Hot Summer Days

Some of us are getting some nice hot weather these days! I like the heat, but it does slow down the heavy work outdoors somewhat.   The Ed Snowden story is still alive and well.  Listening to the likes of Feinstein and Kerry calling him a traitor and such is almost funny, I guess they don’t know what lots of folks call them (far worse, I’m sure).  The Zimmerman faux murder case starts today.  The Communist News Network (CNN) have been playing up the race pimp side leading up to it.  Made for TV murder trials seem to be popular.  I don’t think this trial will take very long as compared to others.  Good Luck George!

Advertisements

Comments

  1. gmanfortruth says:

    Happy Monday 🙂

  2. Who knows, G … maybe they’ll go back to lynching black kids in Florida rather than just shooting them. Then you can save on bullets … have a picnic … maybe burn a cross or two … because the Martin kid was probably going to kill Zimmerman with his skittles … or maybe drowned him with his cold drink …

    • Course, he could have just beat him into a bloody pulp too. Zimmerman was guilty of….biting off more than he could chew…..so, he needed Col. Colt to make him even. I vote five years for stupidity!

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I vote “NOT Guilty”. 🙂

        • Sunshine says:

          Although I’ve always thought he is not guilty (self-defence), it will be a hung jury.

      • That’d work for me, Stephen. I think it’s Manslaughter by stupidity … even “if” Martin beat him to a pulp (although I’ve seen, delivered and received beatings far worse than what that little asshole showed up with after he killed the kid and none of them were “life threatening”) … so even if he did catch a beating, had he kept his distance (like the cop told him to do), none of this happens.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          had he kept his distance (like the cop told him to do), none of this happens.

          And if Martin just walks home instead of playing hardass, none of this would have happened either. We won’t agree on this Charlie, you see racism, which is exactly what the media brainwashed you into believing, I see an unfortunate incident that shows the mentallity of many of our youth. This gangsta mentallity has repercussions, and this is the worst. This should be a lesson yo all the youth of this country, “Keep your hands to yourself”. Without the initiation of violence, Martin would be alive today.

          • “And if Martin just walks home instead of playing hardass”

            Yes, G, you hidden hood wearers have to keep them in their place … how dare they question a wannbe cop for following them? Imagine that! A kid walking home with skittles and a soft drink had the gaul to walk home with skittles and a soft drink. When that Zimmerman fella started following, because as Z said, “these fuckin’ punks” … “these assholes always get away” (with their skittles and soft drinks) …

            You might as well tattoo a KKK on your chest, G …

            • The shame of this fiasco, as captain cannoli sees it, is the state will probably lose because of the 2nd degree charge (forget what the jury make up is or isn’t) … I doubt Zimmerman “wanted to kill TM” … but there’s no doubt in my mind that he did so as a result of his own negligence (in not listening to the cop) … the accident that occurred afterward was ALL avoidable had zimmerman stayed in his car and let the police be the police … but who knows, maybe the cops would’ve shot Martin too … it sure has happened in NY where cops shot (41 times) an unarmed black man … and it’s happened way more than once.

              • Charlie, they only hit him 19 times. This is the famous case where there actually was followup. Our “victim” was a refugee who entered the US under a false flag. he claimed to be an orphan from a different country where there was persecution so bad by the forces of evil that his Mom and Dad were murdered. . With no basic knowledge of English, he became a street peddler. The four Detectives from the 46 were out that night looking for an armed serial rapist. This was Evergreen Ave, between the Bruckner and Westchester Ave. in the Bronx (not a particularly great place at night, I’ve been there). The cops saw our “victim”. When they ordered him to stop and put up his hands, he went for his ID This alone probably would get you dead but it gets better. One of the four cops apparently slipped on dog shit. He fell backwards and let off a wild shot. The other three reacted as if he were shot and began shooting. 41 rounds later, with only 19 hits, it was over. Diallo was down with his wallet in his hand.

                Now, back in our day, the ’50’s and ’60’s, the “perp” would have been found with at least a switchblade on him but things actually have gotten better and a full bore investigation went on. The details of the case came from a narcotics detective I know well. He was not a Bronx guy, did not know the other detectives and I would put my life in his hands. One of the finest men I ever met.

                Flash forward two years. Diallo’s Mom shows up from some other third world country, sues the NYPD and collects. As Yakov Smirnoff would say, “What a Country!”

            • gmanfortruth says:

              Charlie, our still living in the past. Things are way different now . The kid attacked . He chose his path, he initiated violence . The reasons do not matter, get over it!

              • G, I’m surprised you’re not on the Defense’s witness list … since you know “the kid attacked” and all … the reasons do not matter … that’s EXACTLY what was said to countless blacks lynched in the south for allegedly raping white women … “the reasons do not matter” … neither does guilt or innocence … they’re black, so hang them.

                By the way, the 41 shots in NY … that’s just a few years ago … maybe 2 before Trayvon Martin … so when you say the past, you mean, what, like 10 seconds ago? 🙂

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Other incidents are irrelevant. Do cops screw up, yes they do, and too often get away with it. Why is that an issue in this case? Quit talking about straw man BS and stick to the facts.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Or maybe the thug youth of this country will learn that their actions could have dire consequences. Initiate violence, take a bullet. People should not become victims of violence because of the gangbanger mentallity.

      By the way, Skittles are deadly weapons if used properly 🙂 If Zimmerman is found innocent, would you be happy with blacks rioting?

      • I wouldn’t be happy, but I’d sure understand why they rioted. I think the 2nd degree charge was ther result of media and politics, but manslaughter seems to fit the situation … Florida has a pretty bad record regarding lynchings and death penality cases against blacks, G … I’d totally understand if there were nationwide protests that turned ugly. Hopefully, it’s restrained if the killer walks …

    • Luckily charlie, we don’t enough racist democrats in Florida to do lynchings anymore. The conservative south prefers the rule of law.

      • Zimmerman was in fear for his life … because he was being “beaten senseless” … not a scratch on his face … a broken nose with no blood (or black eyes) … a little cut on the back of his head … and not a SINGLE PIECE OF DNA OR BLOOD EVIDENCE ON THE KID HE KILLED (not under his fingernails or anywhere on his clothes).

        Yeah, right, he was in fear for his life …

        I think we arleady know about racism in the great state of Florida, FLP … looks like nothing much has changed at all …

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Nothing will ever change as long as this nation has race pimps like you sparking the fires Charlie. Your the perfect left winger, names,names, names, for no other reason than to stoke fires. Losers, all of you 🙂

          • If I didn’t know better, I’d think you were calling me a loser, G …

            and like I said, my man … you use the same EXACT language as the lynchers in Florida did in the 1940’s and 50’s … coincidence or are you wearing a hood when you type? 🙂

        • I would think someone of your number of years in age would be able to remember when Florida was a Democrat controlled state and racism was at it’s highest, todays more compassionate conservative Florida has come a long way. If you want to see real racism walk alone at night through the streets of Harlem or Detroit, you know… thos bastions of Democratic cities in the north. (FYI, I was born and raised in New York, moved to Florida 17 years ago, I am very much a yankee)

          • FLP … why are you so anxious to tie me to the democratic party? I’m a socialist … I deplore both parties (that are both the same) … are you seriously trying to claim it’s just the democratic party that promotes racism? You live in Florida, your former Gov., Mr. Bush himself has pointed to the absurdity of your party chasing minorities to the other party. Are you drunk on self-righteousness. What’s the difference which party gets to claim the bigger racist? The fact of the matter is, my friend, stand your ground was passed in YOUR state … it is an aburd law that promotes murder by anyone in any kind of altercation (just say you felt your life was in danger) … so once again, I’ll ask you … no matter how many years you have, what’s your point?

            • gmanfortruth says:

              Charlie, FLP knows what you are, knows what the Dems are. Ithink, maybe, he may be saying tha your are a really big DICK, but I’m not quite sure. Maybe you should be more direct in your questions 🙂

              • If I didn’t know better, G, I’d think you just called me a big DICK.

                I can only hope that the rest of SUFA has been counting how many times you’ve called me names over the past few posts/days … because I’m trying really hard to restrain myself, you see … 🙂

                I’d suggest you’re all full of shit with the name calling coming from the left but none of you would acknowledge it … 🙂

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Not me Charlie. Just imagining what FLP might think, that’s all. He can speak for himself of course, so we shall see 🙂

            • charlie, you make too many false assumptions. I never once tout the Republican party as the solution to anything. There are some in the Republican party that I support, but the party has an entity is a waste, that is why I am trying to change it (besides the Democrats are too far gone).

              “are you seriously trying to claim it’s just the democratic party that promotes racism?” false assumption, never said that so I won’t waste time responding.

              “You live in Florida, your former Gov., Mr. Bush himself has pointed to the absurdity of your party chasing minorities to the other party.” False assumption, “your party” is a straw man. I currently do not have a political party that represents me.

              “What’s the difference which party gets to claim the bigger racist? The fact of the matter is, my friend, stand your ground was passed in YOUR state” and it is one of the reasons I moved here, that and the whole no snow thing.

              ” … it is an aburd law that promotes murder by anyone in any kind of altercation (just say you felt your life was in danger) …” Lives have been saved by the law, or should we discount any good it has done because criminals now fear for their lives?

              “so once again, I’ll ask you … no matter how many years you have, what’s your point?” My point is simple, you keep building up the straw man of a racist south when that no longer exists. If you lived in Florida you would see that and it is time you put away your bigoted beliefs and wake up to the reality of the 21st century. Why do you constantly project your racism on others? You have demonstrated over and over again that you are the one that defines people based on skin color and income, I have never met a bigger bigot than you.

              Now I will admit that this is only based on your comments on a blog. Maybe in the real world you have more respect for those around you, or at least enough fear of getting your ass kicked that you contain your bigotry in more. But the persona you have decided to portray here on SUFA is that of a racist bigot that is no longer worth my time to respond to. I fought for your right to free speech and my right to ignore you, I will practice my right if you decide to practice yours.

              • FLP … I read the first two paras and you’re the one who originally made the false assumptions (about me and the Dems) which you conveniently ignore … so I won’t bother reading further … why? Life is too short to try and decipher nonsense.

                You’ve never met a bigger bigot than me … now that’s funny. You really do match (EXACTLY) the racists in the 1946 Groveland case … you related to Sheriff McCall by any chance? 🙂

              • “or at least enough fear of getting your ass kicked that you contain your bigotry in more.”

                Now that’s even more funny … my name is charlie stella … what’s yours, punk?

  3. gmanfortruth says:
  4. This is great – when their own strategy comes back to bite them in the backside. Remember that whole theory of low level workers making the IRS decisions? LOL! What an ongoing joke these people are.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/06/24/carney_on_snowden_we_are_just_not_buying_that_this_was_a_technical_decision_by_a_hong_kong_immigration_official.html

  5. @ STephen: “Charlie, they only hit him 19 times.”

    That’s all? Geesh, maybe they should’ve gone for better training! Just nineteen shots to kill an unarmed man … and so long as there’s an excuse (one of them fell on his ass), well, what the hell is the big fuss about?

    You HAVE TO BE KIDDING, right?

  6. @G: “Why is that an issue in this case? Quit talking about straw man BS and stick to the facts.”

    Some day, G, we’re all gonna figure out just what the hell the points is you’re trying to make … 🙂

    The issue in the Martin case is pretty obvious, I think … an unarmed black kid was profiled, told not to pursue, followed anyway, and things got out of hand real fast … and the kit with the skittles was dead and the guy with the gun said his life was in danger.

    Great law, Stand your ground … shoot first and claim self defense later …

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Yes, Charlie, Stand Your Ground is a perfect law! It tells criminals they are no longer in charge and cannot just terrify people with their actions. I love it, know why? I’m not a criminal. I’m not going to attack anybody, so those that chose to attack a weaker person should meet a bullet, head on.

      If it were up to me, I’d whack every gangbanger out there and put their heads on posts at the entryways to each city with a sign that says, “This is what gangbangers get in this city”. Add a few more heads that say “this is what happens to wife beaters and pedophile’s too”

      They are barbarians, the only way to stop them is to kill them, they are no better than a terrorist Jihad killer. Fuck them all!

  7. gmanfortruth says:

    Interesting thought. A Govt employee, the head of the NSA, is asked if they are collecting info on U.S. citizens. Clapper says no. Another employee, contracted by the Govt, provides proof that they are collecting info on U.S. citizens. His name is Snowden.

    When the guy that tells the truth has a worldwide manhunt for him is in bigger trouble than the LIAR, doesn’t anyone think that something is very wrong here?

    If our Constitution matters, this may be the defining event that starts the next Revolution. Imagine that? 🙄

    • We agree, G! Snowden is a national hero … the entire gov’t, Obama included, should be tossed … but that includes FLP’s near and dear Repubicans (I believe that’s what Mark Levin calls them) 🙂

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Yep, we do ! We can get along on many issues, except criminals I guess, LOL 🙂

        • I think we both view the government (this government–except for Bernie Sanders) as criminals …

          • gmanfortruth says:

            In the Immigration law currently going through the Senate, there is a 1.8 Billion dollar provision for………ObamaCars. Yes, to give away cars to the poor. This is in there for non other than Bernie Sanders. I see why you like him, he’s a thief…….

    • Personally, I’m having a real problem with Snowden-going to China and Russia and who knows where else with 4 computers full of information-don’t know what he has on those and there is no doubt that all these communist Countries will have the information before he leaves them. This latest article, I’m gonna post makes me real concerned about what his actual objective is!

      “If I have time to go through this information, I would like to make it available to journalists in each country to make their own assessment, independent of my bias, as to whether or not the knowledge of US network operations against their people should be published.”

      If he has time-gonna let another Country!!!! decide whether or not the info. should be released!!!!!!

      Snowden: Yes, I took the job at Booz Allen to gather evidence on NSA surveillance
      posted at 5:31 pm on June 24, 2013 by Allahpundit

      Does this change anything? Not legally, I think, but maybe it’s another dent in Snowden’s image for some people like me and Michael Moynihan who were favorably disposed to him initially and whose feelings have grown more … nuanced ever since.

      For the first time, Snowden has admitted he sought a position at Booz Allen Hamilton so he could collect proof about the US National Security Agency’s secret surveillance programmes ahead of planned leaks to the media.

      “My position with Booz Allen Hamilton granted me access to lists of machines all over the world the NSA hacked,” he told the Post on June 12. “That is why I accepted that position about three months ago.”…

      He also signalled his intention to leak more of those documents at a later date.

      “If I have time to go through this information, I would like to make it available to journalists in each country to make their own assessment, independent of my bias, as to whether or not the knowledge of US network operations against their people should be published.”

      Michael Tomasky reads that and dismisses Snowden as “nothing more than a spy.” Wasn’t he a spy when he made the decision to lift data off of NSA’s servers, though, irrespective of whether he took the job at Booz in the first place to gain access? This is news less because it affects his legal status, I think, than because it complicates the public sense of Snowden as some sort of total naif who may have decided to do all this relatively quickly, flush with indignation at what he suddenly learned about PRISM. Not so. He planned it for months, using false pretenses to get close to the material he wanted. It was a true intelligence operation, worthy of the CIA. it’s not even clear from the article, in fact, if he took the Booz job because he already knew what was going on at NSA and wanted more evidence or because he wanted to take a fishing expeditions of NSA’s servers. (Probably a combination of both.) The more interesting question, as Erick Erickson’s noted on Twitter, is whether this complicates the Guardian’s and WaPo’s roles in working with Snowden. Glenn Greenwald’s said before that his Guardian team was in touch with him in February, before he took the Booz job. That doesn’t prove anything; maybe Snowden never told them or WaPo of his plan to infiltrate Booz and tap the servers there. But obviously there’s a difference between (a) a source acting on his own initiative to lift government data and then dumping it on a reporter and (b) the source and the reporter planning together on how to lift that data. The feds are probably going to look at that now, if they haven’t already, but there’s no evidence of collusion as far as I know and the feds would probably be reluctant to prosecute in any case because of the horrible PR they faced after l’affaire Rosen.

      Meanwhile, a tidbit from today’s NYT:

      Albert Ho, one of Mr. Snowden’s lawyers, said that before the dinner began, Mr. Snowden insisted that everyone hide their cellphones in the refrigerator of the home where he was staying, to block any eavesdropping. Then began a two-hour conversation during which Mr. Snowden was deeply dismayed to learn that he could spend years in prison without access to a computer during litigation over whether he would be granted asylum here or surrendered to the United States, Mr. Ho said.

      Staying cooped up in the cramped Hong Kong home of a local supporter was not bothersome to Mr. Snowden, but the prospect of losing his computer scared him.

      “He didn’t go out, he spent all his time inside a tiny space, but he said it was O.K. because he had his computer,” Mr. Ho said. “If you were to deprive him of his computer, that would be totally intolerable.”

      He took on the U.S. government and fled to China — and then, allegedly, Russia, Cuba, and Ecuador — all the while feeling that life would be intolerable if he had to go without using a computer for awhile? Maybe he is a total naif after all. Speaking of which, more from the Times:

      Two Western intelligence experts, who worked for major government spy agencies, said they believed that the Chinese government had managed to drain the contents of the four laptops that Mr. Snowden said he brought to Hong Kong, and that he said were with him during his stay at a Hong Kong hotel.

      If that were the case, they said, China would no longer need or want to have Mr. Snowden remain in Hong Kong.

      I can’t tell from the way that’s worded if they have reason to believe it’s true or if they’re just making a safe assumption. The assumption is safe: I keep seeing Snowden defenders arguing that there’s no proof that he’s hurt national security even though, rationally, there’s no way a government like China (or any adverse power, really) would let an intelligence plum as prized as Snowden get away without shaking him down for something. Either they’re going to lift his hard drives or, if he’s encrypted them somehow, they’re going to get rough with him to decrypt them. (That may in fact be why he’s momentarily disappeared in Russia.) By his own previous admission, he’s chosen to hold plenty of damaging material back because he’s interested, supposedly, only in vindicating civil liberties in the United States. We know by now that that’s not true — some of the stuff he’s leaked is aimed simply at embarrassing the U.S., not at protecting Americans’ rights — and, in any event, many of his supporters seemed to take the position yesterday on Twitter that the ends kinda sorta justify the means when the feds are after you. If the only places he can hide are authoritarian states like Russia and Venezuela, even though they’re complete anathema to the civil libertarian ideals Snowden claims to hold, so be it. A man’s gotta protect himself, right? Wouldn’t that same logic justify giving sensitive U.S. info to whoever’s holding him, though? If the alternative is a federal pen, hey.

      Via Mediaite, here’s Jay Carney grumbling about Russia and China. Between this fiasco and the war in Syria, the “reset” with Russia these days seems to amount to Putin kicking Obama in the stones every week or so.

      • “and there is no doubt that all these communist Countries will have the information before he leaves them”

        Now wait a minute, VH … aren’t we communists here in Ameri-cha? All those progressives!

        You guys complain about the government having hidden agendas … then somebody exposes it and you complain about the whistleblower …

        Make up your minds 🙂

        • gmanfortruth says:

          At this point, I wouldn’t believe anything the media puts out about the guy. Unless he say’s it on TV, it shouldn’t be believed. I really doubt that Snowden has any real important info to offer, getting that kind of stuff would take more than 3 month’s. Even the fact that the NSA is spying on all of us is not really anything unexpected. Just be careful, if you tell the truth in this country, the men in black suits might come calling. If you lie, they’ll bring you canolli 🙂

          • You have a valid point about determining whether or not the statements are true. So we will wait and see-I’m just not giving him a pass until I know what’s on those computers-Not giving him a complete pass either way-He shouldn’t have gone to China and Russia with any information, IMO.

  8. gmanfortruth says:

    Charlie said “Some day, G, we’re all gonna figure out just what the hell the points is you’re trying to make … ”

    It’s not that difficult. It’s called fight criminals and don’t become a victim. Why should the criminals have the upper hand? Which, Charlie, seems to be what you want. Screw them all. Break in my house, DIE. Carjack attempt, DIE! why is that so wrong? Please, Charlie, the world wants to know why defending oneself is so wrong in your great big heart. Tell us Bro! 🙂

    • Defending oneself is all fine and good, G … and there have ALWAYS been laws (a law) that permits self defense … but leaving it up to the shooter to explain? You see nothing wrong with that? Gangbangers (the ones you seem to hate so much) have gotten off on stand your ground in the great and self righteous state of Florida … it’s an insane law.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I agree that some bad guys have gotten off. I call that part of the trade off. Those who got off, will eventually find themselves in prison or at the wrong end of that law (and dead). I would rather have the threat of the criminals being whacked by innocent victims (or the act itself) than worry about a small few who get off killing another criminal. One criminal killing another vs. a non-criminal allowed to defend one self? You know where I stand BRO!

        • And if the dead person isn’t a criminal? Now, I’m not going by YOUR definition of criminals (those who wear hoodies) … I’m talking about people who abide by the law … unless, of course, buying skittles and a soft drink qualify a black kid as a criminal …

          • gmanfortruth says:

            The criminal in Martin came out when he took the first swing. Enough said . Maybe Zimmerman was right all along. FREE GEORGE 🙂

            • Are you waving a confederate flag, G?

              Is your hood in place?

              The criminal Martin … you gotta love it … open season on black kids … especially those wearing hoodies … are you a member of the KKK or just an admirer?

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Not at all Charlie. Never was into the Confederate thing. KKK? No, not a Democrat either. I do however look at the ACTIONS of people when I make an opinion. Skin color is a non-issue, just like religion, to me. All breathing people are capable of being evil. Your insistance that I’m racist is all you got to combat my opinion. But don’t worry old friend, no one will EVER claim you slept in a Holiday Inn Express 🙂

  9. gmanfortruth says:

    Change of latest subject 🙂 Charlie and I can’t keep arguing like this, so I’m going in a different direction. I’m posting this list, so you can see where you stand if a major emergency hit your area, or this whole country. Some of these, most can fix, others, just not happening. Use your best judgement !

    #1 According to a survey that was just released, 76 percent of all Americans are living paycheck to paycheck. But most Americans are acting as if their jobs will always be there. But the truth is that mass layoffs can occur at any time. In fact, it just happened at one of the largest law firms in New York City.

    #2 27 percent of all Americans do not have even a single penny saved up.

    #3 46 percent of all Americans have $800 or less saved up.

    #4 Less than one out of every four Americans has enough money stored away to cover six months of expenses.

    #5 Wages continue to fall even as the cost of living continues to go up. Today, the average income for the bottom 90 percent of all income earners in America is just $31,244. An increasing percentage of American families are just trying to find a way to survive from month to month.

    #6 62 percent of all middle class Americans say that they have had to reduce household spending over the past year.

    #7 Small business is becoming an endangered species in America. In fact, only about 7 percent of all non-farm workers in the United States are self-employed at this point. That means that the vast majority of Americans are depending on someone else to provide them with an income. But what is going to happen as those jobs disappear?

    #8 In 1989, the debt to income ratio of the average American family was about 58 percent. Today it is up to 154 percent.

    #9 Today, a higher percentage of Americans are dependent on the government than ever before. In fact, according to the U.S. Census Bureau 49 percent of all Americans live in a home that gets direct monetary benefits from the federal government. So what is going to happen when the government handout gravy train comes to an end?

    #10 Back in the 1970s, about one out of every 50 Americans was on food stamps. Today, about one out of every 6.5 Americans is on food stamps.

    #11 It is estimated that less than 10 percent of the U.S. population owns any gold or silver for investment purposes.

    #12 It has been estimated that there are approximately 3 million “preppers” in the United States. But that means that almost everyone else is not prepping.

    #13 44 percent of all Americans do not have first-aid kits in their homes.

    #14 48 percent of all Americans do not have any emergency supplies stored up.

    #15 53 percent of all Americans do not have a 3 day supply of nonperishable food and water in their homes.

    #16 One survey asked Americans how long they thought they would survive if the electrical grid went down for an extended period of time. Incredibly, 21 percent said that they would survive for less than a week, an additional 28 percent said that they would survive for less than two weeks, and nearly 75 percent said that they would be dead before the two month mark.

    #17 According to a survey conducted by the Adelphi University Center for Health Innovation, 55 percent of Americans believe that the government will come to their rescue when disaster strikes.

    • Survival, capitalist style … a class system that has turned the most prosperous nation on the planet into a third world economy … the American Dream is dead and buried … what used to be the safe bet (go to college to better yourself/income, etc.) is now turned on it shead (unless you’re loaded) … better to pickup garbage or join the police force, etc. … welcome to the new world order …. the 1% rules … and you patriots support it to the point of going to war for it … nothing like logic and reason, my friends … yous do Ayn Rand proud …

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Charlie, you are clueless as to what I think. I’m with you on the 1% (i have asked for a list). Your BS straw man posts and the Ayn Rand stuff is stale as Democratic rule in Detroit. Get the point?

        • Once again, G, you make ZERO sense in your strawman attack on me … you defend capitalism (think about it, G–that’s my point) … you defend the very system that permits the 1% to rule the roost … you defend it so hard and so blindly that you equate your liberty with how they allow you to live. It’s actually pretty comical (especially when you attempt to fire back), but since you’ve learned a new catch phrase (strawman), try and understand what it actually means. In the meantime, keep crying (and whining–which is what most of you do on SUFA) about your lack of liberty and how the big bad progressives are ruining the “American” way of life, etc., and the 1% couldn’t be happier to have X amount of the poplution (fools, I call them/you) defending EXACTLY what keeps them in power … your economic system that pits class against class …

          Now, do you get the point? I doubt it … 🙂

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Still blaming the non-living entity (Capitalism) for the acts of the living I see 🙄 Based on your thinking, it’s the cars fault you got a ticket or in an accident. It’s the guns fault the Martin is dead, not Zimmerman’s, It’s the books fault for the terrorist building bombs etc. I know you get this point 🙂

  10. Have a nice evening, yo’ll

  11. Someone needs to explain to me why everyone is so obsessed with this Zimmerman/Martin case. Here is a case of a man who says he was in self defense and you have a prosecutor who says he was not and is going to trial. The jury has been picked and we await the outcome………everything else is smokescreen…..so….why the hoopla? This is no different than any other type of stalking case…..it is up to the jury to decide. It matters not the color of the skin….only the alleged offense. Sigh.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Colonel, Good day Sir, I hope all is well down your way. A quick explaination. The media lied and mad this a race issue before his arrest, over a month after the incident. The race pimps (Jesse Jackson, ect) joined in the fray and it was nothing short of a media lynching of Zimmerman, who was finally charged. Had the colors been reversed and the shooter black, it would be a non-issue. This to me is the RACE card gone wild.

      So, we shall see what the outcome is. NBC, in this case, should be closed down and shuttered for their part in this. In the outset, NBC altered a 911 call that made Zimmerman sound like a racist. Listening to the unaltered call, he was not racist at all. It’s just more left wing BS trying to save face after the real call was unearthed. Can anyone on the left tell the truth?

      • Hi G Man……I understand part of your argument. But, to my lame brain, it has inconsistencies. First of all, anytime a black person is involved, it will ALWAYS be a racial issue because it has been allowed to get out of hand and it has been used as a weapon to “justify” certain things. This is unfortunate and should be changed.

        The issue to me is not the “stand your ground law” or the “castle doctrine”…..it boils down to……did Zimmerman have a so called “right” to perpetuate a situation where he had no business being. I do not think that it is undisputed that the area where this lad was wandering around had theft and break in issues. It is undisputed that the majority of the break ins and car thefts were made by black persons. It would be normal to profile individuals on the basis of a particular common denominator…whether that denominator is skin color, number of eyes or horns, or whatever……it does not matter.

        I live in an area that has a neighborhood patrol. We have several cars that have a “neighborhood patrol” magnetic sign on them. These cars are registered with the local police by license number and we patrol our neighborhood with regularity. We will report suspicious activity to the police and let the police handle it….unless we actually see criminal activity taking place and then we will intervene until the police get there. We are all armed. We DO NOT stop anyone and ask “why” they are walking the neighborhood and the police have learned that if we call…..it usually has good reason. All of us are licensed to carry concealed. Our crime rate is practically zero. Our women and children can walk the streets and parks at any hour without being accosted….in our neighborhood. But, we are a local community organization and we are all dedicated to our area.

        We have NO self appointed vigilantes….if anyone is told by the police to stand down…..we do it. We may observe and follow but we do not confront….therefore no self protection is necessary. Only once have we been questioned by someone we were watching. He did not like the fact that we were following him and radioing ahead and this person confronted a car that was parked with a neighborhood patrol sign with two individuals in it watching him walk around a park 1 am in the morning and he did not live there or anywhere close by. It was suspicious activity and we reported it to the police. But the confrontation never went anywhere. No one pulled a gun. It was not needed.

        It seems to me, that Zimmerman put himself in a confrontational position and the only way out was to shoot in a fight. Why was he there when the police told him to stand down? That is for a jury to decide. He has been charged….so let the jury decide.

        NOW, Charlie, my friend. I see NO PROBLEM with self protection or the castle doctrine. Come at me…..you will die. Pure and simple. Come onto my property uninvited, break into my house, try to steal a car…tools…..a bicycle…..you will die. I will not walk away when I am confronted to avoid an unpleasant situation. I will also not put my self into a situation accordingly.

        This Zimmerman case……let the jury decide.

        So, as I see it……

        • NOW, Charlie, my friend. I see NO PROBLEM with self protection or the castle doctrine. Come at me…..you will die. Pure and simple. Come onto my property uninvited, break into my house, try to steal a car…tools…..a bicycle…..you will die. I will not walk away when I am confronted to avoid an unpleasant situation. I will also not put my self into a situation accordingly.

          Try to steal a tool, say, from your front lawn and you will shoot to kill?

          I don’t believe you. I don’t even want to believe you (on that). It’s absurd … and should you do it, you’d deserve to be brought up on charges … there is such a thing as overkill, Colonel. That is absolutely absurd (so I don’t think you’d do it). 🙂

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Thanks Colonel 🙂 Zimmerman did nothing wrong. He followed and observed until he lost sight of Martin. He walked back to his truck, where shortly there after was confronted, by his truck, by Martin. Martin initiated violence and we know the results.

          That is the story the best I know it as it was told to police and reporters.

          When I lived in the city, we also looked after each other. Following and observing was a normal thing when someone not from the area was around. I like the neighborhood watch’s.. Yes, those who do the watching CAN follow and observe, it’s completely legal (remind Charlie of this please). During my time there, we never were confronted.

          Now, if a stranger is around, we confront with a sidearm, a high powered rifle and a big dog. I don’t think I can be accused of being a bleeding heart liberal 😆

          • “Yes, those who do the watching CAN follow and observe, it’s completely legal (remind Charlie of this please). During my time there, we never were confronted.”

            I sat watch with a football teammate when we both lived in a Brooklyn apartment building. We had a table and chairs … and ourselves … no crime while we were on watch … nor was there any when women without guns were on watch.

            You confront a stranger with a sidearm and a big dog, G? You kill me, brother … 🙂

            • gmanfortruth says:

              You confront a stranger with a sidearm and a big dog, G? You kill me, brother

              In these parts, we all know each other. The “Keep an eye on the place” request is quite normal. One of the neighbors always knows when another neighbor is gone, always. we keep a gun in our vehicle and on our person just about all the time. The dog is about 60 lbs, boxer/pitbull mix and very well trained. A great distraction that usually keeps people inside the vehicle. I have confronted 3 people who were on the property of a neighbor who was gone. All claimed to know the landowner and just wanted to see if he was home. That proved true in all cases. No one got hurt and the landowner’s feel very good about leaving their property in our watchful eyes 🙂

              • gmanfortruth says:

                OH! This ain’t Brooklyn, this is a very rural place. Our police response is 30 minutes at best, if they know their way around. We don’t relay on LE, you may all you want. Our Sheriff wants our actions to continue.

          • Charlie…….hmmmmm…….I despise thievery of any kind….on my property…..would I shoot to kill without warning….of course not. Would I shoot if warning was not heeded and they continued…..yes……even if it was a garden hose…….it is not the item, it is the act. Whether or not you steal a Mercedes or a screwdriver….that is not the point. Not with me. The cost of the item has no bearing……I would warn first, if front yard….fenced in back yard would get a lay down warning…..if they run, I will drop them. Break in my house….no warning, no talking….just shooting.

            I do believe that there is a consequence for illegal activity…..the consequence with me…..heed my warning. Ignore my warning, pray that my aim is off. I do not wish to give criminal activity a second chance. Outside of war, I have only had to shoot once and pull my weapon twice. I deliberately shot a lad in the foot when he was trying to steal a, are you ready for this, a porch swing at 3 am. I pulled a weapon one time when my significant other and I returned from a loooong road trip at 2 am, were hungry and was in the drive through line at the local McDonalds when 6 lads walked up behind my car….in a drive through line and split into pairs on either side of the car….when they saw the weapon, they left. BUT, I was prepared to shoot all of them if the car was touched.

            So…without warning? No…..inside my house, there is no warning. But, do not heed my warning, I will bring you down. If you have a problem with this, tell me why? I am indeed curious.

  12. gmanfortruth says:

    DIALOGUE BETWEEN A LADY INTERVIEWER WITH A MALE BEER DRINKER:

    Lady Interviewer: Do you drink every day?

    Man: Yes.

    Lady Interviewer: How much a day?

    Man: Around 3 six-packs starting at noon.

    Lady Interviewer: How much does a 6-pack cost?

    Man: Roughly $10.00 at a deli.

    Lady Interviewer: And how long have you been drinking like that?

    Man: 15 years.

    Lady Interviewer: So with a six-pack costing $10.00, and you consuming 3 six-packs a day,

    you are spending roughly $900 each month. In one year, you would then

    be spending $10,800, correct?

    Man: Correct.

    Lady Interviewer: If in 1 year you spend $10,800 on beer, not accounting for inflation,

    15 years puts your spending roughly $162,000; correct?

    Man: Correct.

    Lady Interviewer: Did it ever occur to you that if you did not drink for the last 15 years,

    you could have bought a Ferrari?

    Man: Do you drink?

    Lady Interviewer: No.

    Man: So where’s your damn Ferrari?

  13. gmanfortruth says:

    The FBI is very busy busting terrorist’s 🙂 http://godfatherpolitics.com/11415/the-fbi-foils-its-own-death-ray-plot/

  14. Hmmm, interesting blog on O and the press’s weird fascination with him. The author is referencing the recently murdered? Michael Hastings.

    http://neoneocon.com/2013/06/22/michael-hastings-obama-and-the-swoon/

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Kathy, This shows how low some reporters will go to get that story. I’m still amazed how the MSM still talks good about “The Worst President Ever”. Shameful 😦

    • As far as Michael Hastings-who knows-but there is certainly enough information out there to make one Wonder.

      Kathy-as far as the love fest for Obama-have you read the Left Behind series or watched the movies?

      • I have not, VH. It is a series?

        • Yeah, it’s a series about the End Times-it came to mind when I read how all the reporters swooned over Obama-most of the reporters in the book swooned the same way over the anti-Christ. Now I’m not saying Obama is the anti-Christ but there is enough information out there to cause me to occasionally wonder. 🙂

          • Bottom Line says:

            There is no such thing as a global tyrant sea monster that is going to chip everyone, …or whatever.

            Rev. 13 is (among other things) a cryptic description of an astro chart/sky map, …not a tyrant that is going to chip people.

            It’s not Obama’s chart.

  15. gmanfortruth says:

    Blacks are not violent and guns are not needed! The results of Charlie’s thinking: http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2013/06/police_search_for_millburn_robber_captured_on_survelliance_camera_in_home_invasion.html

  16. Think NSA Spying Is Bad? Here Comes ObamaCare Hub

    By JOHN MERLINE, INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY
    Posted 08:14 AM ET

    The Health and Human Services Department earlier this year exposed just how vast the government’s data collection efforts will be on millions of Americans as a result of ObamaCare.

    Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., asked HHS to provide “a complete list of agencies that will interact with the Federal Data Services Hub.” The Hub is a central feature of ObamaCare, since it will be used by the new insurance exchanges to determine eligibility for benefits, exemptions from the federal mandate, and how much to grant in federal insurance subsidies.

    In response, the HHS said the ObamaCare data hub will “interact” with seven other federal agencies: Social Security Administration, the IRS, the Department of Homeland Security, the Veterans Administration, Office of Personnel Management, the Department of Defense and — believe it or not — the Peace Corps. Plus the Hub will plug into state Medicaid databases.

    And what sort of data will be “routed through” the Hub? Social Security numbers, income, family size, citizenship and immigration status, incarceration status, and enrollment status in other health plans, according to the HHS.

    “The federal government is planning to quietly enact what could be the largest consolidation of personal data in the history of the republic,” noted Stephen Parente, a University of Minnesota finance professor.

    Not to worry, says the Obama administration. “The hub will not store consumer information, but will securely transmit data between state and federal systems to verify consumer application information,” it claimed in an online fact sheet .

    But a regulatory notice filed by the administration in February tells a different story.

    That filing describes a new “system of records” that will store names, birth dates, Social Security numbers, taxpayer status, gender, ethnicity, email addresses, telephone numbers on the millions of people expected to apply for coverage at the ObamaCare exchanges, as well as “tax return information from the IRS, income information from the Social Security Administration, and financial information from other third-party sources.”

    They will also store data from businesses buying coverage through an exchange, including a “list of qualified employees and their tax ID numbers,” and keep it all on file for 10 years.

    In addition, the filing says the federal government can disclose this information “without the consent of the individual” to a wide range of people, including “agency contractors, consultants, or grantees” who “need to have access to the records” to help run ObamaCare, as well as law enforcement officials to “investigate potential fraud.”

    Rep. Diane Black, R-Tenn., complained that just months before ObamaCare officially starts, the Obama administration still hasn’t answered “even the most basic questions about the Data Hub,” such as who will have access to what information, or what training and clearances will be required.

    Beyond these concerns is the government’s rather sorry record in protecting confidential information.

    Late last year, for example, a hacker was able to gain access to a South Carolina database that contained Social Security numbers and bank account data on 3.6 million people.

    A Government Accountability Office report found that weaknesses in IRS security systems “continue to jeopardize the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the financial and sensitive taxpayer information.”

    A separate inspector general audit found that the IRS inadvertently disclosed information on thousands of taxpayers between 2009 and 2010. In 2011, the Social Security Administration accidentally released names, birth dates and Social Security numbers of tens of thousands of Americans.

    If these government agencies can’t protect data kept on their own servers, how much more vulnerable will these databases be when they’re constantly getting tapped by the ObamaCare Data Hub?

    In any case, creating even richer and more comprehensive databases on Americans will create a powerful incentive to abuse them among those looking to score political points by revealing private information or criminals who want to steal identities.

    A recent CNN poll found that 62% of Americans say “government is so large and powerful that it threatens the rights and freedoms of ordinary Americans.”

    What will the public think once ObamaCare and its vast data machine is in full force?

    Read More At Investor’s Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/062513-661264-obamacare-database-hub-creates-privacy-nightmare.htm#ixzz2XFGJtcT0
    Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

  17. gmanfortruth says:

    Privacy is dead in this country. If this law is not repealed, all healthcare will be done by protocal’s. Death Panels, much like the VA system and how they treat veteran’s. Suicides will become a normal event in every town. Eugenics in disguise 😦

    • He didn’t go far enough, the sellout! Universal health care … medicaid for all!

    • Seeing the VA system should convince any intelligent person that we do not want the government involved in our healthcare system. But then again, we let the government control our education system so their are fewer intelligent people left to vote, as we saw in November of 2012.

      • FLP, why not joint GMan’s team and form a new nazi party? Then you can kill all those who don’t think like yourselves/troglodytes …

        • gmanfortruth says:

          See below! Your not that important Charlie and all of can do without you, just a hint!

  18. gmanfortruth says:

    FREE. GEORGE. :). Us Rednecks stand for truth and justice . Send the message, criminals can be killed!

    • You always come close, G, but you never go the full measure. We know you’re a redneck, G … we know you’re probably missing some front teeth (from a hockey game you played without a helmet or mouth guard) … we know you’re a paranoid schizoid … and we kind of figured out you’re a blatant racist, but we want to read it from your own fingers … redneck is such a weak out, brother. Come on, find the strength and call all those hoodie wearing criminals what you know you want to call them … be a man, my son. 🙂

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Charlie, I’m going to make a kind suggestion. Talk about the subject matter, or just shut the fuck up. Your choice, or, I’ll make it for you! Can I be any clearer? 👿

  19. @ the colonel: “That is what I meant by “hoping my aim is not off”………….but then again…being Texan Combat Colonel……my aim would not be off.”

    If you put one in his leg and I’m on the jury, I say, “Little extreme there, Colonel, but I’m sure he’s learned his lesson. You get a pass.”

    If your aim was off and you whacked him?

    Guilty of negligent homicide … but I’ll make sure to visit you with cannoli’s in tow … 🙂

    • Fair enough but curious…….why would you even say a “little extreme”? Why would you not allow the protection of private property? Why would you put a dollar figure on that? Or is it you do not feel that theft, no matter the cost, is not worth lethal force? Do you feel that attempted theft is ok? Just let them walk or run way? Or, do you actually feel that theft, no matter the cost, is not worth lethal means to stop it. Just curious as to what people think…..the difference in justice, I guess. I, personally, would have no leniency, as you know….

      A thief is a thief…..slaps on the wrist do not solve anything…..my opinion, of course. But, you would not have to bring me Canoli in Texas….steal a frijoli bean here will get you hung like a horse thief.

      Luv ya man….. 🙂

      • Why would you not allow the protection of private property? Why would you put a dollar figure on that? Or is it you do not feel that theft, no matter the cost, is not worth lethal force? Do you feel that attempted theft is ok? Just let them walk or run way? Or, do you actually feel that theft, no matter the cost, is not worth lethal means to stop it. Just curious as to what people think…..the difference in justice, I guess. I, personally, would have no leniency, as you know….
        Colonel, it’s not about private or public property for me. I say extreme as far as shooting a guy in the leg for stealing a garden hose (whatever) because you don’t need to shoot the guy. You may be 100% right about a slap in the wrist not doing anything, but killing him/her … how about jail? You can’t kill off everyone who’s ever stolen, can you? What about the guy who cheats on his taxes? Isn’t he a thief (by your definition)? Would you have him killed as well?
        Money has nothing to do with it. I’m talking over the top as in the punishment far exceeding the crime. I wouldn’t shoot a guy for stealing my car (unless I was behind hyjacked). I look out the window and see him breaking in, I may go out and try to stop him. Maybe even fire a warning shot or clip him in the leg (I don’t trust myself to make a clean shot, so the warning shot would probably be enough for me) … but, no, I wouldn’t kill him for a car. It’s replaceable.

  20. I don’t know if anyone on the left still reads this blog but if they do-I really have to ask, if the shoe was on the other foot would You accept this last minute convenient BS? I know the talking head’s pretend that they do.

    No, ‘Progressive’ Groups Weren’t Targeted by the IRS Like Conservative Organizations Were
    Guy Benson | Jun 25, 2013
    Guy Benson

    Yesterday’s IRS news bulletin was a bit perplexing. It was no real surprise that the agency had used inappropriate ‘BOLO’ lists more widely and for longer than we’d previously known. Sweeping malfeasance and subsequent dishonesty is par for the course with them at this point. What was intriguing, though, was the apparent revelation that the IRS had also used key words like “progressive” and “occupy” during their screening process. This begged the question, why didn’t these facts come to light much earlier? Liberals and the IRS have been eager to tamp down the festering controversy for weeks, all while insisting that the abuse wasn’t politically motivated — a tale few Americans believe. If the wrongful targeting affected both sides of the spectrum, that would have represented solid evidence for the ‘innocent incompetence’ defense. As I’ve written previously, pleading ineptitude boosts conservatives’ case that the federal government has become too sprawling and unaccountable, but it’s still less damaging than leaving a general impression of deliberate partisan malice. Are we to believe that as the latter assumption calcified in the public’s imagination, the IRS and its defenders chose not to disclose the other side of the story? Remember, lefty groups had already stated that they weren’t targeted, evidence abounds that left-leaning applications sailed through while righty applications languished, the Inspector General’s report clearly showed a distinct ideological imbalance, and Stephen Miller conceded under oath that right-leaning groups were exclusively victimized by the practice. The IRS admitted and apologized for their disparate treatment of conservatives, for crying out loud. So why, after all of that, are we finally being informed that liberal groups were ensnared in the scandal, too? National Review’s Eliana Johnson cuts through the fog and makes some important distinctions that help illuminate the truth:

    A November 2010 version of the list obtained by National Review Online, however, suggests that while the list did contain the word “progressive,” screeners were in fact instructed to treat “progressive” groups differently from “tea party” groups. Whereas screeners were merely alerted that a designation of 501(c)(3) status “may not be appropriate” for applications containing the word ”progressive” – 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from conducting any political activities – they were told to send those of tea-party groups off IRS higher-ups for further scrutiny. That means the applications of progressive groups could be approved on the spot by line agents, while those of tea-party groups could not. Furthermore, the November 2010 list noted that tea-party cases were “currently being coordinated with EOT,” which stands for Exempt Organizations Technical, a group of tax lawyers in Washington, D.C. Those of progressive groups were not.

    So the terms employed during initial screening processes did include words like “progressive” (although from what we know about the original ‘BOLO’ lists, they were overwhelmingly skewed toward conservative descriptors), but only conservative applications were marked for additional scrutiny — including micromanagement from Washington. This abuse led to plainly uneven outcomes along ideological lines, as reported by USA Today:

    In February 2010, the Champaign Tea Party in Illinois received approval of its tax-exempt status from the IRS in 90 days, no questions asked. That was the month before the Internal Revenue Service started singling out Tea Party groups for special treatment. There wouldn’t be another Tea Party application approved for 27 months. In that time, the IRS approved perhaps dozens of applications from similar liberal and progressive groups, a USA TODAY review of IRS data shows. As applications from conservative groups sat in limbo, groups with liberal-sounding names had their applications approved in as little as nine months. With names including words like “Progress” or “Progressive,” the liberal groups applied for the same tax status and were engaged in the same kinds of activities as the conservative groups.

    Zero Tea Party conservative groups’ applications were approved for more than two years, as dozens of lefty groups were rubber-stamped. Yes, it seems as though the word “progressive” appeared on some of those ‘BOLO’ lists (see update below), but the screening and approval process went on as usual for those groups. Not so for the other side, against whom Beltway managers directed added scrutiny, onerous follow-up questionnaires, and interminable delays. Also bear in mind two other elements of the IRS scandal: The targeting of conservative donors, and the wildly improper (and illegal) leaking of conservative groups’ confidential donor lists to their political adversaries. When liberals can provide evidence that the IRS shipped, say, a private roster of Planned Parenthood’s donors to the Susan B. Anthony List, then we’ll talk. That’s a hypothetical. In reality, the IRS was actually instructing pro-life groups not to picket Planned Parenthood clinics under penalty of law, and inquiring as to the contents of their prayers. Some on the Left are seizing on yesterday’s developments as “proof” that conservative “conspiracy theories” have at last been debunked, or whatever. Nice try. Johnson’s piece, plus reams of additional evidence, belie that spin. I repeat: The IRS apologized for its wrongful actions against conservative groups. It’s not a conspiracy theory if the harmed party elicits an apology from the culprit, based on the culprit’s own internal review.

    UPDATE – The DC’s Patrick Howley points out another significant difference:

    The term “progressive” appeared on a heavily redacted November 2010 ”Be On the Lookout” (BOLO) list released this week by Ways and Means Democrats. The term was used to help the IRS identify political activity that “may not be appropriate” among 501(c)(3) charities eligible for tax-deductible contributions. However, the targeting of conservative groups largely focused on applicants for 501(c)(4) “social welfare organization” status, which shields groups from having to disclose their donors. The scrutinized “progressive” applications were not required to be sent to a special IRS unit for additional review — but tea party and conservative applications were subjected to extra scrutiny by 12 different working groups within the IRS. Tea Party groups were also marked for extra scrutiny in the same document…Ways and Means Democrats did not call any progressive victims of IRS targeting at the committee’s hearing on IRS victims. “I do want to note that the minority was given the opportunity to call a witness, but did not present a witness that had been affected by taxpayer activity — by IRS activity. So, that’s why there is no minority witness at the table today,” Camp said at the June 4 Ways and Means hearing, in response to Democratic Rep. Ron Kind’s complaint that no progressive victims were present at the hearing. Camp later said at the hearing that he welcomed potential progressive victims to come forward, but that no progressive groups had done so by June 4.

    Committee Democrats now claim the targeting was bipartisan, so there’s no “scandal” to see here. If liberal organizations were equally — or somewhat equally — swamped with inappropriate questions, hyper scrutiny from IRS headquarters, and massive delays, why couldn’t Cummings’ brigade produce a single witness to testify to those facts? And were any IRS working groups formed to review liberal organizations’ applications? The agency mobilized twelve such units for scrutinizing conservatives.

    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2013/06/25/report-irs-screened-but-didnt-target-progressive-groups-n1627588

%d bloggers like this: