1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Charlie Rangel: ISIS No Threat to US

GOOD OL' BAD GUY Wrote: 11 hours ago (10:33 AM)
Why does anyone care about what a guy, that is a threat to the US, thinks about what or who is a threat to the US?
Potential? Maybe Katie has to be cautious about what she publishes but I don't. Winning at war is impossible if your enemy can’t be identified. In every case where there has been terrorist activity a Muslim has perpetrated it. These people are indoctrinated at an early age that lying to infidels is a tactic that should be used to promote Islam. That’s not the worst of it that indoctrination includes that any infidel that can’t be converted to Islam should be killed. For your own safety you should be very cautious about whom you trust or believe when a Muslim claims to be peaceful or passive. This ain’t a wake up and smell the roses issue; this is wake up and recognize the enemy.
RodB, I see your point; maybe gun nut was a poor choice of words. Regardless of someone mental state shooting 80 unarmed people, for any reason, makes him a mental case in my book. The point I was trying to make is gun controls can and will not stop gun violence and it’s better to be armed if you are where it occurs. It makes no difference if you are in Detroit, Boston or Uloya, Norway gun free zones are never going to be gun free.
There was a joke going around at the time rocket were being developed and a lot of launch attempts failed. ‘Government employees are a lot like rockets, you can’t fire them and you can’t make the work.’
Been there, done that. I worked for the Navy for a brief period and suspect the only reason I was hired was to put some 700 people, including myself, on the bottom of an organization chart. Our VERBAL instructions were, “It’s better not to be seen than to be seen doing nothing.” Makes me think someone at the top of the organization chart met the requirements for a promotion. One thing this situation proved is you can’t maintain your sanity when the honey-dos and yard work are finished leaving daytime TV as the highlight of your life.
James, If you really think more restriction of gun ownership is a good idea why don’t you move to Norway. Norway has restrictions you favor in place so you will be safe there. One word of caution avoid Uloya; a single gun nut killed around 80 UNARMED victims there on 22 Jul 2011. I wonder how that would work out for you.
In response to:

Stop This Voter Card Madness!

GOOD OL' BAD GUY Wrote: Oct 16, 2014 11:46 AM
No one really believes that requiring photo ID suppresses any one from voting. What they do believe is that requiring photo ID will suppress the vote of those not eligible to vote. This is a classic example of believe what I say but ignore what I mean. For those that think voting fraud is rare are just not paying attention to the reports of having more votes counted in precinct than there are registered voters and/or a candidate receives 100% of the votes. The only thing I can think where government displays any competency is scheduling elections. There has never been a surprise election that would require same day registration. Do we really want those that don’t think voting is important until election day to vote? Poor planning on their part does not constitute an emergency on the public’s part.
There are many of us that agree with you but unfortunately no one is listening. The UN should have never been allowed ANY space in ANY country. It’s too late now to find an island somewhere it could be isolated from the real world and the diplomatic immunity of delegates avoided. Expecting the UN to be any different than the League of Nations is a great example of how to define insanity. Granting VETO powers to a select few members in the original charter rather than having the members vote weighted by their financial support spelled out failure from the get go. Ask yourself if you would invest in a business venture that includes the same terms, if your answer is yes your meds need to be changed.
Equal pay for equal work is one thing, who it is that defines what is equal is something else. Do we really want the government defining pay equality by gender? There is no way a bureaucrat wearing a green visor in the basement of some marble walled government building can determine if Suzy and Sam are equally proficient by the job description. Employers or supervisors are better judges of an employee’s worth to a company. That’s what performance reviews are all about. ANY employee that thinks they are under paid should seek work elsewhere, if they can find a position that pays better more power to them, if they can’t it’s not their employer’s fault.
Based on the fact that lawyers are ‘officers of the court’ and the courts are in the judiciary branch of government ANY lawyer SHOULD be bared from ANY legislative activity. Just what is it that they don’t understand about the separation of powers?
1 - 10 Next