What "gain" do democrats hope to get?

Call me when Wayne LaPierre forgoes his million dollar salary to help pay for the security guards his organization is recommending for every school. If anyone exploits pain for gain, it's that guy.

cutthemdown
12-21-2012, 07:18 PM
The reason Houghtam is because Obama promised he wasn't going to make gun control a big issue. It's the left pushing a hidden agenda after an event they feel gives them polticial traction.

The reason you don't like the idea of arming a guard at schools is because that doesn't change something you don't like. It's not about making kids safer. It's about coming after guns.

The reason movies are not talked about is because guess what? They lobby with as much money as the NRA does and give more to politicians. Notice the liberal politicians say almost nothing about that. Hollywood a huge lobbying force. They want to show 15 yr olds gun blasting violence.

An assault style rifle ban and 10 clip limit just won't bite into our gun homicide rate. For one 90% of them done with handguns. Two people with rifles will just use more then one clip.

houghtam
12-21-2012, 07:58 PM
The reason Houghtam is because Obama promised he wasn't going to make gun control a big issue. It's the left pushing a hidden agenda after an event they feel gives them polticial traction.

The reason you don't like the idea of arming a guard at schools is because that doesn't change something you don't like. It's not about making kids safer. It's about coming after guns.

The reason movies are not talked about is because guess what? They lobby with as much money as the NRA does and give more to politicians. Notice the liberal politicians say almost nothing about that. Hollywood a huge lobbying force. They want to show 15 yr olds gun blasting violence.

An assault style rifle ban and 10 clip limit just won't bite into our gun homicide rate. For one 90% of them done with handguns. Two people with rifles will just use more then one clip.

Number one, people are advocating just adding guns to the situation. Again and for the millionth time, statistically speaking, the more guns there are, the more violence there is. That is not a solution.

Number two, the reason the assault weapons ban in the 90s wasn't as effective as it should have been was because it was a weak law fraught with exceptions, grandfather clauses, and the like. That is also not a solution. I don't want to come for your guns, I want to come for the guns you have no business owning.

Number three, movies and music have long been the target of "you're ruining our youths" movements...from both sides. Or were you not born yet in the 80s and 90s during Tipper Gore's crusade against music and video games?

Number four, can you please quote for me where I said hiring armed security for schools is a bad idea? Considering you took a big swing and a miss yesterday thinking I don't trust police, I can see how you probably screwed that one up, too. As I've said multiple times, I personally have supervised dozens of off-duty police officers during my time with my theaters, and I still keep in touch with many of them. They take those jobs because they are woefully underpaid as officers, by the way. So that leaves the question...who's going to pay for it? Do you honestly think a Congress comprised of hundreds of Republicans who have refused to raise taxes for ANYTHING are going to raise taxes on gun purchases? Ha!

Instead, the NRA promises "meaningful" dialogue, and them comes out in their press release offering an "everyone's fault but mine" solution.

lonestar
01-28-2013, 05:30 PM
Brief · January 28, 2013
The Foundation

"[R]eligion and virtue are the only foundations, not of republicanism and of all free government, but of social felicity under all government and in all the combinations of human society." --John Adams
Inspiration

"[T]he current and future role of the Bible in U.S. society is an often-debated topic. A new release from Barna Group shows how this debate plays out regionally and takes a look at how 96 of the largest cities in the nation view the Bible. ... Individuals who report reading the Bible in a typical week and who strongly assert the Bible is accurate in the principles it teaches are considered to be Bible-minded. ... Regionally, the South still qualifies as the most Bible-minded. ... This includes the media markets for Knoxville, TN (52% of the population are Bible-minded), Shreveport, LA (52%), Chattanooga, TN (52%), Birmingham, AL (50%), and Jackson, MS (50%). ... Easily the lowest Bible-minded scores came from Providence, RI (9%) and Albany, NY (10%). ... The New England area is home to most of the markets in the bottom 10 Bible-minded cities, including Burlington, VT (16%), Portland, ME (16%), Hartford, CT (16%), Boston, MA (16%), Buffalo, NY (18%) and New York, NY (18%). The remaining markets in the bottom 10 are primarily in the West and include San Francisco, CA (16%), Phoenix, AZ (17%), and Las Vegas, NV (18%). ... See all 96 cities here. ... Whether you live in a city ranked in the top half of Bible-minded cities or in the bottom half of Bible-minded cities, there are still tens of thousands of people to reach regarding both the message of the Scriptures and their importance. ... The key is to not merely 'preach to those insiders' but instead to equip and empower those who do believe with a strong and relevant message to take out into their communities, vocations and spheres of influence. They are the tipping point and can have great influence on the greater city." --The Barna Group


Read this on the Web at http://patriotpost.us/editions/16476/

FWIW Denver at 24%, Colorado Spring/Pueblo @ 29%

DenverBrit
01-28-2013, 06:25 PM
History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.

-Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, Dec. 6, 1813.


In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Horatio G. Spafford, March 17, 1814

Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.

-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom