Previous 11 - 20 Next
Read and weep over what? Thievery, regardless of the stripe of the perpetrator, is still thievery. The Feds have no role, by the Constitution, involving themselves in the private business and care decisions between a Citizen and the doctors that they employ. To consider otherwise is heresy unto this Nation, its Authority, and all those who died to protect the sovereignty of the People.
Hmm.... a mouthpiece for a 'one-world,' governance scheme conveniently believes that an oligarchy, such as communism, is the one governmental model everybody should embrace? Absolutely shocking. When will these parasites finally die off?
Yankee aggression, Southern defense. Who fired the first shot is immaterial when one looks at the long list of transgressions the Yankee states employed against the Confederate States. Read a real history book instead of a hack like Howard Zinn, and the cause/effect relationship becomes clear.
Sadly, this has been, more or less, since the 'judiciary,' granted themselves the power of the oligarchy in 1803; i.e., Marbury vs. Madison. John Marshall fancied himself a ruler and lord over all over all that he surveyed.....and it has held true as "law," ever since.
Clinton's impeachment wasn't about stupidity; at least, not on his part. It centered around his constant lying and eventual perjury. Perjury is a felony (in most jurisdictions that I'm aware of), and is punishable by time in prison on top of fines. The stupidity came in when people were actually starting to believe there was no lie involved when that scumbag tried to question the definition of "is." People and apparently the Senate, were too stupid to define "is;" or, a factual state of being.
And you'd like everyone to walk around a potential victim, just because there might be a criminal with a gun? Neat how that can be turned around, no? Let's get something straight: my freedoms and rights are not forfeit to any criminal, nor will they ever be. I don't see why folks like you just don't understand that simple equivocation. My rights are not forfeit, criminals' are forfeit. End of story.
This f******g scumbg did WHAT? Concord Mass., where some of the first volleys of the Revolution were fired, is where the children are lain prostrate before a subjugating and tyrannical ideology? ....Jesus. Jesus Christ...
Settles it: dumbest SOB alive...
I've no doubt that somebody has said this already, but when does somebody more versed in the atrocities of 'islam,' set up a similar site that boldly states "mohammed's mammy should have met a coathanger?
brandon, it doesn't seem to me that 'just the facts..." is making that claim. It is well spoken in conservative circles that most folks just don't believe that there are commanders or "head shed," that would actually give an order to fire against their own people. That is easy enough to hear for yourself, if you look on just a few boards or engage a conversation. However, the problem is that here is at least one of these "commanders," that would, if the story is correct, happily do precisely that: order combat against Citizens because of their ideological belief. The concern is that when one makes a blanket assertation like "no, they wouldn't," it really doesn't take long to find out that that assertation is dead wrong. Morover, (s)he makes no claim as to the Enlisted personnel, as your comment suggests that you are or were. However, if there are any of the officers that would so easily and simply violate their oath for their own ideological stake, it is a fair assumption that there are about an equivalent proportion of Enlisted that would do the same thing. Long story short, there are lowlife scumbags in all rank, title, and position in the military. The days of being able to trust are long gone, and have been for is 'icing' on the liberal cake that violating the principles and integrity of our honored dead is now business as ususal in every branch. Will everybody in the military, should the time come, mindlessly fire on his/her countrymen? Of course not, and there will be as much blood and dissention in the ranks as there is in the world at large when that happens. But, to assume that none of the "modern soldier," would do so is utter nonsense. The "modern soldier," is, in many instances (and growing daily), an extension of the perpetual entitlement and victim mentality of every protected class that the politicos have foisted upon us. This will become a performance, honor, integrity, and trust issue between the military and the civvie population....if it hasn't already. I honor the military in most situations, and allow me to give thanks for your service as well, but to blindly trust an armed organization that has become more political and less moral, by great leaps and bounds over the last few years, is stupid. It is not a personal insult to you. However, I'm willing to bet you can think of a few bastards that it would insult accurately. That those scumbags exist is precisely why "just the facts..." made the comment at all.
Don't worry too much, Jim. For months, or apparently even years, before the primaries even begin, there will be media types and wanna-be political consultants cramming the "only electable," narrative down our collective throats for Christie. Further, once Christie is nominated, we'll be treated to more ludicrously one-sided favor lauded upon Clinton (the most likely nominee from the communist camp).
Previous 11 - 20 Next