Stand Your Ground

In continuing the discussion about the pro’s and con’s of Stand Your Ground Laws, There are plenty of questions to answer still. Let me just say that hypothetical situations are a waste of time, because nobody really knows how they will react under extreme conditions.  This also goes for past knowledge of laws,  in the heat of the moment, no one will be thinking about a college course from a couple years earlier, any claim of such is absurd.   I am for Stand Your Ground laws, it puts the law abiding citizen in a position of power that should detract an attacker.  All laws are not perfect, this one included (I don’t think I need a law saying I can defend myself from an attacker), but many of the problems can be fixed by simply changing the law.   So, let’s continue, I have some questions for Captain Canolli.  Feel free to bring up any subject, as is the norm.

Advertisements

Comments

  1. gmanfortruth says:

    Charlie, what does age have to do with this in your mind? You asked this before but never explained your rationale. 🙂

  2. gmanfortruth says:

    D13, the good Colonel asked why all the noise about the Zimmerman case awhile back. This is a good article about how the media railroaded him and the pending lawsuit against NBC. http://beforeitsnews.com/survival/2013/07/the-muted-news-of-the-zimmerman-lawsuit-2-2479940.html

    To answer the Colonel’s question, it’s the actions of the media that has me up in arms. They lied big time and turned a tragic event into a nationwide racial event. That’s just wrong. I hope he wins and becomes a 1%er and lives happily ever after on a nice Island somewhere. I also hopes he puts NBC out of business, as a lesson to the rest of them.

  3. gmanfortruth says:
  4. Good Morning, my friend. Allow me to continue further……in Houston, a jury found last year that the stand your ground law is NOT a license to kill and this is how Texas handles it. In this case, a neighbor takes the law into his own hands. He does not call the police but instead goes next door to a very loud party and wants them to tone it down. They tell him to go to hell and an argument ensues. The one neighbor is armed and is attacked by the drunk and much younger party goers. Attacked meaning, that shoving and cursing went on. The neighbor pulls and fires and cites stand your ground. The jury said…not so fast. You might have been in fear at the time but you provoked the issue. Had you not provoked the issue, you would not have had to fire your weapon. This is how it is, Charlie. Provocation being the main issue here. The older man was attacked and punched….but he should not have been there. All he needed to do was call police and tell them that there is a loud party going on and that the party needed to be toned down and the police would have done that. A simple disturbing the peace call would have sufficed. Instead, he turns vigilante and tries to solve the problem himself without trying the police first. I am NOT an advocate of using the “stand your ground” defense as a reason for taking the law into your own hands.

    In the Zimmerman case, this is how I see it. Did Zimmerman provoke the issue? If he was just following someone, that, alone, is not provocation. Did his following include taunting or racial slurs of a type that it would make the other guy attack? Who the hell knows, except the jury. To me, what this case depends on, is the fact that if the police told him to back off and he did not….and he provokes an issue, then a jury needs to determine what is provocation. In Houston, the jury decided that even though the man was in fear of his life at the time and pulled his weapon to save himself, he should have not put himself into that situation. I see it the same.

    • Oops……..the above was intended for Charlie…….

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Colonel, the difference in the two cases, your Texas shooter was not on public property (as I read it). Zimmerman was on public property or common areas of the “gated community”, which he is legally allowed to be. There were no witness accounts of him yelling racial slurs or anything of that nature. It seems to me that a stranger in a gated community is enough reason to follow. I’m not sure how laws are concerning gated communities and trespassing.

      • Understand your position…..just giving you how Texas juries see this. Plus note that I am posting the exact law in Texas…..this is why I do not understand the hoopla in Florida. I still do not understand it. To me it is simple….did Zimmerman have a legal right to be where he was? If so, then what exactly prompted the confrontation. If Zimmerman had a right to be there because it is public property, then Martin had the same right. Where did this break down? If Martin did not like being followed, too bad. If he turned and attacked Zimmerman because of this…..Zimmerman gets off. BUT…..and this is the caveat…..did Zimmerman do something else, other than following him, to provoke Martin? If so, Zimmerman does not have the right of stand your ground.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          An interesting point, when GZ was on the phone with the cops, TM came toward him, in his vehicle, and circled the vehicle before walking off again. The jury has a tough job in this case. Whatever they decide, is what is likely the truth. Being judged by your peers is the only fair way to have a trial of this nature. If GZ is convicted of something, then I will accept that as truth. If he is found innocent, then we can all watch the riots break out. I think if this happens, it may be much worse than the riots after the Rodney King fiasco.

  5. More on the Texas Stand your ground and Castle Doctrine.

    Just because Texas law affords you a legal justification for using deadly force when someone attacks you or enters or removes you from your occupied habitation, vehicle, or workplace, does not mean you are immune from being arrested or criminally prosecuted – even if you are completely in the “right” as far as the law is concerned. Your right to assert legal justifications is just that: a legal justification. It is not a get out of jail free card, or an “I get to skip the entire legal process” card. In fact, always remember, there is a high possibility that you will go to jail and have to post bond to get out long before the issue of justification is considered by the government. We see cases like this commonly under the firearms program, not to mention seeing cases of this nature unfold in other states everyday. You may ultimately have to go to court and assert your justification defense before a judge or jury. This process may take months or even years to get resolved. You just don’t know.

    The term “stand your ground” law, again, is not a legal phrase but a phrase the media frequently uses in its reporting. Texas law tells us that there is no duty to retreat if faced with a situation where you have to use force or deadly force to protect yourself or another. Even if by retreating you could avoid the entire confrontation, you do not legally have to. Texas Penal Code §9.32(c) states that in defending yourself or another person, you have no duty to retreat if:
    (1) you have a legal right to be at the location where deadly force is used,
    (2) you did not provoke the person against whom deadly force was used,
    (3) and you were not engaged in criminal activity at the time deadly force was used.

    (D13 says take a close look at the statement of “another person”. In Texas, we have the right to protect other persons).

    The statute is better classified as a “no duty to retreat” law. Under these very limited circumstances, a prosecutor or law enforcement can no longer argue that you had a reasonable “escape route” or that you should have had to “fall back” before justifiably using deadly force. If you are facing a criminal charge, qualifying under this statute could mean the difference between a conviction or not. In order to receive the “no duty to retreat” protection from the law, first, you must have been justified under the Texas Penal Code in using force or deadly force.

    As we discussed above, Texas Penal Code §9.32 states that you will be presumed to be legally justified in using deadly force if someone is entering, attempting to enter, removing you or attempting to remove you from your occupied habitation, vehicle, or workplace. Texas Penal Code §9.32 also states that you will be presumed to be justified in using deadly force if someone commits or attempts to commit: aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery. Deadly force can be used to stop any of these crimes, as well as when it may be immediately necessary to protect yourself or another person from the attacker’s use of deadly force. If you are anywhere you have a right to be, only then does the use of deadly force with no duty to retreat apply under the statute. To paraphrase a very effective jury argument, the statute is designed to protect you when “trouble finds you, but not when you go looking for trouble.”

    If you want to protect yourself or another person, there are multiple situations under Texas Penal Code §9.31 where you will not be justified in using force or deadly force. If you fall under one of the following situations, you will not be given the “no duty to retreat” protection in the legal system:

    1. The use of force is not justified in response to verbal provocation alone. (If someone is only yelling at you, you are not justified in using force against them).
    2. You will not be justified in using force to resist arrest or search being made by a police officer. Even if the arrest or search is ultimately proven to be unlawful.
    3. The use of force against another is not justified if you consent to the force. (No dueling or consenting to gun fights).

    4. If you seek a discussion with another person regarding your differences while unlawfully carrying a weapon, you will not be given the “no duty to retreat” protection. Unlawful carry of a weapon includes:
    a. a non-CHL holder carrying in places other than their premises, vehicle or watercraft;
    b. having a handgun in plain view;
    c. engaging in criminal activity while carrying a weapon; or,
    d. carrying a weapon by a person who is a member of a criminal street gang.

  6. And someone asked what criminal trespass was considered in Texas:

    Any location where you would be considered a trespasser is by definition, a place where you do not have a legal right to be. Under Texas Penal Code §30.05, a person becomes a criminal trespasser if a person enters or remains on property without effective consent, or the person had notice that entry was forbidden or received notice to depart but failed to do so. Notice of trespassing includes: oral or written communication, fencing, signs posted on the property indicating that entry is forbidden, purple paint marks on trees or posts on the property, or crops for human consumption growing on the property. Crops are also defined as cattle, sheep, pigs, and poultry. There is no duty to retreat if you are the property owner.

  7. Let me just say that hypothetical situations are a waste of time, because nobody really knows how they will react under extreme conditions..

    The problem with your reasoning here, Mr. G, is pretty obvious (even to the rational thinker) … the Zimmerman case is EXACTLY that, a hypothetical case. It is an absolute hypothesis as to what happened … nobody knows. Even though all of your posts assume GZ’s words for gospel/fact, they’ve already disproved that on several counts. One, for instance, is the class he took on SYG. It isn’t that he was thinking about SYG when he killed TM. The point, in case you missed it, was that he LIED about it. Now, if he lied about a dopey college course, you think it’s possible he might LIE about what happened the night he killed some unarmed kid? Do you think it’s remotely possible or is GZ such a hero to your extremely narrow mind, that you can’t imagine he’d lie twice (especially when the lie may well keep him from doing jail time).

    This also goes for past knowledge of laws, in the heat of the moment, no one will be thinking about a college course from a couple years earlier, any claim of such is absurd. I am for Stand Your Ground laws, it puts the law abiding citizen in a position of power that should detract an attacker.

    Part 1 of this question already debunked for foolishly misleading the reader. It wasn’t about the law, it was about the LIE. Part 2 (you’re for stand your ground … puts the law abiding citizen) … once again, an absolute assumption that a shooter is a law abiding citizen (you weren’t there, G … you don’t know what happened). The only facts you have suggest it went down much differently than GZ poses, at least up until the confrontation( which is also suspect).

    All laws are not perfect, this one included (I don’t think I need a law saying I can defend myself from an attacker), but many of the problems can be fixed by simply changing the law.

    Yes, so when does it get changed? How many innocent people die/dirty people get off first?

    Charlie, what does age have to do with this in your mind? You asked this before but never explained your rationale.

    I think you are referring to the discussion JAC and I had about him being older and being pushed by a younger bigger male (if eye-talian descent) … my point was if an older man/woman can use lethal force for merely being pushed, why shouldn’t a 20 something have the same right … which would lead to the potential for lot more over-zealous killings (considering how often young people tend to get into fights).

    Colonel’s statement: “Who the hell knows, except the jury.”

    Nope, Colonel, even the jury doesn’t know what happened. They’re bringing their own judgments and potential pre-judgments to the case. They know nothing more than you or I.

    Go to Colonel: There were no witness accounts of him yelling racial slurs or anything of that nature. It seems to me that a stranger in a gated community is enough reason to follow. I’m not sure how laws are concerning gated communities and trespassing.

    There were no witnesses to anything but yelling. Two who claim GZ was on top and one who claims TM was on top prior to the shot. There’s also no law that precludes someone from assuming the stranger in a gated community is funkin’ punk or an asshole, but it goes a bit of a way to showcasing GZ’s state of mind (an assumption of guilty VERY similar to yours about TM).

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Charlie, my point of the subject was an “in general” look at SYG laws. Since the Zimmerman case is not a SYG case, why claim that it is?

      “The point, in case you missed it, was that he LIED about it.” Really, Lied to who? Hannity, BWAHAHAH! You are claiming he lied, yet it was not testable material in the course he took. You really should have watched more of the trial. It was a small portion discussed as part of the overall talk about self defense. Irrelevant!

      Part 2 (you’re for stand your ground … puts the law abiding citizen) … once again, an absolute assumption that a shooter is a law abiding citizen I think your bringing in the GZ case again. I spoke in general terms. Law abiding citizen is the correct words, you are reading out of context.

      which would lead to the potential for lot more over-zealous killings (considering how often young people tend to get into fights). More left wing assumptions, worthless!

      There were no witnesses to anything but yelling. Two who claim GZ was on top and one who claims TM was on top prior to the shot. There’s also no law that precludes someone from assuming the stranger in a gated community is funkin’ punk or an asshole, but it goes a bit of a way to showcasing GZ’s state of mind (an assumption of guilty VERY similar to yours about TM).

      Once again Charlie, you are picking and choosing what you want to fit your ideology. GZ admitted being on top, after he shot him. The witness’s were all correct (but I guess you decided to ignore that fact 🙂 )

      • gmanfortruth says:

        OH, Charlie, your little “narrow minded” comment is so childish, grow up already!

      • Charlie, my point of the subject was an “in general” look at SYG laws. Since the Zimmerman case is not a SYG case, why claim that it is?

        Exactly … so why did he LIE about it … as for not testable, which trial are YOU watching. The Hannity interview was shown to the jury. He claimed he knew nothing about SYG. Then his professor came in and explained it was covered extensively in a course GZ got an A in. Irrelevant, huh?

        “The point, in case you missed it, was that he LIED about it.” Really, Lied to who? Hannity, BWAHAHAH! You are claiming he lied, yet it was not testable material in the course he took. You really should have watched more of the trial. It was a small portion discussed as part of the overall talk about self defense. Irrelevant!

        Try rereading my first comment a few more times.

        Once again Charlie, you are picking and choosing what you want to fit your ideology. GZ admitted being on top, after he shot him. The witness’s were all correct (but I guess you decided to ignore that fact 🙂

        And once again you take GZ’s word for gospel. Maybe you should try rereading your own responses. 🙂

        So far the defense consists of “My best friend(s) …” I’m sure the jury, if it’s being objective, is VERY impressed (sarcasm intended).

        G, why don’t you give up attempting to appear like you have more than a redneck’s sense of intelligence. Why not grab a beef jerky and go to town … (and remember to put your teeth in your mouth first) 🙂

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Still can’t help but act like a 4th schoolyard bully, can you? It just makes everything else you write worthless.

          Back on subject, SYG laws. Why don’t you like them? Some REAL examples would help, not just unsubstantiated claims on your part.

          • G, if I was a schoolyard bully (which you seem transfixed on), I’d come to that shithole of a town you live in and knock what few teeth you have left out. But I don’t. Nor do I threaten people with bikers … or the Mob … or anything else. I really can’t stand that I have to deal with you on this site, but you’re in control. I find you’re never ending bullshit exactly that, bullshit. Make no mistake, I think you’re a moron. You probably think the same of me. Fair trade. I could care less what you think about what I write … mostly, I suspect you can’t handle having your ass whooped in debates, which is why you return to schoolyard bully bullshit. You make zero sense in most of your posts … they are nothing but the lunatic rantings of a guy who hides behind a keyboard and calls people names (not just me, entire races of people) … that’s your shortcoming, my friend, not mine. I try at times to be civil with you, but it’s like Barnie Frank told the lunatic at his press conference, it’s like talking/arguing with a dining room table. Why not let go of the insults (try it for a day) and try and stay on point.

            I’ve given countless examples of SYG gone awry … go back and check, but if you need one specifically, see the article on my blog (where SYG in Florida) let a bunch of bad guys off the hook.

            • gmanfortruth says:

              Charlie, if you don’t like me, you are free to take your bullshit somewhere else, or, I can help you do just that, your choice. Your false claims and name calling have run their course.

              • Blow me, if you can find it because I can’t.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                gman

                You started this round. You should go back and read your own posts in sequence.

                I suggest part of the problem is you two insulting each other and using a smiley face to indicate it is supposed to be funny. Then the other guy ignores the smiley face.

                G…your not a moron nor are you stupid. I’ve seen you write some good stuff. Just slow down and gather your thoughts and double check them before posting. Sometimes your sequences are out of order, creating the appearance of rambling.

                Offered with the best of intentions and affection.
                JAC

              • gmanfortruth says:

                JAC, I’m far from perfect, but no, I did not start anything with Charlie today, I asked him a question in the first comment. I did not point any other comments toward him. In Charlie’s first post of the day, speaking to me, quote” Do you think it’s remotely possible or is GZ such a hero to your extremely narrow mind,” Sorry, I have a bad habit of fighting fire with fire. I simply will not continue to allow the “blow me” “Go fuck yourself” comments to continue.

                I was likely wrong in changing his post, but I disallowed some other rude crap he spewed only to have someone come along and allow them again. I highly doubt that USW would allow his actions and we have put up with it for too long.

                All I want is all of us to be respectful to each other, which is the case with every poster here accept ONE. I may ramble, but I don’t just call someone a moron because I disagree with them. I’ve never had this issue with Buck or Mathius. I thought both were intelligent and eloquent, not to mention a challenge to debate. Charlie don’t debate, you should know that, because your just like me, a racist and a moron, according to Charlie. Oh, according to Charlie, we can add FLP, Bottom Line, Kathy, and on and on. It needs to end!

                My actions also have the best of intentions and affections. Too many have been scared off, time for change so we can have some debates.

  8. gmanfortruth says:

    Somewhat on subject, but Chicago has some of the toughest gun laws in the country, so what is the result? Murder City http://countdowntozerotime.com/2013/07/08/spirit-of-violence-in-spreading-across-america-chicago-murders-soar-67-shot-11-killed-over-july-4-weekend/

  9. Now that G has taken to manipulating posts of mine, I bid you all a farewell …

    • Um..GMan..it’s on you here…Manipulating? Seriously?

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Anita, I have asked nicely that Charlie quit with the personal attacks and the name calling. He has managed to chase Black Flag out of here, amongst others. He bores me with his rude comments and they are not needed at all. I really didn’t manipulate anything, I just helped Charlie be less rude. Example : Blow me. is not a complete sentence and quite rude, what Charlie really meant to say was: Blow me, if you can find it because I can’t. See, that’s far less rude and rather funny.

        However, it’s easier than deleting his ignorant posts. Flag may have been chased off, but I won’t. If Charlie debates without the personal attacks and name calling, he is fine, but he rarely debates. If changing his rude comments is so wrong, then he shouldn’t have posted them to begin with. I’m not going to get into a childish name calling fight with him. He needs to grow up and act like an adult instead of a child.

        In all these years, you have posted with respect and dignity, as most others have. Charlie has attacked Flag, FLP, Kathy, myself and I’m sure I can find a few others. Enough is enough. If changing his ignorant post is what it takes, then so be it.

        • I will not shed a tear at the absence of charlie. Although it is good to have people challenge your position on issues, it only works when that opposing view has honest ideas behind it and charlie is many things, honest is not among them.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Something tells me your far from alone FLP. I’d like to see some deep thinkers come on and post, most of the one’s we had all left, wonder why??????

            • I saw it happen at http://www.thepeopledecide.us. We had an awesome political forum going with people from the left, center and right posting about everything political. Then we got the attention of 1 or 2 leftwing lunatics that turned every discussion into name calling slander fest and one by one we lost the intelligent posters. It got so bad the site owner did a redesign and now no one posts their at all.

              If you let the alinskyites run free on any discussion forum they will kill it.

        • I dunno G. Charlie can dig his own grave, he doesn’t need help. People can choose to reply or not. but to change someone’s post, I think is wrong. Freedom of press and all. Charlie has an MO for sure, but he still has folks replying to him so what’s the harm? He thinks how he thinks,and so do you…this site is all about differing opinions and hoping to meet in the middle. He’s hung in there for 5 years..on his own for a while now..he keeps everyone’s eye on the ball if nothing else. Your last sentence?..careful brother, you reap what you sow..I don’t want to see SUFA go down like that.

          Free Charlie 🙂

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Free Charlie

            Free Charlie

            Oh the irony of it all. ROTFLMAO.

            Don’t worry my dear, I am agreeing with you. Just couldn’t help see the funny in the right wing crazies calling to FREE our resident Communist. 🙂

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Anita, Charlie dug his grave and I just helped him to jump in. Wrong, probably. Deserving, in my mind YES. His ignorance has played it’s course, which I doubt would have lasted this long if USW were around. He can post all he wants, I won’t change anything, but I will disallow his rude BS (that didn’t work last time). Please explain if you think that is wrong! 🙂

            • I’m wondering what you think the point of this blog is? You keep saying “debate”..as though some one wins and someone loses. It’s just people throwing ideas around.coffee shop talk…hoping the ideas float across the USA and we wake some more people up along the way. You aren’t going to win anything here. People stop in because it’s interesting conversation, Fbombs and all. You’ve kept right up with Charlie,as you say..fight fire with fire…and we don’t want you to go anywhere,,jus sayin..

              …..anyway..Ray Hawkins told me to STFU and get a new blog..and he never got fired 🙂

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Anita, maybe debate is the wrong word. How about just talk about current events and other things. I would agree with you 100% on that. The F bombs don’t bother me at all, cussing is a non issue for me, I do it myself.

                I can keep up with Charlie at anything, except eating Canolli, he’d beat me hands down 🙂 I don’t want to keep up with Charlie when it comes to personal attacks and name calling, and I highly doubt anyone really does. I wonder how many more great ideas would have been posted by different people but they just didn’t want the ridicule? Charlie’s antics take away from good conversation. I doubt you would share a coffee shop table with someone who talks down to you, would you? That’s what Charlie does and it’s OLD and BORING! So it stops, simple as that. He is not banned and is free to post.

                I did not fire Charlie. Although I thought about it. I’m not going anywhere, I will not be chased off like others by anyone’s Left Wing mentality! 🙂

                Born with red hair, cursed I say, just cursed 😆

              • easy on the red hair..my daughter and granddaughter are strawberry blonde… 😉

                …”talks down to you”…ever read Charlie’s blog? Momma Stella makes Charlie look like the farm team. Apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.

  10. @ Charlie……you lost me on this one…..you did not attribute this statement to me…did you?

    Go to Colonel: There were no witness accounts of him yelling racial slurs or anything of that nature. It seems to me that a stranger in a gated community is enough reason to follow. I’m not sure how laws are concerning gated communities and trespassing.

    • As to the jury…..you are right but they are going to be more in on ALL the details not reported in the press.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I would agree, if not for the trial being on live TV! I catch bit’s and pieces when it’s not raining outside, but for the most part, at least in my opinion, the prosecution is doing a horrible job. I could be totally wrong, and they are hearing things differently than me. Nothing would shock me at this point.

  11. Just A Citizen says:

    Anita, SUFA at large.

    Anita raises a good question. I would like to see some feedback.

    What is it you wish to get out of SUFA?

    In the beginning USW was searching for answers as to why our system was messed up and why the political party he supported was lost. He was considering going Libertarian in response.

    This led to “opinion” pieces on various issues as well as a few articles designed to simply provide “alternative information”, like my series on Ayn Rand’s philosophy.

    We obviously need some new blood in the discussions. But we are also facing “burnout”. Not at SUFA per se’ but in political discourse in general. Remember I warned how hard it is to keep people engaged for very long. So this creates a drag on brining in new blood.

    By the way, I have a little different take on what caused the drop off here. The name calling and personal attacks certainly increased and probably contributed. But I noticed it also happened when SUFA suddenly seemed to turn into an Anarchist site. That is every comment about how to solve our problems was met with the “life is a bitch and then you die” arguments.

    Then of course there was what I thought was a huge “over reaction” from our lefty friends to my comments about Romney. I am still scratching my head on that one.

    So maybe it was all my fault after all………. 😉

    Anyway, please share your thoughts on WHAT YOU want from SUFA.

    Conversation, debate, information, motivation, action plans, etc, etc.

    • ………in the beginning……the country was only in half as deep of shit that it is now. I figured that with as many people blogging, TPartying, Occupying,..that we could together talk us out of this mess. But now with government’s “in your face” strategy…daily, with no accountability..a serious march to the left happened, socially and politically..and yeah, people are burned out.Tired of waiting for the next thing to get snuck through. Tired of preparing for doomsday, which never seems to get here. Tired of seeing the numbers manipulated, especially gold. Just tired. But, something new is bound to happen, even if it takes til ’16. What’s that you keep harping on JAC?..having the foundation strong to build on..core principles. I think we should concentrate on putting in writing (on screen) exactly what those core principles are, figure out ways to downsize the govt, (that’s easy..you’re gone)..and just see where we get from there. I think it would be really cool if we could have actual dollar amounts to apply to the discussion..even just for kicks..just to see how things could be different. But then I don’t want to be the one in charge of keeping the conversation going either.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Good idea Anita! 🙂

      • I came to this site because I was looking for solutions to the current fiscal and political mess we seem to be in. I certainly appreciated the level of the debate over many other sites. The topics were great and the discussions excellent all though they could get mired in trivia such as the definition of single words. One observation I can make is that people’s opinions often seem set in stone. The left didn’t give nor did the anarchists. Of late we are becoming sidetracked by hot media topics. I view the GZ/TM trial as just that. The key issues I feel are constitutional restraints on government and the run away fiscal train. Immigration falls in the middle. It is a media hot spot but has both constitutional and fiscal aspects. We had a long discussion on that topic some months ago. I think the main conclusion we came to was border security first before anything else. Sound familiar?

        Sorry gals, I view abortion as a media side issue.

        At one point, I did take some of the ideas from here and introduced them into our local newspaper. I got some positive responses but also strong negative left talking points, no real counter arguments. It is hard to get past the major talking points of the two parties.

        I would like us to pick a topic, research it, draw up an action plan and then put that action plan into our local papers. Most papers have a blog to go with their letters to the editor. Using our research we will be able to defend our positions with solid information.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          T-Ray

          Interesting idea. Use this forum to build the information then launch ACTION.

          Probably need some info on HOW TO regarding the action portion. Many other sites include this but we could create a data base for SUFA users.

        • Great idea, T-Ray!

        • I like it…..good idea…..I will get the Vets involved as well as we are on a variety of topics.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Conversation, debate, information, motivation, action plans, etc, etc.

      JAC, you hit the nail on the head. I have been trying to bring a multitude of articles forward, for no other reason than attempting to initiate conversation. I would like good discussions WITHOUT the personal attacks and name calling. I know it’s not very hard, for most of us anyway.

      I’d like more on economics and it’s troubles now, not my strong suit, but willing to learn. Heck, even Obama bashing is old, LOL 🙂 This country is very divided, which is rather interesting when one applies history to it.

  12. Interesting take on the Egypt mess..or is it an American mess too? From Brett Baier’s blog.

    From an Egyptian in Alexandria

    “In a Nutshell…

    A lot of my dear American friends sill ask me what on earth really happened in egypt, for their benefit, and anyone else on earth genuinely trying to make heads or tails of us “crazy Egyptians” ; here’s exactly what happened in egypt over the past 12 months, but expressed in ‘American” terms…

    There are no exaggerations or lies, these events all took place:

    On June 30th 2012, democratically elected Barack Obama wins the election with 51.7%, takes the oath, and is sworn in as president of the United States.

    First five months of his term go relatively smoothly, where he makes almost no decisions (except for some dubious presidential pardons to a dozen convicted terrorists, including some convicted for their part in the assassination of a former US President).

    Suddenly, on November 21st 2012, president Obama issues a presidential decree giving himself sweeping powers, to the extent that his future decrees become un-contestable in any court, in effect his decisions henceforth are akin to the word of God.

    His laws a new Bible…

    Nationwide protests erupt as a result of this decree and 1.5 million people organize a sit-in at the White House to peacefully request he rescind it.

    Some of Obama’s democratic party supporters attack the peaceful sit-in outside the White House with guns & shoot 5 peaceful protesters dead

    A few weeks later president Obama dissolves the US Supreme Court and labels them all “traitors to America”

    One short week later, he fires the United States District Attorney and personally appoints a Democrat to replace him.

    A month later he annuls the US Constitution and forms a ‘constitutional committee’ to draft a new constitution (committee includes no Republicans or Independents, no Moslems or Jews, and only a handful of women.. And is composed primarily of Democrats & religious preachers)

    In a referendum not supervised by any judicial branch, this constitution narrowly wins, and President Obama ratifies it the very next morning (despite it having only gotten the approval of 18% of all Americans).

    Within a month he invites top global terrorists, known jihadists and Al Qaeda members from all over the world, to a rally in Yankee stadium, where he cuts ties with and declares war on, Canada.

    Throughout this whole time, the US economy is sinking, the stock market collapsing, foreign investment has all but stopped, tourism has died, and electricity, fuel, and water shortages are a daily occurrence.

    Unemployment has almost doubled, and the US$ dollar has lost 20% of its value globally.

    Oh, and president Obama also outlines his new plans to lease the entire Silicon Valley area to China for 50 years (with full administrative control)…

    Democratically elected president Barack Obama has done all the above in his FIRST YEAR IN OFFICE!!!

    Ultimately, on June 30th, 2013…

    110 million Americans take to the streets in 50 States peacefully and politely demanding -for 4 straight days- that democratically elected Obama leave immediately, and not continue his remaining 3 years….

    That’s it in a nutshell

    Who would you say had “legitimacy” in this case if it had been America?

    “Democratically elected Barrack Obama”, or the 110 million Americans who fired him … ?”

    • gmanfortruth says:

      The 110 million Americans, of course. I don’t judge the Egyptians because I don’t have any idea what they are up against. It’s a different world over there, that’s for sure.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Our own D13 covered and predicted this contingency when the “Arab Spring” was in its infancy. If you recall, he explained how the military in Egypt depends on popular support for its legitimacy. It dances the fence between the Figurehead power seeking and the people.

      The recent Pres apparently thought he had been able to break this paradigm. He was WRONG.

      Fortunately for us we don’t have to rely on the military to throw the bums out. Then we have never had to deal with a President with so much Hubris. We have come close, but even the most radical know there are traditions that cannot be attacked head on. One must bring the water to a boil slowly.

      • Wow…..someone paid attention. Luv ya JAC…..

        • Just A Citizen says:

          d13thecolonel

          Afternoon Sir. Always read your stuff very very very closely.

          Now don’t forget to email me your travel plans.

          • Will not forget….unfortunately on hold for now as my dad, 94 year old WWII vet..has just been diagnosed with severe dementia and Altz….my mm, 92, is not handling this well. But will not forget. That is a promise.

            • Just A Citizen says:

              d13

              Have been through that. Don’t envy you one bit. My thoughts and best wishes are with you and yours.

              If you get delayed beyond winter, then we’ll just have to rendezvous in Texas. 🙂

              Gets a little damp and chilly around here in January and February.

          • Another conundrum for us. Prior to the Egyptian military intervention, all of the moderate and conservative generals were about to be replaced with Muslim Brotherhood generals. The balance of power was about to be shifted…..the current Egyptian military is dependent upon US dollars and is supportive of Western philosophy. There is an outcry in the Senate and the House to cut support because we pledged not to support governments over thrown by military force. However, to cut support will certainly undermine a friendly military that is holding the Suez open and keeping militants in check……..

            Interesting politics over there.

            • Just A Citizen says:

              d13

              Yes, very interesting.

              Our restriction on military coup did not account for Egypt, where the military is in charge all the time. So maybe it really wasn’t a coup. Just a Govt firing of the executive officer????

              Been reading to much law lately. Starting to think like a lawyer……….LOL.

    • I heard the start of this on Rush today, but had an appointment and couldn’t sit in the car to hear all of it.

      Pretty astonishing.

      So if we get that many people to march on Washington, can we do it too?

  13. gmanfortruth says:

    More entertainment for the MSM to broadcast (by their own doing I might add) 🙄
    http://www.prisonplanet.com/threats-to-riot-loot-if-zimmerman-found-innocent-intensify.html

    • I over heard some people in Orlando talking about going to Sanford to riot if George was found innocent, and I may have been mistaken but they sounded excited about the possibility to loot and destroy businesses in Sanford. The worst part was they were openly discussing this in a public place, bet the organized thuggery behind closed doors is even worst.

      Prediction, if George is not found guilty there will be looting and rapping in Sanford.

  14. gmanfortruth says:

    In an interview to be published in this week’s issue of SPIEGEL, American intelligence agency whistleblower Edward Snowden criticizes the methods and power of the National Security Agency. Snowden said the NSA people are “in bed together with the Germans.” He added that the NSA’s “Foreign Affairs Directorate” is responsible for partnerships with other countries. The partnerships are organized in a way that authorities in other countries can “insulate their political leaders from the backlash” in the event it becomes public “how grievously they’re violating global privacy.” Telecommunications companies partner with the NSA and people are “normally selected for targeting” based on their “Facebook or webmail content.”
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/edward-snowden-accuses-germany-of-aiding-nsa-in-spying-efforts-a-909847.html

    Something tells me this is much more far reaching than the lame claim of terrorism. Any comments?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      No, I think it was driven by the desire to prevent terrorist acts. But remember, the international efforts in this area began back with the IRA, not suddenly on 9/11.

      This is how all Govt programs begin, with great intentions. They usually end with corruption and an arrogance that belies the very principles they were established to protect.

      Power is corrupting and the most corrupting of all is the power one believes they have in order to protect others.

  15. gmanfortruth says:

    Obama and his minions strike again. http://www.ohio.com/news/top-stories/bessemer-farms-calls-it-quits-says-new-farm-rules-too-cumbersome-1.411362

    I saw this coming along time ago. Basically, the law could outlaw personal gardens, if anyone actually cares.

  16. gmanfortruth says:

    @T-Ray, Great idea above. You may have dug the hole to lay a foundation for something positive to occur around here. I have some quick ideas for subjects, not inclusive of course, just ideas.

    1. Getting the Federal govt out of city/county business
    2. Local legislation demanding that LEO’s enforce citizens fundamental and guaranteed rights, even if against Federal agents

    Short list for now, if there are any others let’s pick one and start a new post! 🙂

    • Gman…..good morning…..no disrespect intended here….but your item one would be a grass roots thing to to and a good idea. Start with local issues. Your item 2…while laudable,smacks of the anarchist cook book. While I can agree on principle that this could be a local issue…..the solution of enforcing something that may be against the US Constitution as well as a State Constitution. If your intention is to get a grass roots issue started to change a state law to better protect citizens rights….that is one thing….but to try to get local enforcement to enforce a “guaranteed or perceived” fundamental right that is already addressed in law you do not like is another thing.

      Am I misreading you?

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Good Morning Colonel 🙂 Sort of, but not totally. Still working on some coffee 🙂 My understanding of T-Ray’s idea was working at the local level. Maybe I misunderstood him. Although locally is the best place to start, then work our way up. I’m sure someone will have better ideas than I, just threw them out to start the thinking process.

        The second part. I was thinking about the over regulation of the many industries by the Feds, just because Obama decides to do an EO, example, coal fired power plants. I was also thinking about the sweeping new rules coming down by the Feds on farms and produce growers under the Food and Safety Modernization Act of 2010 (which Congress passed on Christmas Eve).

        Those are my two major concerns locally. Shrinking the 800 lb gorilla is gonna have to come in many ways. Telling the Feds to go away is a start at the local level. Forcing them to go away by the citizens choice would make for some great video and start a possible movement against their power abuses. Maybe 🙂

  17. gmanfortruth says:

    Until we can move on T-Ray’s idea, here’s article/video that I found disturbing. Not because of the abortion issue, but because I have never heard people chant “Hail Satan” outside of a Hollywood movie or some TV show. Careful, it may give you the heebie-jeebies too!

    • Gman…..your link did not publish but I am making an assumption you are talking about the issue down here in Texas. Just watch closely and you will see how we handle this. I predict that the bill will pass……today or tomorrow and no filibuster or chant will stop it.

      • gmanfortruth says:
      • gmanfortruth says:

        I’m sure the law will pass. I was more focused on the sick chants.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          gman

          There are several reports that these chants were limited to a few young people. Not the majority of the crowd.

          Could it be these young people were simply being rude towards those they view as being Religious based only in their opposition to abortion?

          Me thinks Glenn Beck blew this one out of proportion. The others got in late and just repeated the stuff.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            I’m sure it could be. It also happened when the pro-life folks were singing, that was in a different video. Could they mean it? Only they know for sure. Just thought it was eerie.

            • The funny thing I think about Human Beings is that they “need” a Supreme Being. Now., for thousands of years this was the deity. We have become so enlightened, so progressive and sophisticated in the modern time that we dismiss the deity as a figment of our imagination, a crutch for the stupid or something to keep the unwashed in line.

              I just pissed off a very old and dear friend when I replied to his comment on Facebook supporting the Freedom FROM Religion foundation. The gist of my comment was I supported the Constitution in its prohibition of an established religion but found that this did not include the mere mention of a generalized deity. Apparently this was “offensive” to him.??????

              Back to my original point. Humans need something much bigger than they are. For some it is now Nature which takes in most of the environmental movement. For others it is Politics, be it Communism, Fascism or Anarchy. This is their God and I will always remember the title of Arthur Koestlers book about Communism, “The God That Failed”. So, it does not surprise me that there were chants of “Hail Satan” . What better God than the anti-God! The ability to even mouth these words publicly says lot about the condition of the soul of the person doing it. Active Satanists? Probably not but the ability to do it, to perform this supreme insult to 90 plus percent of the people around you says an awful lot about who you really are.

              Last week, I believe that the VA recognized the Druid religion including their symbol on military headstones. Before that it was the Wiccans who are recognized by the VA and the Military (The Air Force Academy has created prayer grove).

              I have said it before and i will say it again, I am not a very religious guy. I believe in God and I believe that in the thousands and thousands of years we have been on this planet that God has appeared to many people in many forms at many times. So long as the message is the same, peace, love, brotherhood, honesty, fairness, then I can accept them even if some of their practitioners have wildly misinterpreted the message.

              “the devils best trick is to persuade you that he does not exist.”
              _Charles Baudelaire-

          • JAC……it was not a majority of the crowd…about 25…… But they were loud. What did happen was the loud cajoling preventing a vote. The Texas House will not let that happen again. There are decorum rules that will be enforced. Any disruption will clear house chambers. There were other chants from pro life as well. It will not happen again.

  18. LOL…..I bet no one can top this……I got kicked off HUFFPO…….

    • I was told, and I quote……” Your views are not consistent with the content and direction of Huffington Post “

      • This was in response to my posting concerning Rick Perry. I said that Greg Abbott will win the Governorship and that Wendy Davis will not even get 30% of the vote because she is a shill and fake.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          I was kicked off in 2011 and never went back. The OH SO tolerant Liberals are all a bunch of fakes and liars. No wonder this country is so divided.

        • Haters gon’ hate! Good job Colonel..didn’t take long at all 😉

        • Wear it like badge of honor. The left does not want to debate, let alone even hear things that they disagree with. It is an old, old joke that everything they say should begin with the phrase, “All right thinking people everywhere know……..”. I think this is stolen from Heinlein.

          I am so sorry to hear about your Dad. I said it 40 plus years ago, back in college, long before Tom Brokaw, when they are gone, I’m really going to miss those guys.

      • That’s a badge of honor right there d13 🙂

  19. gmanfortruth says:
  20. But…but…but…..how can I sleep knowing that Huffpo does not like me? The horror. I guess I will get over it. ‘Heavy sigh’

    • Just A Citizen says:

      d13

      Good morning Colonel.

      Was wondering “who” banned you. There have been a few throwing that charge at me before but nobody actually banned my account information and thus prevented me access.

  21. Just A Citizen says:

    The Zimmerman Trial…………… In the beginning I expressed my opinion that GZ was not guilty because of the charges brought and that he should have been charged with manslaughter or negligent homicide.

    Well the PC police and politics got involved and the FL justice dept felt compelled to pursue “second degree murder charges”.

    So lets once again review what that means in Florida:

    “Overview of Florida Second Degree Murder Laws In Florida, state laws establish several types of homicide, the unlawful killing of a human being. The state prosecutes homicides as murders and manslaughters — it may be helpful to know the multiple types of murders established by state law and understand the differences among them. In particular, second degree murder lacks the premeditation often required for the prosecution of a first degree murder. To prove second degree murder, a prosecutor must show that the defendant acted according to a “depraved mind” without regard for human life. Florida state laws permit the prosecution of second degree murder when the killing lacked premeditation or planning, but the defendant acted with enmity toward the victim or the two had an ongoing interaction or relationship. Unlike first degree murder, second degree murder does not necessarily require proof of the defendant’s intent to kill. State law specifically requires a charge of second degree murder if the victim dies during the commission of one of the felony crimes specified by statute. These felonies include burglary, home-invasion robbery, kidnapping, sexual battery, and a number of other offenses. To establish second degree murder, the prosecutor must show that the victim died as a result of an act committed by a non-participant in the felony. If the defendant or another criminal participant in the felony caused the unlawful killing, state law requires a charge of first degree murder rather than second degree murder. Florida uses this law to deter and punish unintended deaths as a result of felonious activities. Defenses to Second Degree Murder Charges Justifiable use of deadly force to defend against a felony committed against a person or property Excusable homicide committed by accident Spontaneous or negligent killing that might qualify as manslaughter instead of murder Penalties and Sentences A second degree murder prosecuted as a first degree felony may result in a sentence of imprisonment for a term lasting up to thirty years. Florida laws also permit the state to request a term of life imprisonment. If the defendant has a prior record of felony convictions or has committed other homicides, the state may request an increased sentence of imprisonment for life.

    Florida Second Degree Murder Statute Florida Statutes Sections 782.02-782.36 – See more at: http://statelaws.findlaw.com/florida-law/florida-second-degree-murder-laws.html#sthash.v9ndj43k.dpuf

    I have a real problem seeing how this charge can stick based on the evidence. But then again who knows. Juries are not immune to the politics either or from their own biases.

  22. From my own city..on the issue of privatizing bus service and other services…someone help me out here to put this girl in check.

    .Unions Created the Middle-Class. This is a self-evident truth. Had workers not unionized earlier this century, we would never have had the switch from blue collar worker parents to white collar college grad children. To attack the instrument that created the middle-class in a recession where the middle-class is evaporating into thin air is an attack on the idea of the middle-class itself.
    Unions Protect Worker’s Rights. Without unions, we wouldn’t have the eight hour work day or 40 hour work week. We wouldn’t have safety regulations for dangerous professions. We wouldn’t have worker’s comp for when people get injured for doing their job. All these things we take for granted now as luxuries aren’t luxuries, but rather rights that were fought long and hard for. We are reaping the benefits both private and public sector workers.
    Workers’ Rights Equals Human Rights. If you live, you work. So the rights you have as a worker reflect those you have as a human being. If workers’ rights are being violated so are human rights. I think this issue is really the core argument that can be used to support unions (or not).

    If you believe that human beings deserve to be treated fairly, you should support unions, because the rights they are fighting for are rights that you will receive after the unions are done fighting the hard battle to obtain them. Whether you work in the public sector or the private sector, what unions are fighting for will affect you.

    • Ok…I think I can help. Give me a day.

    • Anita, my take, which may sound a wee bit like Charlies.

      My Grandfathers were UMW members, my dad was a local 6 hotel workers union member and I was a DC 37 member.

      Both my father and I had some limited respect for unions throughout the 1960’s. After that it was lost. Unions served a very real purpose and I think they will again. Unions started pricing themselves out of jobs. If you study the history, you will see that they encouraged featherbedding and hereditary jobs. In addition, they were deaf to the fact that times and technology changed. I offer up NY City’s 12 newspapers in the 1950’s and 60’s s examples. By the mid sixties The Journal American, The World Telegraph and Sun and the Herald Tribune were in deep trouble. Note that all three were prior amalgamations. The Daily Mirror had gone out of business three years before costing hundreds of jobs. The owners of the three papers decided to do something revolutionary, merge the papers into, “The World, Journal, Tribune”. Being a fan of the papers I thought this was great. They wrung concessions out of almost all their unions and started publishing with a few holdouts. The theory was, if the paper were successful, they would come on-board. Well, the paper was but the unions did not. If I remember correctly it was the typesetters union that brought the whole thing down. They themselves had not done any real typesetting for years. Mostly they worked part-time, were paid full time and just stood round and watched. The sticking point was the Paper had offered to keep them on to retirement and pay them for watching. What they wanted was to pass the jobs down to their sons as the jobs had been passed on to them. This, of course was impossible. they refused to compromise and felt the paper would never call their bluff. It did. After about 100 days of publishing it was no more.

      I don’t care if it is the meat cutters union, the UFW, the UMW, the UAW or the Teamsters. There is a time when the gravy train runs out and you have to sit down and compromise. You should be willing to do so. Now, having said that, I throw in my Catch 22. When management says there is no money but Corporate Chief salaries and bonuses have risen by hundreds of percent, the question becomes, is there really no money? That is my one great sticking point. When I read that Corporate managers and yes corporate “raiders” get 37 million dollar bonuses on top of outrageous stock deals and generous salaries I wonder how the hell this goes on. Sorry if I offend here but,Jesus Christ himself is not worth a 37 million dollar bonus! Exactly what can you possibly do to justify “earning” such figures? The Japan model is instructive if only because it used to be the American model. Japanese mangers receive fractions (10%) of what their American counterparts do. I remember reading what the CEO of SONY made while beating the pants off GE. In America, you even get rewarded for tanking a Company.

      So, a lot of the “givebacks” that management wants from unions might not have to happen if the corporations spent more wisely and if corporate leaders demonstrated loyalty to both their company and employees. Funny how it is always not only expected but demanded from the bottom up but never from the top down. Over the years I have worked for more than a few guys who, if they were Jr. 2nd Lieutenants in Vietnam, would have died almost immediately after they stepped off the helo skid first time courtesy of a bullet from behind and I have told them so. Some get it, some don’t.

      You bring up excellent points about current benefits but what makes you think that the hard won gains of the past will last? It’s like the American experiment we all worry about. there is no guarantee because we have “freedom” that we will continue to have freedom. There is no guarantee that because we have time and a half, a 40 hour work week, healthcare, vacation etc. that we will continue to have them.Forty years ago 96 percent of clothing worn in the US was manufactured in the US. Today, 96 percent is imported. Where is the ILGWU these days? Where are the jobs? The benefits?

      Unions are scapegoated, because they deserve to be. My Dad saw the excesses, knew they were indefensible and predicted the fall of the unions. He was right. I imagine Gallup polls put unions up there with politicians for trustworthiness. Their actions have played into the hands of management. Union leaders, many of whom are politicians themselves, are quite capable of cutting deals with Corporate mangers that benefit…..union leaders! Seen that one first hand. ,

      So, where are we headed? First of all, if you haven’t noticed, to the demise of the middle class. I know what type of retirements my dad and his contemporaries were headed for with defined pension plans and I know what I have put together. My kids, all in their 30’s, all well educated (4 kids, 5 masters degrees, one PHD between them), have none of what I had. Oh, they make a bit more money but their medical expenses takes care of that. $ 26,000 for baby delivered conventionally? Pension plans? 401K’s don’t make me laugh.

      The next big “shocker” and nail in the coffin will be Marco Rubio’s amnesty bill. Just try and get a well paying start up job with 10, 20, 30 million people competing with you. The robber barons of the 19th century could only pray for what the 21st Century politicians have foisted on the citizenry and there ain’t no Teddy Roosevelt’s in sight.

      Someday, when we are all living in something approximating mid 19th century London, all speaking a polyglot of languages, all afraid of each other more than the oligarchs who control us, the real union movement will start up again. I suspect it will be much harder this time. 100 and some years ago, the government was not able to maintain the fiction that all socialists and the IWW people were Bolsheviks (some certainly were). So, some died, some were deported, some were beaten to within an inch of their lives for their efforts but they triumphed at least until the second and third generation came along and squandered their birthright through greed. In this state of permanent war that we are in, everybody who is against company policy ( you know my definition of fascism: cooperation between Government and Corporate leadership) is a potential “terrorist enemy” and the folks buy it. Back in the ’30’s Jimmy Hoffa did not have to contend with drones or warrentless wiretaps. Hard to believe that someday, maybe even now, J. Edgar Hoover can come across as a moderate.

      • SK, can I get the short version ? The union rats only have a limited attention span…plus I have them all pissed off already from paraphrasing D13 🙂

        • Unions were absolutely necessary. Then they got greedy. Civil Service Unions are automatically in opposition to their employers, the taxpayers and have even less credence. According to my late father, “a union must be good enough and offer enough that people want to (not are forced to) join it.”

          The economy will continue to tank, benefits will continue to be cut, workers will get the shaft until both labor and management realize they have the same goals. Tell union people, “50% of something is something. 100% of nothing is nothing. You my win the fight but lose the war”

  23. So he means to keep an eye open to corrupt behavior like that of the IRS, right????????? Or not.

    http://drudgereport.com/

    • Sounds like something out of the old Soviet handbook. Next are we going to have kids spying on parents if they do not buy ObamaCare?

  24. Since I did not do it over the weekend, I am paying bills tonight. No matter how fast I write checks, the money always seems to run out before the bills do. Strange how that works. But then I look at my check stub and see how much is stolen off the top. How much are we overtaxed by the Feds so they can kick it back to the states and local governments? Too many hands touching the money and adding no value. We need to shrink the beast. Maybe then i can get through the bill pile before the money runs out.

    • Don’t tell anybody if you figure a way to have money left over…..someone will rat on you to the IRS and then you will have none. You are not supposed to have excess, you know.

  25. gmanfortruth says:

    Just heard a female Democrat, from the House Appropriations Committee, when talking about cutting the IRS budget (which she was against) say, and I quote “These republicans aren’t doing anything to create jobs”. Yes, we really do need to shrink the mess in DC, let’s start with removing the current 536 and put in some people with a CLUE 🙄

  26. Texas abortion bill going to house and Senate today….It will pass.

  27. Was just looking at unemployment numbers and it scared the hell out of me when I saw that 100 million working age Americans where not employed.

    The “official” unemployment number is 12 million looking for work and then there are 88 million Americans either retired or have given up on finding work. Dark days are ahead of us.

    I will have to look deeper, I wonder how many of the 88 million are under the age of 24. That will be the real scary number.

    • ok, did some looking into the numbers and found that the BLS only has numbers on working age Americans between the age of 16 – 19, and they are scary.

      As of June 2013 we had 16.805 million Americans between the age of 16-19. Out of those 5.143 million employed. They estimate 9.801 million out of the work force, only 1.860 million count as unemployed.

      That means we have nearly 10 million young Americans not getting any real world experience. More than half of our young adults are learning no useful skills and will be a drain on society until they do. This means that our level of production as a nation will suffer.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Our production as a nation is already suffering. The Govt isn’t telling the truth about anything, if they did, they would be fired quickly. This 800 lb gorilla will be very hard to fix/replace without much bloodshed. Sad days ahead.

  28. gmanfortruth says:

    Anybody have any ideas to add concerning T-Ray’s suggestion?

    • Term Limits for congress. This is an issue I have worked to further with several candidates in 2012, unfortunately one of my biggest allies lost his race. I have been working to reload and make another run at it in 2014 but if we could work on an action plan on how to motivate congress to pass a term limits amendment that would be great.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I agree. But I must ask how do we convince Congress to cut their own throats? 🙂

        • You can’t…you will have to elect local people that have your belief.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            What are the chances of having a majority in Congress to vote for this? A President to sign it? Or, use the Amendment process to get the job done!

            • The chances are great…if you get the majority in the house and/or senate. You have to find the candidates and then talk them in to running for office. With a majority in the House and Senate….if a President issues a veto…over ride the veto…..BUT one thing that you must understand. The mood and the thinking of our country is changing to a gimme state. You have to over come that first.

              • You start by getting new reps to agree to support the amendment and then they would have to work on the older congressmen that won’t live long enough for the term limit to effect, then you would have a large enough backing to pass it.

                The best part is that term limits is a bi-partisan issue, I know liberals that would support it. We would have to get enough Democrats on board quickly before the MSM can turn it into a GOP issue.

  29. @ Anita….. First of all, labor unions had their place. They were instrumental in improving workplace safety, primarily and eliminating the abuses that companies did do at one time. Sweat shops, child labor, company stores, etc. However, labor unions went far past the intended motive. With the advent of a myriad of labor laws, EEOC, EPA, etc, labor unions have morphed into political organizations whose income is totally dependent upon union dues to survive. In addition, with all of the under the table “negotiations”, labor unions, along with wimpy management afraid of strikes and violence, capitulated to impossible retirement issues…..those are sacrosanct to labor unions….why is that? Because the city pays into the fund and the unions use pension funds for all of their….ummmm…diabolical issues. So, you can agree that unions had their day in the sun but are now dinosaurs with escalating pensions and the only way to pay those pensions is to increase tax money. A city does not generate its own revenues. The following is a statement from your own administrator in your city.

    “Romulus Superintendent Paula Daniels said her district’s deficit did not come as a surprise because retirement costs continued to increase and enrollment fluctuated year after year. The district educates about 3,000 students.

    “It’s been going on for a while. At some point it just catches up with you,” she said.”

    In short, in order to keep paying pensions, one of two things must happen. Increased enrollment in students….and/or a higher tax base. Pension plans were allowed to create deficits…in other words….your city did not live within its budget. Deficits are allowed to accrue and, therefore, no money to pay them. In order to pay the salaries of the union chiefs, pension money and dues need to keep rolling in. The Law of Diminishing returns sets in.

    Does this help any? Be aware, however, that the lay person does not understand finances beyond their own pocket book. They refuse to see how FUTURE requirements affect today.

    • Also…..show her these statistics….In 2012, the union membership rate–the percent of wage and salary workers who were members of a union–was 11.3 percent, down from 11.8 percent in 2011, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The number of wage and salary workers belonging to unions, at 14.4 million, also declined over the year.

      Then ask her this question…..if labor unions are so great and everybody loves them…..why is only 1 out of 10 in a union…..90% of the people are not in unions.

      • One other statistic: “About half of the 14.4 million union members in the U.S. lived in just seven states (California, 2.5 million; New York, 1.8 million; Illinois, 0.8 million; Pennsylvania,
        0.7 million; and Michigan, New Jersey, and Ohio, 0.6 million each), though these states
        accounted for only about one-third of wage and salary employment nationally.

        • Thanks D13. Your 90% figure..I saw a chart that list 17-18% union membership, so I posted a comment asking how 80% non union business could survive, no reply yet. Paula Daniels is new to the city this year, I have a feeling she will be a target for the union. You’ve given me some good ammo. I need to get a short version from SKT, but I’ll update you from the swamp as it goes on.

          • I quoted the Bureau of Labor statistics exactly.

          • Just remember this as you are in the swamp………a lesson learned from this old Colonel….

            Remember…..when you are up to your ass in alligators, it is sometimes hard to remember that your initial objective was to drain the swamp. Stay focused.

            • Oh….and “keep yer powder dry”…….

              • Yessir, Im staying polite and on point..Couple snippets so far..before I paraphrased you:

                Me: Why is it then that since RTW has been implemented, that union membership continues to fall. Some of your loyal brothers and sisters also do not like having to pay dues when they have to personally write the check.

                He :You may be correct ….But when the profit sharing checks or raises that the unions negotiated for are given out how many of these so called people your’e refering to say NO THANKS!!!

                Me: I can only guess that bonuses and raises go to employees, not just union employees, so the employee feels justified in accepting it..I honestly don’t know, I’ve never been in a union.

                So far the arguments have been “how can they take the bennies and jobs away when we fought so hard to get them…and shame on you for not supporting us” without acknowledging that the union has their hand in why the city is where it is.

          • Unions were absolutely necessary. Then they got greedy. Civil Service Unions are automatically in opposition to their employers, the taxpayers and have even less credence. According to my late father, “a union must be good enough and offer enough that people want to (not are forced to) join it.”

            The economy will continue to tank, benefits will continue to be cut, workers will get the shaft until both labor and management realize they have the same goals. Tell union people, “50% of something is something. 100% of nothing is nothing. You my win the fight but lose the war”

  30. I’ll try to write something tonight. There’s not enough time before work to give it justice and it was just too tired last night after paying bills to think coherently. I would love to pay bills the way the government does. Either print the money or use red ink but they have a monopoly on that.

  31. To the anti-abortion ladies:

    D13 has a serious question for you. I am really trying to learn.I admit to being pro choice but have changed my mind slightly to viability.

    If Texas recognizes a woman’s right to choose prior to the World Health Organization’s agreement that viability ( meaning a baby can live outside the womb without life support systems ) begins at 20-24 weeks, but then says that after that time, abortions will not be tolerated…..why is that not a good thing? Why is taking abortions out of the back alleys from unqualified persons a bad thing? Why is making sure that abortions that are performed are done so in qualified sanitary conditions with qualified personnel a bad thing?

    Another question….at what point does the health of a mother become the primary focus over that of a non viable fetus? Does the mother have any rights at all….in your minds? If not…why not? I have never had anyone explain this to me.

    Thanks…I do not want to get into nasty discussions….I am looking for information.

    • In a rush but here is my take.

      Abortions are legal – the law of the land. I was definitely on the side of pro-choice as I thought they would be rare and usually in cases of mother or baby health. I naively thought PP was probably a good place to help women make reproductive decisions.

      Then I became educated and found out they aren’t rare at all. Don’t have the exact numbers, but in 2011, PP performed something like 333,000 abortions and made 2300 adoption referrals. I also read up on Sanger and found out the motivations behind the whole PP concept. What I have learned disgusts me. It isn’t about helping a pre-pregnant woman make decisions at all; it is about eliminating pregnancy for any reason and specifically targeting blacks. I’m embarrassed it took me so long to figure it out and that I bought into the rhetoric. And my tax dollars are paying for a lot of it.

      Abortion is still legal and quite frankly, I believe it always will be. But I don’t believe we should be a society that places so little value on life. I believe the emphasis has to be on accountability and education about the process. The correct language needs to be used. It isn’t a mass of cells or a parasite or any of the other language used to minimize what it is. It is life – and you, the mother, are responsible for it. If you don’t want that responsibility, don’t get into situations where a pregnancy could be the result. I feel, because the pro-abortionists have used soft, kinder, non-responsible language, that a large part of the population really doesn’t have to think before they act. Live for the moment, consequences be damned (or eliminated, as it were).

      So what we can do, is work to make abortions truly rare and safe. The mothers should be educated about what is happening and going to happen, ie, see an ultrasound prior to procedure, just like any other medical procedure. Wisconsin has also put in (left already took it to court), that doctors performing abortions must have hospital admitting privileges. Both of these steps, in my view, make great strides in making abortions rare and safe.

      And for some reason, the left is furious with these simple steps. These steps are about women’s health. I can’t imagine anyone going to some random clinic for any other procedure where the doctor didn’t first get an image (ultrsound/x-ray) of what the situation was and also if problems arose, they would be able to continue to administer care, rather than call an ambulance and send you off to some emergency room.

      Exposure, truth-in-languaging, and cut public funding. (This is unedited–figure it out if it’s not correct!)

    • Just A Citizen says:

      d13thecolonel

      Good morning my Texican friend.

      I have been doing some research on the Texas bill and conversing with many more “calm” folks on the left about what it really does and why they oppose it.

      In summary, the Doc qualifications in the copy I read really doesn’t address the issue of “unqualified” Doctors. It does appear to be an arbitrary requirement that precludes most Board Certified Doctors from performing abortions in clinics.

      The requirement that they have “admitting privileges” seems arbitrary in this regard and does nothing to assure the woman’s access to a hospital if needed. Because the hospitals admit “anyone” if beds are available or if it is an “emergency”.

      Now this taken with the fact that other states are trying to copy the “same restrictions” where those States have previously tried to further limit abortion, makes it look like this is a “strategic game” designed to reduce abortion availability altogether.

      One discussion I had was with someone radically supporting access and had knowledge of clinic operations. She said that the “closing of clinics” was probably a self inflicted wound, an attempt to create martyrs. The restrictions should not cause them to close if abortion is truly a minor part of their business. But her comment was that those committed to choice would do “anything” to keep choice as it is.

      So the threats of closing clinics is probably real but not necessarily due to the bill itself.

    • Also read an article about terminating a pregnancy due to health of mother and in many cases, a cesarean surgery would be performed – not a drug induced abortion. Think about it, the mother has a health issue where continuation of the pregnancy would not be safe. If this is legit (not a mental health issue as in, “this pregnancy is stressing me out”), in all likelihood it would be an emergency and you wouldn’t run to PP. Another over stated reason by the pro-aborts.

    • As usual the problem is the word. This time it is health. You and I are of a much simpler time when a word meant what Webster’s dictionary said it did. When we think of health, we assume that the need for an abortion is because there is a life threatening health condition involved. I am also sure that the original legislation had that in mind. But, as the Americans with Disabilities Act morphed into an alcoholic and narcotic dependency program (which Bob Dole admits he never intended) the lawyers have pushed the edge of the envelope even farther than usual. I have heard debates where advocates for very late term abortions advocate that because of the mothers “emotional health” these last minute atrocities should be allowed.

      I am a Catholic. Long before abortion was legalized in the country, there was great debate in the church over abortions to save the mothers life. Most people still think that the Church was opposed. As a sophomore in a Catholic High School in 1962, we were told quite clearly not to believe these rumors. In the case of real danger, the mothers life always took precedence. There was a book and movie once called “the Cardinal” which came out about that time.In it, the main character, played by Tom Tryon of Texas John Slaughter fame (insider Texas reference) agonized over his sister’s pregnancy where the baby, if delivered would kill her. If I remember correctly, for a book and movie, based on the Catholic church to get the issue wrong which they did was a major black eye for the church whether the author and producer intended it or not. To this day there are extreme fundamentalists who would ban any abortion for any reason even to save the mothers life. They belong to many different religions and really only represent themselves and make the rest of us look like fools.

      I hope you guys out there realize that the big, big problem in the country today has to do with the meaning of words. If the traditional meaning and even intent can be changed at a moments notice on whim, well then, nothing is impossible. Up can be down, wrong right, good can become evil and of course a man and twenty five of his best friends can be married and be a family.

  32. @ JAC…..I went back on Huffpo under the moniker of The Texas Connection……wanna bet as to how long I stay?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      d13

      The trick is to change your email at the same time. I just set up new gmail accounts when that happens. I know they can still track me down but generally they don’t take the time.

      I’ll look for you in the fog……………. heh, heh, heh!

  33. Just A Citizen says:

    Anita

    It is my understanding that FDR himself commented on the immoral nature of Public Employee Unions.

    That’s right, the grand wizard of the leftist movement in the USA was OPPPOSED to public employee unions. Even he saw the inherent conflict of interest.

    And I am guessing the person you first mentioned was ranting about Public Employee Unions and NOT regular unions.

    Because if it is the latter then have someone explain just what laws have been passed to destroy the “voluntary” union of employees into a bargaining unit. You’ll get nothing coherent in response.

    Keep up the good fight.
    JAC

    • Been at it off & on all day with these cats. Here’s the latest:

      That’s really odd, you’ve never been in a union yet you know
      all about them.Anyway I do agree with you. Americans don’t deserve jobs that pay a living
      wage. They don’t deserve decent benefits or a safe place to work, and they
      sure as heck shouldn’t have a dignified retirement.
      We need to continue to support the factions that want to further increase
      CEO’s staggering compensation packages. It’s important that we continue to
      try to tear each other down instead of building each other up.

      I put the Colonel & SKs comments out there..i’ll be working yours in somewhere.

      I have a headache 🙂

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Anita

        Based on those few comments you will not move them in any way.

        Your goal of the discussion at this point will be to expose others listening or watching to more critical and rational arguments.

        What you posted is the usual trick of projecting a behavior or view on you that reflects their view of the opposition. That way they can attack the accusation of what you are rather than what you are actually saying.

        There is another play you can make, although I would let her/them run a little longer before playing it. Here it is when the time is right:

        Ask; Why do you hate Freedom and Liberty. Why are you opposed to a JUST Govt which treats all the citizens equally under the law? What is it about Freedom that you find so scary?

        Why do you want certain people to have special access to Govt power the rest of us don’t have? (this would be the govt unions)

        People deserve what they earn or have agreed to via contract with others. Deserve is a subjective criteria and not the basis for rational law.

        Remember BF and I making statements like “I deserve a new truck or fishing boat”?? You can make up your own. When they come back with that ain’t the same then point out it was them that used the base principle of “deserving”. Once you accept “deserve” as the criteria then the specifics are up to those making the demand, or those who have the power to reward themselves.

        Keep us posted and I’ll help if I can.

  34. So if Zimmerman gets off, who will we find behind all the expected riots? Our community organizer in chief? Perhaps so as they apparently were involved in the earlier riots.

    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/07/10/newly-released-documents-detail-the-department-of-justices-role-in-organizing-trayvon-martin-protests/

  35. Just A Citizen says:

    Militarization of our Police.

    L I BE, Look what has been posted on the Huffer.

    For those interested in this subject, it includes a good historical summary of how this has been going on since the 70’s…………NIXON still lives………………aghhhhhhhhh !

    Obama has just continued the practice, but by doing so has violated once again the image he sold the sheep.

    • Just A Citizen says:
      • gmanfortruth says:

        If nothing else, it’s good training for Obama’s National Security Force! I really hope that people are REALLY paying attention, because the SWHTF in the note to distant future. Where is all the Gold? Nobody seems to know.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Well I sure don’t have any of it.

          Ask BF, I think he filled one or two of his surplus silos with the stuff.

    • Commenters are really telling. Some are finally starting to figure it out! I like how some are, “yeah, it wasn’t so much that I wanted Obama, it was just the other choices were so bad”. Oh suck it up you loser – admit you thought he was the second coming and your head was stuck so far up, you refused to listen, read or hear anything differently.

  36. gmanfortruth says:
  37. Sufa,

    My proposal is that we periodically pick a topic, research it, and come to some agreeable conclusions as to how to solve the problem. Once we have an agreed upon approach with supporting documentation, then we each make a proposal to our local newspapers in hopes of generating some useful discussion and at the very minimum educate some people along the way. This will require that we monitor and participate in the discussion on the local papers blogs site. I have done this is the past. I typically follow the same rules we do here, no flaming the opponent and respond with facts and ask that they do likewise. After a few rounds of this even the diehards give up and respond in a genial fashion.

    My basic philosophy is that the federal government has grown much too large and has taken on tasks far beyond those defined by the Constitution. It also collects way too much of our money and spends even more. Some fundamental changes need to occur.

    Some of the topics that I would like to see us address are:
    1) Immigration, we started this several months ago
    2) Repeal of the 16th amendment (income tax)
    3) Repeal of the 17th amendment (direct election of senators)
    4) Auditing of the Fed and possibly deauthorizing it. Congress need to control the printing press
    5) No wars w/o a formal declaration, reestablish Congress’ war making authority
    6) A viable energy policy with the goal of a 90%-100% reduction in the DOE
    7) Elimination of the D of Ed
    8) All bills to clearly state the Constitutional that grants Congress the authority to pass the bill
    9) Eliminate the debt ceiling and force Congress to pass individual bond authorizations for specific projects
    10) Remove from the EPA any and all authority to regulate green house gases. Any such regulation will come directly from Congress
    11) Revise the tax code, more specifically move to a flat tax or national sales tax that eliminates the income tax and eventually the IRS.
    12) All regulations generated by the executive departments must be reviewed and approved by Congress
    13) Repeal ObamaCare
    14) Stop overtaxing at the federal level to rebate the money to states and local governments.
    15) …………………………….
    Please chime in and add your own.

  38. 15. Fair trade agreements….dollar for dollar
    16. No trade surplus or deficits.
    17. No defense treaties without Congressional approval.
    18. Elimination of the IMF or no funds to the IMF for lending to our enemies.
    19. National voter ID.
    20. The elimination of NATO…it is outdated.
    21. The elimination of the United Nations….it is a costly circus.

  39. Zimmerman trial – WTH is going on now? What is this new charge thing going on and what is with this judge? Then we hear of DOJ being involved last year and the police chief comes out and admits he was pressured to bring a charge against Zimmerman, just to bring a charge.

    I smell major sewer rats here – in the name of Holder and “if I had a son” Obama. Is this the set up for race riots that they were looking for?

%d bloggers like this: