1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Gun Laws and Human Nature

grizzlie66 Wrote: Apr 09, 2013 6:01 PM
I'm sorry, but a student of history will tell you, universal background checks and gun registration is the first "downhill" step towards the eventual confiscation of private firearms, and total governmental control. Ever heard of Mao Tse Tung, Stalin, Hitlaer, they all banned posession of firearms by the public. The children of Newtown, or the victims in Aurora, are just being used as props to promote a "Far Left" agenda. There is a reason for the 2nd Amendment, and it isn't to guarantee citizens the right to go hunting, or create a civilian militia. In the end it's to prevent an out of control government from a complete and total take-over.
In response to:

Gun Laws and Human Nature

grizzlie66 Wrote: Apr 09, 2013 5:27 PM
It's funny how the Left seems to be crusading on the idea of passing "common sense" gun laws, to include bans on large capacity magazines and comprehensive background checks. I'm sorry, but the states with the strictest gun laws are the ones with the highest rates of violent gun crime. You can pass a hundred laws, but unless the laws are enforced, what good are they. That's right, ZERO! We don't need new gun laws, we need to enforce the ones we have. It's no different that the immigration dilemma. We have the laws on the books to prevent illegal immigration, not just "undocumented immigrants" (PC personified). Enforcement should be the word of the day, not new laws. We have enough thanks!
I wonder how many WH tours could have been offered to school students if the "First Couple" hadn't had a jet fly their "damn" dog to Martha's Vineyard for one of their numerous "getaways". Or maybe one or two fewer outings or fund raising trips. Let the blasted DNC pay for these fund raisers, not the American taxpayer, all of whom do not agree with the message or the agenda of this President.
The one thing that still "sticks in my craw" is the liberal proclivity to blame the sequester on the conservatives. How easy we forget that even though a number of Republicans did finally agree to and vote for the Sequester resolution, it was because even they thought we were going to be able to reach an agreement to prevent it's implementation. The aggravating part is it was the White House and this President who drew up the sequester in the first place. That's like loading a handgun, giving it to a six year old, and then espousing amazement when the gun goes off. The "illiberal left" needs to get a grip, and quit playing partisan gamesmanshnip.
You're right, the depression came roaring back, but not our economy. Of course FDR was a "flaming Progressive", so I'm sure you would feel justified in "cannonizing" him and his "economic prowess". Ask some of the seniors that lived through the latter depression years, including WWII, and you might find a different opinion of the economics of the time.
Krugman's Nobel prize in economic science ranks right up there on a par with several of the Nobel's Peace prize winners we've seen in the last couple decades. Obama's, Gore's, and Arafat's Nobel Peace prizes were and still remain a joke. It's funny what happens when you attempt to evalutate Progressive ideology relative to reality. Unfortunately the record shows a definite bias towards ideology. Maybe the Nobel prizes should be dedided on a much more objective criteria in making that final selection. Krugman's liberal bent seems to always trump facts, common sense, and logic.
In response to:

And the Survey Says: Obama’s a Loser

grizzlie66 Wrote: Jul 27, 2012 5:35 AM
According to AmericanViewpoint Romney's statement in London that he wasn't sure whether or not they were ready for the Olympics somehow rivals Obama's world wide apology tour in Europe? Of course the truth of the matter was they had to import 18,000 military troops to make up for the shortfall of security agents the private company supplying them failed to hire. Maybe the planned transportation strike could have caused some concern as well. Yeah, Romney should simply have pulled an Obama and told them what they wanted to hear. But when has a liberal progressive like Obama ever dealt with the truth in lieu of a servile, obsequious, sycophantic style of diplomacy. His analogy is like comparing a verbal altercation to mass murder.
You know, maybe if you ended up living in a country where only the criminals had guns maybe you'd learn to more apt to appreciate the concept of self protection. If someone doesn't want to own or possess a firearm that's fine, it's their decision. However, don't sit there on some self-righteous pedestal of perceived indignation and naiveté and dictate what is good for the rest of us. There is only going to be one toughest SOB on the block. An "equalizer" however can act as a real deterrent to even the biggest and the "badest". The avg. police response time to a 911 call is 8 minutes, a .40 cal. S&W is 1205 ft/sec. You choose which one you want protecting your family.
In response to:

Lie, Cheat, Steal: Save the Planet!

grizzlie66 Wrote: Apr 27, 2012 1:23 PM
Nice try, as if to suggest that you knew all Conservatives thereby validating such a ludicrous and lemming style statement you moron. As many on the left as on the right bought into the junk science surrounding cigarettes and asbestos. Guess it's a wonderful life when you can make up "facts" to suit your needs or your agenda. Global climate change, of course, it's been happening since the earth was created. Global warming as a product of man's irresponsibility, not hardly. Why the hell do you think the glaciers during the last three ice ages melted off? No, neither cave men nor dinosaurs were to blame, it was because of a natural phenomena, which has been occurring for billions of years, and that's with the big "B". But how else can...
How about Obama's "I will fundamentally change the United States of American"? Who knew or could have dreamt what he actually meant. So BHO didn't/doesn't like the U.S. the way it was, so in his mind that in his mind, "gives him the right to singlehandedly change our system of government"? Our most dangerous enemy isn't in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, N. Korea, China, or Russia. It is an enemy from within that seeks to overthrow our government and create something akin to a failed European Socialist state. Who might that be? BHO and the Progressive Movement. They sneak around out of the public view changing our country, and circumventing our constitution, through Presidential proclamation and agency over-reach!
1 - 10 Next