"perhaps heading for more lenient cities as Los Angeles or New York" The same thing happens when a state respects the 2nd Amendment and allows the citizenry to carry firearms, the bank robbers head for easier pickings, like the Left Coast and Liberal Centers like NYC. I mean, why would you walk into a bank to rob it if anyone from the teller to the guy in line behind you might be concealing a weapon. Simply, you don't, you go to states and cities where no one can carry, drastically reducing your risk. I'm not interested in robbing any banks (albeit they seem to be robbing the people), but if I was, I sure would stay clear of Arizona. Similarly with illegal immigration, California is going to draw the illegals (oops, I mean "undocumented").

"saving America from the invaders" It's not the enemies outside of our borders that I worry about the most.

"When was the DOJ put in charge of the Supreme Court?" When did the US Treasury and Congress jointly abdicate the creation of money to foreign and domestic private banks? These things happen when a citizenry ceases to be vigilant and succumbs to the empty promises of socialism and crony capitalism made by empty suits.

"This is nothing but brazen arrogance." Brazen, arrogant, and nothing but chicken feces (am I allowed to say that?)

" clear foreign policy vision " To be clear, I like Mr. Cain. I like the way he speaks plainly. I really enjoyed his pre-campaign addresses. I don't care much for his non-sensical 9-9-9 plan (imagine a tax code based on an alliteration, probably better than what we have now, but not by much), but I like his sense of fiscal integrity and think he'd help this country. However, for him to claim to have a "clear foreign policy vision" is quite over the top. He has no experience, and by his own admission, very little foreign policy knowledge. Sure, he'd do a lot better than Obama with his pathetic lack of experience, but after four years of an amateur, we need someone that will hit the ball out of the park. I think we can do better.

" clear foreign policy vision " I like Mr. Cain. I like the way he speaks plainly. I don't care much for his non-sensical 9-9-9 plan (imagine a tax code based on an alliteration, probably better than what we have now, but not by much), but I like his sense of fiscal integrity. However, for him to claim to have a "clear foreign policy vision" is quite over the top. He has no experience, and by his own admission, very little foreign policy knowledge. Sure, he'd do a lot better than Obama with his pathetic lack of experience, but after four years of an amateur, we need someone that will hit the ball out of the park. " fear of him from both the left and the right is growing exponentially" Yesiree, be afraid, very afraid!

"As much as I think nucing the Japanese was completely unjustifed" Glad a woos like you wasn't in charge, shudder to think of the blood, guts, and limbs of additional Americans AND Japanese a protracted war on Japanese soil would have cost. We can debate whether FDR allowed Pearl Harbor to happen, whether Ethel and Julius gave away American Nuclear Secrets, whether Patton was assassinated, but there's one thing that I know for sure, it's that Fat Boy and Slim Man ended the Japanese-American War and gave the two nations a lasting peace. For all his faults, Truman in a moment of rational wisdom, saved possibly millions on both sides. War is hell, best not start it if you can't stomach the outcome.

"As much as I think nucing the Japanese was completely unjustifed" Glad a woos like you wasn't in charge, shudder to think of the blood, guts, and limbs of additional Americans AND Japanese a protracted war on Japanese soil would have cost. We can debate whether FDR allowed Pearl Harbor to happen, whether Ethel and Julius gave away American Nuclear Secrets, whether Patton was assassinated, but there's one thing that I know for sure, it's that Fat Boy and Slim Man ended the Japanese-American War and gave the two nations a lasting peace. For all his faults, Truman for a moment of rational wisdom that saved possibly millions.

"Just where in the U.S. Constitution does it allow for taxpayers' monies to be redistributed to religious organizations? " Unfortunately Serverst is correct on this one. We don't need ANY charities receiving government dollars because then they become beholden to political interests. What we need is a smaller government that extracts less from her people so that they can more freely give to charities, or preferably act more as individuals to lift up their neighbors. "Think local, not Federal" Of course, our liberal friend here didn't mean to shrink his/her cherished big government, but he/she isn't known for applied logic or even a modicum of rational thought, so he/she spews offensive secular trite that even sometimes contains truth.

"You are not welcome here" Janelle, think about it a moment before sending away the most obvious opportunity for conversion to conservatism and libertarianism, it's the liberal fools and every time they spew their frothy dogma:)