Lib tactics (that unfortunately work all too well): accuse others of what you are actually attempting to illegally accomplish. It puts them on the defense, while you get to remain "self rightous." In the real world, the only people being disenfranchised to vote are those following the law and who are more than happy to prove citizenship in order to vote.

If Romney wins....and with the rampant, current voter fraud that only benefits the Dems, it's a big IF........I pray he stops all the illegal activities put in place by the DOJ. That means letting Arizona protect its borders, and requiring every state to scrub its voter registration lists for legitimacy. Again, it's a big if, but he better not let the MSM and others name calling keep him from doing the right thing and fixing these problems.

Well, hey, better late than never. Mark Levin had a great piece yesterday, though, about how "reformed" liberals and liberals in denial will have a very difficult time accepting what their past support has done to the country. Some will look back on what they helped "accomplish" with remorse and regret, while others will become angry at the world in denial and defense. I'm not lumping Mr. Davis in this category per se, and welcome aboard sir. Please be the beacon of hope for those liberals starting to see the light, but refuse to accept it!

Well done! God Bless you guys, and have a great Memorial Day weekend. Though, keep the pilot-training option open for him as well....he's probably going to be a very smart boy ;)

Referencing a 1970's Mel Brooks comedy full of satire and slap-stick is the basis of your analysis of today's racial environment.....Really? Really. It makes sense, though, most liberal zombies get current news from Jon Stewart and TMZ, so I guess your post isn't that surprising after all.

"Life and living" applies to Zimmerman too. Unborn baby is a completely different circumstance. There aren't too many eyewitnesses of an unborn baby trying to beat the mother to death.

Here's one for Aura -- Zimmerman also has a right to life. If he's getting viciously attacked.....and this is a tough concept for libs......he also has a right to keep his life! Geez, this is not difficult, Aura.

What about the person being attacked having a "right to life?" Completely different circumstance to an innocent, unborn baby clinging to its mother prior to the horrific events during an abortion. Your argument holds no water -- "right to life" means "right to life" for everyone. I'm sure you don't get that. If someone is attacked, they have every right to protect themselves... What is difficult about that?

Agree, Edward. For some reason, the set-up for posting comments always seems to cut off my last sentence, so I have to finsish the thought with a reply to myself! Any tips on preventing that?

(continued)....."as calculus is to a squirrel."