1 - 10 Next
The Democrat leadership keeps their candidates and elected officials on a very short leash. They are not allowed to criticize any approved candidate, or policy, without special dispensation, in extraordinary circumstances (to win, or retain a seat for the party). Party support (or opposition) in the next election depends on strict adherence to the party line.
It is “the most transparent administration in history”; I can see, more clearly than ever, how corrupt, lawless, partisan and stupid the people running the government are.
In response to:

Obama fails History 101

Anthony305 Wrote: Aug 28, 2014 7:34 PM
I don't doubt that Obama is historically illiterate, but it wouldn't matter if he was well informed. He will say whatever he thinks will advance his program, with no regard for truth, or accuracy.
With police officers, and every other profession, only the most qualified should be hired (assuming that the screening-testing of applicants actually reflects ability to do the job well). If the result (as in the NBA) is that nearly all are black, or that none are black, that's the way it should be. We don't need black cops (or doctors, engineers, professors, etc.), we need the best we can get, without regard to "minority status", or anything else not related to job performance.
Most police departments are not justified in having a SWAT team at all, and the ones who might be, should not be using them to serve search warrants, or anything other than violent and dangerous situations that require that level of force. But, this is not all about cops who want to play Rambo; where are the police supervisors, judges, prosecutors and local politicians that not only allow, but promote this sort of "policing"?
They pay no attention to comments. If they want to impose any regulation on us, they don't care how much public resistance there is.
Like nearly everything this administration is doing, this proposed regulation is both evil and stupid. It would add more distraction, rather than contribute anything to safety, and will certainly be used by government for tracking us, and anything else they can get out of it.
In response to:

Green Monster

Anthony305 Wrote: Aug 27, 2014 12:52 PM
It isn't that EPA has gone far enough, in many cases (emission standards for cars, trucks, powerplants, etc., for example) they have already gone much too far. In order to meet the present standards, prices have greatly (and unnecessarily) increased, efficiency has been reduced, service life shortened, complexity and maintenance cost increased--all for miniscule and meaningless reductions in things that may, or may not, have been a problem at much higher levels. All existing standards need to be examined from the point of cost-effectiveness, practicality and what level of any particular substance has really been proven to be harmful. The "rulemaking" authority of all regulatory agencies needs to be revoked, reasonable and practical standards set by Congress, and left alone (rather than made stricter every few years, to justify the existence of the regulation writers and enforcers).
In response to:

The Media and the Mob

Anthony305 Wrote: Aug 21, 2014 1:26 PM
Dr. Sowell got it right about the "bullet counters". The whole point of shooting at anyone is to stop the threat of death, or serious injury; once the decision is made to shoot, you don't stop until the threat is eliminated, by rendering your assailant unable to do harm. If he keeps coming at you, or has a weapon and is still able to use it, you keep shooting (and, hopefully, you have a weapon with enough capacity to keep shooting).
Absurd. Obama sees (and rightly so) the 2nd Amendment as a threat and impediment to the type of regime he wants to impose on this country. Nothing mentioned here, or anywhere else, is going to prevent him from doing anything he thinks he can get by with to disarm the American public. Obama has the capacity to do more than one thing at a time, if he likes, but for the most part, he doesn't have to do anything, he already has the people in place to do it, without having to involve himself. Obama doesn't give a damn about the arguments for, or against anything. If his agenda can be advanced through administrative action (legally, or otherwise), it will be done.
1 - 10 Next