The GOP and the pundits are all trying to analyze the political reasons for why, in the face of serious analysis by all and sundry, the GOP lost the election. What if the reason the GOP lost was not political, but criminal? In how many states were more votes cast than there were voters on the rolls? How many stories have we all heard about various people voting multiple times in multiple precincts...and why do the overwhelming number of these seem to involve Democrat voters? Is it really impossible that the Chicago Machine just flat stole the election, counting on a compliant media to ignore most of the evidence and scorn the rest?

Funny how NOT shooting government agents seems to fail decrease the risk of being shot by government agents. You DO remember the story from NY just a few weeks ago about the cops nailing 16 completely uninvolved bystanders in the process of shooting just one perp with a gun, don't you? Where does this idea that "government agents" have some sort of automatic authority, much less legal or moral right to shoot at people who may not even be armed, and it's ok? This is a criminal act, even by current law, even by senior government agents.

Unfortunately, the judicial branch is all but useless. The DA's and judges have an incestuous relationship with the cops that makes it all but impossible to gain any recompense when the LEO's 'misbehave'. The phrases, "officer safety", "followed procedure" and "limited immunity" get tossed into the fray and 'case dismissed' come back almost automatically.

"...protecting the citizenry by peacefully serving a warrant..." How the bloody heck to you "peacefully serve a warran" with machine guns and a 20-30 man strike force? The local sheriff had peacefully served such a warrant a few months before. He knocked on the door, with maybe one deputy at his side, showed his warrant and took Khoresh to jail without facing a single threat of violence. Note carefully that the ATF boys pointedly refused to include or even inform that sheriff of their "search warrant" action prior to storming the Davidian compound even though they knew about the prior arrest.

Major problem with your assertion. The Branch Davidians had NO history of violent behaviour with either the local citizens or local law enforcement, which had already arrested Khoresh once on a child abuse charge without incident. (That was later dropped when no evidence whatsoever was produced to support it.) The ATF, however, has a rather long history of overreacting in an extremely violent manner to the least hint of provocation.

Your ignorance is appalling. 1) Accused of 'stockpiling weapons' when at least on FFL holder was on the premises and they regularly engaged in open sales of legal firerams at local gunshows. 2) I don't remembe ANY accusations of evading taxes. If it were true all the way, would that justify and armed raid by government storm troopers with machine guns? 3) According to witnesses on both sides after the event, the most likely ocurrence was that the ATF guys fired first, shooting thru the door at those who were talking to them at the time without any guns in their hands. The door, a sturdy metal one, was (surprise!) never recovered after the fire, leaving the question unanswerable.

The only job cuts from less government spending are jobs that depend on government money in the first place. The only place that money comes from is from people who want to spend that money on OTHER jobs. Principle: Government, in and of itself, produces no wealth. The ONLY way government can spend any single dollar is to take it from somebody who made it. New Zealand underwent an abrupt change of parties in their government when it was discovered that there were 1.1 million people on welfare there, and only 1.2 million people working to support them all. Massive government change in less than 6 months.

If the tax is insignificant and those forced to pay it will never even notice, why are the Liberals so hot to enact it? Where's the benefit? If 100% of the wealth of the top 1% of "rich people" was taxed away tomorrow, it would run our current government for about a month. What happens then? Negotiations are difficult with people who insist that they must get what they want NOW, while what you want can safely and conveniently be put off 'til tomorrow...or maybe next century.

On the contrary! If you believe global warming is a hoax, why would you be willing to negotiate about ANY measures to reduce it? If you believe gun control has nothing to do with crime control, why would you be willing to compromise by allowing "some" gun control? If you believe in the value of one man-one woman marriage, why would you be willing to "negotiate" the issue with someone who believes any type of marriage is ok as long as the state allows it? If you believe that government spending is the source of our current economic ills, why would you be willing to "have a conversation" with those who want to push the spending higher without limit? What possible reward will any "compromise" get you?

Bad news, dude. These people ARE the voters in most of the country. At least, the living ones. Of COURSE they get outvoted by the dead, the non-citizen voters and the ones who vote in multiple precincts. That's the way the game is being played today. Doesn't mean they just don't exist.