Previous 11 - 20 Next
In response to:

A Glimmer of Hope for Conservatism

ducks13 Wrote: May 31, 2013 6:26 PM
Bush never really called himself a small government; compassionate conservativism is what he called spending other peoples money. Still your point is accurate, they seem to change once they are in office. I think more people still need to pay attention to the screwing we are getting from the current status quo.
In response to:

A Glimmer of Hope for Conservatism

ducks13 Wrote: May 31, 2013 6:46 AM
Most republican just have a little different speal than democrates, they still want a massive government so they can buy votes and get reelected to a job that has lots of perks. If the government has the power the is assumed in this article then it will be bad no matter which party is in office.
In response to:

The Right Way to Combat Gun Violence

ducks13 Wrote: Feb 24, 2013 7:42 AM
Steve seemed to have forgotten ending the drug war as a right way to combat gun violence.
Wow, you must not have much experience with cops. I report my license plate being stolen; instead of focusing on getting my tag back or something useful like that he starts questioning me as if I was the criminal. One in 10,000; I don't think so. When they plant evidence or coverup their own illegalities are they your friend? There are plenty of well documented examples inspite of the odds being stacked in favor of the cops getting away with it. And to paraphrase "who knows how many lives they have taken or crimes they have committed." Where is your compasion for the wives and children left behind from police mistakes and outright criminality? Did you happen to hear about the car they shot up looking or Dorner?
In response to:

Prophets and Losses

ducks13 Wrote: Feb 05, 2013 6:38 AM
Or anyone else that is doing it 'for the children'
Hagel would be about the only good thing this pres has done. Did Barone even mention that Hagel was a republican senator?
Thanks for writing the column. Mandatory minimums and the lack of appropriate prosecutor discretion create a large legal problem for us. Nice to see is on Townhall.
Because there are no mandatory minimums if drugs are not involved. The they you mentioned you your first sentence is politicians. It was politicians putting on a show for us doing something about drugs, mandatory minimums. It was much like the fiscal cliff show we've just watched. It helps to convince us of how much we need them so we keep giving them our money and liberty.
And they should get a discount for the health care they eliminate by smoking pot. Really should go back to what Kozzzer wrote, limited goverment would eliminate all of these arguments pro and con. You'd be responsible for yourself, what you smoke and your health care cost among others are your responsibilty. Most would run THEIR life so that family, friends, or charity's will be able and willing to contribute when needed.
In response to:

Smoke Pot, Ban Guns, Kill Kids

ducks13 Wrote: Dec 28, 2012 10:59 AM
Becca. Please tell what it is that I am missing? Once the basic question of what pot had to do with the story was answered it seemed like the intent was that legalization of pot was bad but legalization of gun ownership was not. I don't think that is so, both should be legal, which is the point I am now trying to make. It is the same point Eric Allie made in the political cartoon dated 12-17-12 in the political cartoon section of Townhall.
In response to:

Smoke Pot, Ban Guns, Kill Kids

ducks13 Wrote: Dec 28, 2012 10:45 AM
"for those who are taxed after reading a text or tweet" What part of answering my questions was this? I appreciated him pointing out the minor mention of marijuana in the column, I had been expecting the column title to have more to do with the content.
Previous 11 - 20 Next