Shall be Infringed. A discussion on open carry.

“A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”  The second amendment as written and intended, died years and years ago.  The Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could restrict firearms ownership.  Machine guns now require a federal license.  Fighter jets and tanks are tightly controlled and always unarmed.

Last year, Arkansas passed a law intended to clear up the language in the law allowing carrying a firearm in a vehicle.  It has & is legal to transport if unloaded & the ammo stored separate where it cannot be loaded quickly or easily, and you are on a journey.  (or any other lawful reason to have a firearm) (1)   Poor wording of the revision led many county attorney generals to interpret it as allowing open carry as a constitutional right.  The Arkansas State Police have issued their own opinion that open carry is not legal and they will arrest any and all that make that attempt.

Sadly, I find myself conflicted.  I lean libertarian & want as few laws and restrictions as possible.  I am a strong supporter in the second amendment and especially the right to defend yourself.  But I do not want to see open carry expanded.  Arkansas, along with Texas, South Carolina and  Oklahoma  restricted open carry during the post-Civil war Reconstruction era.  About a dozen states allow open carry of handguns without requiring a permit.  Another dozen allow with a permit similar to a concealed carry permit.  Some states also allow open carry of long guns such as shotguns or rifles.

Notice, I do not ask for any restrictions or new laws be passed in these open carry states.  I simply do not think it wise to push for more open carry.  My concern is it will be used to commit a crime.  Be it a terrorist, foreign or domestic that parades into a crowded event, heavily armed, and attempts a massacre.  Or peaceful protesters, such as in Ferguson, are infiltrated by armed thugs, intent on violence.  If open carry is legal in that state, any attempt by police to ascertain the legality of the armed individuals will be decried racist.  And after blood is shed, they will blame the police for failing to protect the public.

And my fear is some on the left want such an occurrence to promote more restrictive national gun laws.  Ronald Ritchie,(2) the “witness” who reported John Crawford to 911, insisting he was a threat, later recanted his story.  Anti-gun activists are advocating reporting of any open carry. (3) Was John Crawford “Swatted”?

And some will say, why insist on restricting our freedoms on what if’s?  I will agree they have a point.  I will also point out, in the 90’s, a man was wondering “what if” I can get some of my followers to hijack an airplane and fly it into a skyscraper….  So what if we all agree there are threats in today’s world.  What is the best way to combat them while allowing the most freedom?

And just now, a terrorist attack in Paris.  France has very tough gun control laws.  “They were armed with Kalashnikov rifles and are also believed to have had a rocket-propelled grenade.” 

1.  How did they get their weapons?

2.  What other laws would have prevented this?

3.  Would open carry help or hinder the police & government?

(1)  http://media.law.uark.edu/arklawnotes/2014/02/13/open-carry-in-arkansas-an-ambiguous-statute/

(2) http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/07/ohio-black-man-killed-by-police-walmart-doubts-cast-witnesss-account

(3)  https://www.nraila.org/articles/20141003/gun-control-supporters-advocate-swating-of-gun-owners

Advertisements

Comments

  1. Interesting 🙂

    • And just now, a terrorist attack in Paris. France has very tough gun control laws. “They were armed with Kalashnikov rifles and are also believed to have had a rocket-propelled grenade.”

      After the videos show this to be incorrect, I often wonder how the Media stays in business. The used pump shotguns, which the media finally figured out and is reporting now. But, France has tough gun control laws. Those who died couldn’t even fight back. Those gun control laws worked real well, didn’t they?

  2. Open carry- Over rated and rarely ever used by those who are only trying to protect themselves. Criminals don’t exactly care about laws anyway.

    Transportation- In Pa, an open carry State, to have a loaded gun in a vehicle one must have a CCL. Or, gun must be in separate “package” from ammunition. What “package” refers to is a zippered gun case or a simple box with tape. States have many different laws, and there have been reports that Maryland are targeting CCL carriers (mostly from Florida, as for some reason a plate run will show a CCl owner, another reason why I don’t like licensing). It’s best to have a lockable hard case for the gun and a separate area for ammo.

  3. The John Crawford case was a clear over reaction by the cops. Ritchie should be charged with filing a false report and jailed.

    • While I don’t open carry, it’s not uncommon for my sidearm to be ‘noticeable”, especially in the summer month’s. Let ONE liberal call the cops and I will file a false report claim against him/her. However, I doubt the cops around here would even come as the 911 operators are trained to explain the law to the callers 🙂

  4. Gman is correct.
    Open carry does not make more crime; statistically, it lessens it, by a considerable degree.
    Will there still be crime, sure. But restricting such things as open carry, there is still crime too.

    This double-logic of people who say “well, guns will cause more crime so we should prevent (fill in blank)” never reapply their stupid logic afterwards, “well, we prevented that, and there is still crime, so maybe it didn’t work”. To them its always a one-way thinking street.

    Let people be free. It always works.

  5. And after blood is shed, they will blame the police for failing to protect the public.

    One day people will get to realizing that it’s not the LEO’s job to protect them. They have even used that argument in the Supreme Court and won.

    • True. But what is to our advantage, helping cops and even our government insure our public places are safe, or disrupt in the name of freedom? When open carry advocates have their public marches, does that help the second amendment?

      A dozen states allow open carry. Should they start staging marches thru crowded malls or movie theaters? How should police react to such an event? And if terrorists imitate them and then stage an attack, who will the media and gun banners blame? I understand it’s our right to play the fool, doesn’t mean I want to play that part for them…

      Better I think for all of us that with concealed carry, LEO’s have some expectation that someone brandishing a firearm may be up to no good and should be scrutinized. In open carry states, that may be a simple as them asking the carrier, what’s up? How ya doing? If and where open carry is common, I don’t see an issue. Ohio is open carry, but it is rarely exercised. Had John Crawford been intending a mass attack, the police would be praised for shooting him in the back. Even though his actions were legal.

      Cops need educating. So do the masses. And maybe also we gun rights people need to think how we portray ourselves.

      • When open carry advocates have their public marches, does that help the second amendment? Normally, these events are in response to someone (s) attacking gun owners Rights. Beyond that, these marches are rare or in celebration of some historical event.

        Should they start staging marches thru crowded malls or movie theaters? Not just NO but HELL NO! There is no right to protest on private property. Gun owners respect private property…..I’ll stop there before I say something about these losers who are doing so lately.

        Most LEO’s that I know support conceal carry because they know the truth about self defense, they will rarely be there to help.

        Cops do need better training. They also need to stop listening to all the Left Wing fear mongering about the scary assault weapons (that aren’t assault weapons at all). Call out the Liberal liars, that’s a good start.

  6. Cool! I got liked by someone without hairy knuckles…

    http://quartervida.com/

    • Saw that you had a fan but didn’t chase her down like you did. Her first post makes sense to me…Am I weird for that ? 🙂

      • I already dislike winter!

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Anita

        Not weird, just suffering from confusion of concepts. For example, her use of “freedom” has a different conception than what most of us think about freedom. “Uninhibited” would be a better description of her point.

        I think the use of “credibility” is also foggy. We are credible when we tell the truth and it is found consistently to be true. Thus there is no conflict between credible and truth telling. There can, however, be a conflict between truth telling and “likability” or “popularity”.

        And it is true that many people judge others on their “likability” or apparent “popularity” rather than their actual credibility. Those who are being judged may then confuse “credibility” with their desire to be considered “likable”.

        So my read is that she is dead on about some conflicts and the need to maintain some balance but her word selection creates confusion among those of us trying to wrestle with the philosophical and political concepts of things like “freedom” and “liberty”.

        Let me add, she would make a great addition to our SUFA family.

        • Agree! Unfortunately, many think like her. If it’s a “credible” source it must be truthful, rather than the other way around. Look at the way people believe something if it comes from the MSM. How about value placed on degrees….ie a Harvard graduate is assumed to be credible. Big mistakes.

      • Anita

        I did not “chase her down”. I was invited to take a look at her site and did so… The stalking and other immoral activities that follow are a different and unrelated matter….
        And yes, much of her writing makes sense. She is good at expressing herself. I wonder why she liked this little rant?

  7. Unarmed Paris Police Retreated From Terrorist Gunmen [VIDEO]
    11:06 AM 01/07/2015
    Photo of Chuck Ross
    Chuck Ross
    Reporter

    Several Paris police officers who came into contact with the armed terrorists who slaughtered 10 journalists at the headquarters of Charlie Hebdo, a satirical magazine, retreated from the gunmen because they were unarmed, according to an eyewitness.

    “Three policemen had arrived on bikes but had to leave because the men were armed, obviously,” Benoit Bringer, who works on the same floor as Charlie Hebdo’s offices, told France Info radio, according to The Guardian. “Then the attackers took off in a car.”

    CBS News also reported — citing a reporter with Britain’s Telegraph newspaper — that the two officers were apparently unarmed.

    Paris police officers have the option of carrying firearms, though many choose not to.

    The officers came into contact with two or three gunmen armed with AK-47s after the Islamic terrorists had left the offices of Charlie Hebdo where they had fatally shot 10 inside the building, including four of the magazine’s cartoonists.

    The terrorists — who were heard shouting “Allahu Akbar” while firing rounds in the streets of Paris and reportedly told witnesses that they were affiliated with al-Qaida — were reportedly angry at cartoons appearing in the magazine which satirized Muhammad.

    Though the full timeline of the shootings is unclear, it appears that the gunmen killed two police officers after their initial confrontation with the bike cops.

    Video shows the gunmen hunting down one police officer on the sidewalk following the shooting inside Charlie Hebdo’s offices. The officer is seen pleading for his life as the gunman approaches and shoots him in the head at point-blank range.

    WARNING: GRAPHIC

    It is unclear if civilians sustained injuries during the street shooting. The gunmen are reportedly still on the loose.

    http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/07/unarmed-paris-police-retreated-from-terrorist-gunmen-video/

  8. Just A Citizen says:

    LOI

    Some good questions.

    Let me offer this idea. It is not the law allowing open carry that creates the problem.

    It is all the people who feel it necessary to exercise their “right” just to make a point. We do not need to carry guns in public places. At least most of them. The odds simply don’t dictate that as a reasonable action.

    Thus the few who do can be approached by the LEO in order to determine their intentions. Peacefully.

    But you are correct. If more people start carrying weapons we will set the stage for the bad guys simply mixing in with the rest of us, or “pretending” to be us.

    There is no doubt that the presence of guns escalates “tension” among those present. It is a simple “survival mechanism”.

    Now with that said, I have stated before that I am, and remain, supportive of open carry.

    Relative to the Constitutional protection, however, it is up to the local jurisdiction to decide whether open carry is acceptable. Application of the second amendment to State and local law is equally erroneous as applying the other amendments we call the “bill of rights”.

    • JAC

      Thanks for the thoughtful comments. I think you & I share a similar view on this. I remember a story about a tourist in a bank in Montana… A guy walked in wearing boots, hat & a six shooter, the tourist was shocked/scared that it was a bank robbery. The man did his business and left. The tourist asked the teller who explained open carry and it was normal for most ranchers. In Arkansas, we have not had open carry for over a hundred years. A lot of re-education needed to change what is perceived as normal. And this is a poor time to launch such a effort.

      It’s also hard for me to oppose it & still profess libertarian views. My “fear” is there will be some incident which the left will use against us and pass another national anti-gun law. The 68″ firearms control was passed in large part because of the riots. A Ferguson type peaceful protest that sported several legally armed open carry individuals could end with concealed carry outlawed or further restrictions.

      I think open carry will come & will welcome it, but want to wait until the masses are better informed. Then again, that may never happen in an entitlement society with government control over education.

  9. Dale A Albrecht says:

    This discussion about open carry has reminded me of an old western “The Fastest Gun Alive” starring Glenn Ford and Broderick Crawford. There was a scene in the saloon where one of the bar dwellers was ridiculing Glenn Ford for not wearing a gun.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Good remembry there Dale. One of the many great scenes in those old westerns.

      • Dale A Albrecht says:

        Have to get some new memories……I have spent some time today looking at the “Intentional” death stats globally. The number of reporting nations has expanded over the years and decades. For the 1st several decades since 1900 only the US and Great Britain had data. The data was shown as rates deaths/100000. The US has stayed remarkably consistant with the exception of the 70’s, 80’s and partially the 90’s then dropped down to the historical trends…..when looked at by State or Territory or district, DC was far and away the worst followed by Puerto Rico the Louisiana……globally the US stood right in the middle of the 65 reporting countries. The US was absolutely peaceful when compared to the countries of Central America, South America and the Caribbean. Africa, we’ll not go there except it was surprising the countries NOT at war in some way had very high rates also. Russia was on par with DC…….have to explore the three grouping that defined the US…..the three areas I mentioned, that were on par with the worst in the world the majority were at the nominal US rate and those that had a negligible rate. Some of those have strict gun control and some have very little, like VT…but then they have 1/2 the people as Wake County here in NC

        • I think there is a vast difference in culture. The US shares much culture with the UK, Canada & Australia, yet our violent crime rate is much higher. Americans are more prone to violence. But if you look closer, most of our violence is inner city. Again, a totally different culture than the rest of the country.

          • Dale A. Albrecht says:

            implying we need space and not be hemmed in…..depopulation called for? just being divisive…….I’ve never in this country been a victim of any crime violent or otherwise on my person or property. However in the span or 1 month in Amsterdam i was an intended victim of armed robbery or assult 4 times. Broad daylight at that and in very public places. I am not a meek looking guy or small by any standard……The dutch just stood there with their jaws on the floor while I defended myself in the case where the guy had a gun. In line at the ticket booth at the transit train in a long queue……all the perps were of African decent…BTW because I do know guns, I recognized the perp was holding a toy colt 45 revolver…..later told if I had in any way hurt him I would have been arrested because he was an unfortunate person and I was rich white etc etc etc. Now in the UK I believe crime is under reported. especially B/E. While teaching there the police basically said we do not have the time to respond. So the implication is live with it and don’t bother us.

            I did not carry a machine gun in public in Sicily because it was so peaceful. I did not have an Italian Marine bodyguard in full combat gear for no reason at times.

            Even with the city vs country breakdown the US had been consistent and in the middle of the global stats. Not wanting to sound racist or anything, but a significant portion of our population is of european decent which have very low “intentional” death rates, does that in some way explain the imbalance of some of the other groups of people perpetrating the majority of the violent crimes….its racial and cultural?

            • “implying we need space and not be hemmed in…..depopulation called for? just being divisive”

              Well, well, you succeeded! Implying nothing, stating what I think is a fact. Americans are more violent. Blame it on the wild west or Hollywood, doesn’t matter and changes nothing, we are more violent. Sometimes that’s a good thing. But when you take a close look at inner city, gangs do stand out. I think the larger demographic should be the focus, young, black males between the ages of 15-23? I think their girlfriends are making babies and collecting. Where does that leave them, the baby-daddies? They are an expense to their mothers or girlfriends. What have they done lately as far as bringing in some groceries or other wanted or needed good? Get out and get a job!!! they say… And what are job prospects for young, black males in the inner city? Got a diploma? No, dropped out at 17 with a baby on the way?

              Yes, the inner cities are more violent. They are an artificial environment created by our government that breeds the results we see. If you remove the inner city numbers, the US has very low numbers for violence. I suspect removing the same for the UK or others then shows Americans are still more violent. Might be why we have had to fight & end their wars?

              • Dale A Albrecht says:

                I agree, you take the inner city stats out and we would be much like Europe. Except the diversity mandate is spreading the cancer outward. The cancer spread into the valley and the original population just expnded and moved further out, like Ventura and Orange County. Those that stayed sent the kids to private school for the most part. The west valley demographic population has not changed all that much, but the schools inserted the cancer into those neighborhoods…..we are generally ancestors of european societies, except asians, Blacks, and native americans(including those south of the border)

          • Dale A Albrecht says:

            I went through my senior year book and looked at the diversity. We were between 3-4K students in a 3 year HS when I was a graduate. We did have 1.2K in my class. We had lost about 1/3 of the students the previous year to a new HS. We had been 4.2 K in student population, previously and the school had to many FEMA portable classrooms to cover the overflow.. Anyway there were exactly 3 blacks and 3 asian students. The school today is 41% white, 31% hispanic, 17% black and 11% other including asians. The demographics of the neighborhood had really not changed over 45 yrs that much. The school I found represented the entire valley demographics, not the neighborhood where the school was located. This is a response to LOI response to my global “intentional” homicide post earlier. When busing was initiated in LA the “white” kids did not get bused. They were put into private schools. The city had to fill the factory somehow. On a trip in the 70’s after bussing started residents and businesses surrounding the school demanded a police cordon protecting their property while the busses loaded and unloaded. Kids were raiding then jumping on the bus and heading to the inner city. I just read a comment on the web by a former classmate just the other year about the streets closed off due to gang drive by shootings and killing. I pulled up a larger web view of articles and I was stunned by the amount of killings surrounding the school, all suspected gang related. Parole officer executed in the parking lot. The valley police stated that the heaviest car theft area in the San Fernando Valley is surrounding the school. A neighboring school which is chartered for law enforcement donated sufficient metal detectors to cover the entrances to the school. This was not a disadvantaged school when I was there. The area that fed the school was right behind Beverly Hills High when it came family incomes.

            • I remember the first year. About 30 or so blacks were bussed in and they looked scared shitless. We as a group welcomed them and quickly made friends, some of with I still have contact with today. High school was a blast with lunchtime touch football games, blacks versus whites. We all shook hands and got along. I just didn’t really know much about all the black/white racist crap growing up, because we didn’t have that in school.

              This was before the black gangs came into play after I went into the service. My old High Schools is now considered a war zone, not a school. I do wish things were like those days at the old High School, life was so much less complicated and peaceful.

              • Dale A Albrecht says:

                scanned through a series of videos of the 2014 season of football games and the stands were mostly empty. Home games filled a 10K stadium, championship games we went to college fields…..only one game we played had restricted NO spectators with police pickets and during the day, not night. Only spectators were the bench warmers. for either team…that was ’69

                note on how PC stuff is….a few years ago 6 school employees including a coach were reassigned for NOT reporting a hazing incident in a timely manner to law enforcement personnel. With criminal child abuse charges possible. Just students were involved. Heck if the laws today were in place back when some of use were growing up we’d all be in jail. There was never malicious intent at any time. I wonder if the coach repeating a missed critical block or tackle over and over is hazing you certainly didn’t hear the end of it until you improved or the flip side, benched……..in scouts survival training was real….took a short course out at Edwards AFB. Out hiking in the desert or in the High Sierras you had to be prepared at all times for possible life threatening events…all in all it taught you how to think and really prepared you for life.

            • Holy crap! I graduated with 58 other white rural kids. My confirmation class had 36 of those kids in it. Our minorities were Catholics. No Catholic church in town but had to eat fish sticks on Fridays because of them. Amish were with us until 8th grade and then had to quit. Hated that as we had a lot of fun Amish classmates – most have relocated but one woman is still in the area and we tracked her down and brought her to our class reunion a couple years ago. Most of the families were Swiss; I was a little different being 100% Norwegian, but no one knew cause my dad was a popular musician that played Swiss music with yodeling. It was the proverbial, “when in Rome…” kind of thing. Ate Lutefisk and Lefse at family gatherings but Swiss brats, cheese and Bratzeli’s with my Swiss friends.

              Great childhood, traditions, and friends. Live 40 minutes away from my hometown and my siblings still all live there. My husband was from there too – we started “liking” each other in 5th and 6th grade and this year we’ll celebrate our 35th wedding anniversary. Broke up a few times in HS and early college, needed to kiss a few toads apparently. Going on an annual girls’ getaway in a few weeks with friends from my elementary school days. The best kind of friends – we know all the dirt in each other’s closets and love each other anyway. Can’t make up crap about how things were cause we were all there!

              Awww, you put me in a nostalgic mood. Maybe I’m trying to waste time as it’s a snowin’ and blowin’ outside and I probably should go shovel.

              Later SUFA!

              Go Pack Go!

              • Dale A Albrecht says:

                I don’t even remember what town I’d consider my “Home Town” Given I’ve lived in 38 places. So home #1 was in Highland NY along the Hudson River. The local school was actually a 1 room school house. It is still standing but boarded up. I started school at 4 years old in Woodstock NY. I’m sure making forts and throwing snowballs, and sometimes rocks at each other are banned now. Taught you to pay attention to your surroundings and when to duck. Playground equipment was mostly trees to climb. Went from walking or sledding to school. Especially on snow days. To sitting on a bus for at least 3 hours plus getting to school until the parents moved into LA proper. Then it was back to walking or riding a bike 3 miles each way. Buses were available for kids that lived 15 miles or more. But then long after I was out of school kids were forced buses close to 100 miles R/T from the inner city to the burbs……in the 60’s classes were routinely 40+. It didn’t hurt the education because we had decipline.

  10. Just A Citizen says:

    Related to my comments about Boehner last night.

    Mia Love gives a very good explanation of her vote for Boehner. Now will the radical elephants allow it to stand or deliberately undermine their party’s ability to function? And if they take the destructive route, when will someone begin to question their true motives.

    Now don’t get me wrong here. Moral and ethical principles matter and should not be ignored. But politics is also a dirty game that requires thinking and patience. That is if you want to succeed in your revolution without shedding blood.

    So ask yourselves, why throw one’s self upon the sword over who is speaker? The real test will come when it is time to vote yea or nay on particular legislation. That is when we will find out whether the “newbies” have the guts to stand against the orchestrated bully tactics of the “MSR” (main stream Republicans)

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/mia-love-explains-why-she-voted-for-john-boehner-as-house-speaker/article/2558302

    • Leaves me conflicted. I think Boehner has allowed Obama to get away with way too much. Compromise and find middle ground long enough and you are pushed off the edge. But he has kept a moderate image without constant RINO outcry and also should get much credit for their control over both houses.

      • Conflicted too. Not a single WI Rep voted to oust Boehner. I’m in the camp that the Speaker can control a lot and so it does make a difference who is in that position. I think the WH has a long rap sheet on Boehner and he’s been weak because of it. Now with both houses I would’ve liked to see someone with actual leadership qualities in the position. Plus, he is a horrible speaker (small “s”), cannot stand to listen to him – sounds horribly incoherent. For god’s sake, master a few skills as you are coming up the ranks. Public speaking just might be one of them. His orange, fake tan is just gross. It seems like he should be one of the Rat Pack – a smoking drunk.

    • It is not going to matter JAC,,,,,,,all of those who stood against Boehner will suffer the consequences because they will be punished. Nothing is going to change.

      Go with it and file the bills and make Obama veto everything. Then use that as ammunition in the 2016 elections.

      • Too me it looked like nothing more than pro wrestling style BS to appease the people calling for his removal.

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        It will make Obama stand an show his true colors without castigating others.

        With the Keystone XL pipeline…he’s using the excuse now that the US will just be a transhipping route and will receive zero benefit. That may be so, but isn’t the oil being trans-shipped now by rail at least until it reached a pipeline or refineries on the gulf coast?…cut from a brookings institute paper…dated 2013 “9,500 in 2008 to 407,000 in 2013 on Class I lines alone. In North Dakota, upwards of 70 percent of its oil now travels by rail” these are railcars….what is indicated is that the pipelines are saturated now and rail is picking up the difference of production whether it is shipped from canada or here…..in looking at the map of existing pipelines and rail lines etc. where pipelines already exist, can’t along the existing right of way an additional pipeline be built…they come and go to and from the same places.

        • You gave me a thought. My memory is saying something that’s on the tip of my tongue but it ‘s not coming out. Which very rich person owns the majority of the railway system? How powerful is he in DC?

          Oh, and I hope you enjoy the weather we’re sending down your way, we are a sharing bunch you know 🙂

          • Dale A Albrecht says:

            The name that is stuck on your tongue is Warren Buffett. I appreciate the sentiment about sharing, but enough is enough. A reality check periodically is a heathly thing. It reminds me why I DO NOT live 25 miles from the Canadian border below Montreal, or twice on the coast of Maine. The 1st time living there I spent all together to much time up ice coated masts on frigates and destroyers at BIW working on weapons and air control systems. The ice floes sliding by on the tide was not great work conditions….the last was working on some wooden boat restorations up on the Penobscot Bay and it snowed a foot the 1st week of Sept…..I was out of there withing the month and heading south.

            • Thought so. oil transport by train from Canada is quite prosperous I would think, and a pipeline would screw that profitable business up quite a bit. Yet the Right is accused of catering to the rich, seems we have some more hypocrisy here by left courtesy of the Obama regime.

              • Dale A Albrecht says:

                i’d post a smiley face except I’m truly a luddite…did anyone catch the Fox news comments on the professors at Harvard who make $300K plus are bitching about their addition healthcare fees. They 100% donated to dems and Obama…..you reap what you sow

              • Dale A Albrecht says:

                Pipeline or railcar…its still being trans-shipped. A 42.8X increase in rail tankers. Just two hedge fund persons and their investors having their rice bowl broken. Honestly I believe a pipeline using the existing right of ways instead of cutting across the relatively pipeline and rail free zone where Keystone XL is planned, would eliminate all environmental issues and highlight the true political manuvering of Obama and his money allies

              • Only problem with the Harvard professors-they aren’t angry about obamacare-they’re mad at the college for not covering all the increase.

          • There are 2 of them, Steyer and Buffet.

  11. @LOI, Did you write the article or is it taken from the links you provided?

  12. Operation Vigilant Eagle, a program launched by the Department of Homeland Security in 2009. Military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan are being characterized as extremists and potential domestic terrorist threats because they may be “disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering from the psychological effects of war.”
    Read more at http://bulletsfirst.net/2015/01/07/va-tries-trick-veterans-adding-firearms-federal-registry/#0IfA1ZRkOxY7akPO.99

  13. I hope that everybody is ready for the 1.3 trillion in new taxes……..Sub S corporations get hammered ( glad we changed all of ours )……get ready for your bank fees to go up as a result of the Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee that will passed on to bank consumers…Repeal of LIFO……Modification of Like-Kind Exhanges for Real Property (1031 Exchange)…..Revert to 2009 Parameter for Estate and Gift Tax and Additional Changes ( This will not get past this Congress )

    Most of the tax increase is aimed at business and high income earners……they will just sit on their money and not invest since the investment rules are also changing to penalize business that take depreciation expense from their investment……

    Most people will say it does not affect me……well, wait until inflation catches up to the tax changes……you will pay….it will be added

    • I’m ready for it just like I’m ready for the seven degree temp tonight. I don’t like it but think I will survive til warmer weather returns…

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        If the system that heats my second and third floor comes on I will know it dropped below 30 degrees outside. forecast to be 18 tonight and tomorrow never getting out of the 20’s…is this what will be called a “3 dog night”?

      • 7 degrees? Is there a (-) in front of that? If not, quit your complaining. And come help shovel my snow as I’m still procrastinating…………

        Maybe if we get enough, I can crank up the big beast snow blower.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      d13thecolonel

      Can you explain the source of your comments re; Tax increases.

      Interested in the loss of 1031 exchanges in particular. What is the basis for you claim?

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      For the fashion concious ladies from Oregon and Washington

    • I would actually say no to those. Was at Lambeau this summer for a tour and their gift shop had a bunch of Packer shoes. Very odd and was able to walk away no problem. Of course considering you need Smart Wool socks and Uggs when you go to a game, pretty green and gold sparkly heels don’t really make sense.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Kathy

        Uggs?? Sorrels work even better at 1/3 the cost.

        Get a pair with the fuzzy little ring around the insert to improve your “style”. 🙂

        AGREE 100% on the “Smart Wool” socks though.

        HINT for those who do some walking in this attire. If you can find them purchase “baseball sanitary hose” to wear under your wool socks. They are a poly/cotton blend and very “smooth”. Less expensive than silk but cut down on raw feet from walking on wool. And they go up your calf for added warmth.

  14. Dale
    http://en.blog.wordpress.com/2014/03/21/new-emoticons/

    Scroll down a little. There’s a line of them. Hover over the one you want and it will show you what to put in the comment box…it won’t look right until you actually post. Make sure you leave a space between the smiley and your post.

    8-: 😛

  15. Just A Citizen says:

    d13

    Colonel, I found one site that is focused on 1031”s. Following is there warning call. There argument is much bulldookey but there must have been a real threat last year. We’ll see what happens this year.

    Congress Threatens To Eliminate 1031 Exchanges

    Three separate tax reform proposals have been advanced by the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Finance Committee and the Treasury Department to either repeal or restrict tax deferral of gain from Section 1031 exchanges of like-kind property.

    Like-kind exchanges benefit millions of American investors and businesses every year. 1031 exchanges encourage businesses to expand and help keep dollars moving in the U.S. economy.

    Without the tax-deferral benefit that 1031 exchanges provide, small and medium sized businesses would not be as equipped to reinvest in their businesses, real estate values would decline, the U.S. economy would suffer, and businesses of all sizes would lose the opportunity to expand. The repeal of Section 1031 will cause a decline in real estate values as investors will be motivated to hold on to properties and to invest in more liquid, non-real estate investments with faster returns. The proposals effectively impose punitive and targeted tax increases on economically sound commercial real estate investment, the likely unintended consequence of which will be similar to implementation of 1986 tax reform modifications that resulted in a recession.

    Take Action Now!
    Send a strong message to congress that 1031 exchanges are a powerful economic tool. Learn more and voice your opposition to these proposals with these critical actions at 1031taxreform.com.

    • I will have some time today….I will try to find that list for you. What I posted was copied but I did not include the whole thing……let me find it.

  16. Go to tax foundation.org ……it lists all the proposals and the dollar amounts and effects.

    • Key word there…”PROPOSALS”

      • Not so Buck…these are already written to be put into place through executive and administrative order…..the only way to stop these is through the congress which has already sanctioned the trillion dollar budget….I just hope we get enough people in Washington with some balls to stand up and stop this…..they can…..if they will do it….I doubt it. Most businessmen who have been watching this have already changed things…..we have…it is easy to avoid if you plan it correctly. It is middle America that is going to carry the brunt yet again.

        • Colonel — they are merely proposals at this point. We do not know when the changes will go into effect, nor the exact nature of the change once actually enacted.

          • It is already in the Federal Register.

            • Link? From my understanding none of the items you mentioned have been enacted.

              • LOL…how in the hell do you link to the federal register but I will try….I have it delivered but I bet I can come up with some paragraphs and page numbers.

                Meaning no disrespect to anyone but I am not a computer literate…..my granddaughters are and they laugh at me all the time….but I do not know how to paste a link. I will try though….I barely know how to turn one on.

              • It just dawned on my feeble brain that you used the term enacted…..good question…the Federal Register is a posting…..enacted…hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm maybe not yet.

  17. It was interesting that the debate here mirrored that of one on at The National Memo where I have been amusing myself as of late. Some people are really nice, and others are just plain vile. Strange group. I heard some amazingly stupid stuff yesterday about “assault rifles”. One person in particular, was beyond stupid, he is what we used to call a “firearms fudgemonkey”. Basically, no matter how hard or how many times you tried, a few people just couldn’t get it (firearms military training). It wasn’t many, many 20 out of 7000 an year, it was either they just didn’t have the coordination to shoot or would do something mindboggling stupid. Some examples of the really stupid, we had a an older Senior Master Sergeant that decided he could stop the bolt of an M16 from going forward with his pinky, his pinky lost, badly. Another couldn’t grasp the fact of not putting your non-shooting thumb behind a semi auto pistol. That was 9 stitches. A smart ass security cop who thought he knew everything about an M-60 and was showing off when he unlocked the buttstock with the bolt still locked back. Lost 5 teeth and broke his nose. The gun was fine.

    We never had an on range gun accident that injured someone with an errant bullet (thankfully). It became almost like second nature to be able to pick out the one within each person’s small group of shooters that was the most likely to not be very wise with the gun. We stayed close to that one and when working with the one, each instructor on either side would watch the rest. Other than the stitches for the thumb behind the 9mm (which happened several times but to a lesser severity) the worst thing was a cop who grabbed an M-60 barrel without a glove to change it (that was really dumb) and literally fried his had instantly. What a horrible smell that is. A few bloody faces from the kick of a 40mm grenade launcher, nothing major and a few forehead cracks with a scope on some high powered rifles.

    Folks who are hard anti-gun will say most anything to get people to agree with them, even when it makes them into a “firearms fudgemonkey”. In the end, after driving them nuts all day, I simply and nicely explained that the “debate is over”, copy and pasted the SCOTUS decision from DC (the Scalia part) and simply reminded them that if they want to change things, it will take an Amendment to the Constitution. Good Luck with that.

    • I read quite a few articles this time of year, and even post a comment occasionally. With some site, the comments section is tied in with Facebook. Two days ago I commented on an article about the UN Arms Treaty, basically saying it has not been ratified into law and must conform to the Constitution. Yesterday, I commented on the article posted here about CJ Grisham, mostly just expressing support for his appeal. In both cases I was informed that Facebook took them down. That pissed me off, so I went back and reposted both and gave posted an very nasty message to Facebook that they WILL NEVER stifle Free Speech and every time they do it I will make it as public as possible. I went as far as calling them MFers. Those reposts stayed up.

      I’m not going to let the hard core liberal’s play these BS games to shut down free speech. I’m not going to let the lies continue to fester over issues that the Left claim are something they are not. I’m fed up with political correctness. NO MORE!

      • Facebook is not the government….this is not a violation of free speech.

        • True, but they have no problem allowing anti gun pages and comments. It’s should work both ways. I’m not really on Facebook much anyway and only use it to stay in touch with some folks, I rarely post on my page. I can live without Facebook, but I won’t sit back and just let their political bigotry to stand without a pretty good fight 🙂

          • Why should it work both ways? You of all people should be supporting facebook’s ability and right to monitor and run its site as it sees fit.

            • I see it as a public entity, so to speak. Even though technically it’s not. But if they are going to discriminate against views they don’t like, those who use Facebook should be made aware so as to educate themselves on what the company stands for. Like I said, I don’t use the site very often and that won’t change, so I just express my opinion and move on 😀

            • And yes, I’m a “if you don’t like it, don’t use it” person. Except I don’t sue when a company discriminates to get my way, I just use a different company’

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Buck

          It is a violation of free speech, especially given they advertise as this “open” forum.

          However, it is not a violation of the Congressional restriction on Govt, impeding free speech.

          One of these is addressed via litigation, the other is not. Well at least it was not supposed to be. However, the “left” has pushed for this right being extended to individuals.

          Remember the post on the 14th amendment?? This was included in there along with the regulation of commerce at the personal level.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Buck

          Just read Gman’s post again. There is more to this than just facebook deciding how to run its site.

          There is an increasing trend for various blog sites to demand you comment via Facebook. Their “terms of agreement” usually just require Civil discourse. Huff Po is a large example.

          So you comment on Huff Po, but Facebook’s mods take down your comment because somebody monitoring you complains to Facebook, not to Huff Po. Of course the Huff Po mods can drop you as well, even when you do not violate the terms of agreement.

          So is there not a breach of Contract in all this??

          And where do we separate private from Govt. when companies like Facebook are aligning with the Govt. more and more each day. Let alone the Govt protection they get via Corporate status.

          • Where do you see a breach of contract? I’m sure there are some terms of service between the site and Facebook that would cover this.

            • Hey Buck, Hope you and yours are healthy this fine day. Bet your little one is getting big! Wish you could/would post a picture of the little tyke.

              I’m sure you remember the bakery sued for refusing the do a cake for a gay wedding and the bakery lost. Although it was based on the 1st Amendment and gays are not a protected class un federal law. So I guess, if a cake maker can get sued for one’s violation of equal right, is it not then assumable that equal rights must also apply to Facebook?

              • Just A Citizen says:

                gman

                Not until SCOTUS clearly applies the First Amendment to citizens via the 14th amendment.

                The cake issue is a “civil rights” violation, one that SCOTUS claims is authorized under the 14th amendment. But to my knowledge SCTOTUS has not expanded freedom of speech to private citizens.

              • yea! What he said!

              • And yes, the little one is getting way too big if you ask me!

              • Didn’t the Hobby Lobby case reaffirm the 1st Amendment that would have changed the wedding cake issue had it gone to the Supreme’s?

            • Just A Citizen says:

              Buck

              They provide access as long as I conduct my self according to their rules.

              I follow the rules yet they deny my access.

              How is that not a violation of the contract implied by them requiring me to sign the agreement in the first place?

              Wasn’t it a year or two ago that someone was trying to take legal action against one of these companies for their arbitrary “censoring”?? I don’t remember what happened. Guessing the Court found in favor of the company imposing its arbitrary censorship.

              Now lets address the fact that FACEBOOK is not just an independent company. If it gets Govt. protection and sanction then why can it CENSOR people?? Is that not the legal basis for Govt. claiming authority over private business? We give you a license therefore you must adhere to our laws, rules and regulations.

              How is FACEBOOK absolved from complying with the First Amendment if the Govt. entity which sanctions it must comply with said amendment??

              Looking for the actual legal concept/principle here, not the philosophical thinking.

              • From my understanding, it is how you say — the 1st Amendment just hasn’t been applied to private individuals/businesses the same way the 14th Amendment has.

                Have you actually read through your contract (the terms of use) with the site? I wouldn’t be surprised to find something which covers this.

      • I seen reference to this yesterday. I can post a video of a lady getting her ass kicked in front of her 3 year old by a home invader. I won’t here, but truth is hard for the anti-gunners to deal with.

    • @Anita, is Dearborn a ‘no go zone” as explained in the video? To explain, Muslim no go zones are basically a State within a State. Off limits to non-muslims, police, fire department and live under Sharia with sharia courts.

      • Not at all. I could run, walk, or drive through and so could you…with no glares or fears.

  18. @JAC, I just had a Liberal tell me that the Republicans want to take away SSI for the handicapped. I’m not really sure how to answer that as I have not heard of such a thing. I’m sure it’s just more Left Wing idiocy, but thought I’d check with you.

    • This is the only thing I’ve seen that fits. Don’t actually understand what it all means or how that one statement will fight fraud-but here you go.

      http://hotair.com/archives/2015/01/07/left-claims-gop-is-trying-to-destroy-social-security-on-day-one-of-new-congress/

      • Just A Citizen says:

        V.H.

        Your right, it does not address fraud. What it does is create “political leverage” to force some “bipartisan” action on fraud. In other words, the R’s can say we won’t transfer money to the disability side because it will not benefit Soc Sec as a whole. Unless you D’s want to work with us to fix the fraud problem. Then we can show a net gain and go ahead and transfer money.

        It is all BS in my view. FACT……..the disability program was authorized under Social Security but has NEVER BEEN FUNDED. Hell, Soc. Sec. taxes don’t even cover the primary Soc. Sec. obligations, how are they going to pay for ADDED programs.

        The “new rule” would not prevent Congress from ALLOCATING specific money to fund the disability program. Only from taking that money from the General Soc. Sec. Trust fund.

        So the R’s counter argument should be “The Democrats want to continue treating the American Public like Idiots with their magical book keeping and stealing of the Soc. Sec. Trust fund.”

        This is why I don’t like Boehner. You will not see this argument made by the R’s. He isn’t smart enough to play their game nor wise enough to create his own. That is my humble opinion and stand ready to be proven wrong.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      gman

      Ask them for “documented” proof.

      I have not heard of any such thing. I am betting if there are proposals being considered it may deal with consolidation of services, which “operatives” would then claim is an attempt to take something away.

      But I have not even heard this, so just ask them for “documentation” that is not just some left wing site making a “claim”.

      • I did, got nothing. But now with some information I can at least put this person’s mind at ease. SHE seemed quite upset over it. Despite her rather ignorant post I will be polite and pass on what I know. Thanks!

      • Here is my reply, figured you’d be interested:

        I wanted to reply on your concern about SSI for the Handicapped. I have received some good information that may ease your mind, which is the purpose of this reply. The GOP is NOT going to deny SSI to the handicapped. I’m guessing these claims come from Left Wing media rag that just loves to attack the GOP and the Right Wing at every possible turn. The whole “claim” is based on a proposed rule change . You probably read something like this:

        With a little-noticed proposal, Republicans took aim at Social Security on the very first day of the 114th Congress.

        The incoming GOP majority approved late Tuesday a new rule that experts say could provoke an unprecedented crisis that conservatives could use as leverage in upcoming debates over entitlement reform…

        House Democrats are sounding the alarm. In a memo circulated to their allies Tuesday, Democratic staffers said that that would mean “either new revenues or benefit cuts for current or future beneficiaries.” New revenues are highly unlikely to be approved by the deeply tax-averse Republican-led Congress, leaving benefit cuts as the obvious alternative.

        First, the SSI benefits have NEVER been funded by any Congress, money must be transferred from the General fund to the fund that provides the SSI for the handicapped, which it will in the future. There is no way that anyone will take these funds or deny them, that would be political suicide. With that said, you can calm down on the matter as the discussion within Congress will be to deal with fraud. It sucks that these idiots in politics scare the crap out of people over absolutely nothing.

        Remember what I said earlier about getting back what you liked. The Senate rules where changed by Reid, which the GOP didn’t like. You may have liked it now another rule change is happening that you don’t like (although it’s just scare tactics with no truth to it). But, what comes around goes around.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          gman

          You got one point wrong because you confused my general statement about SS funding with the year to year funding of SSI.

          Congress does fund SSI but NOT via the Soc Sec trust funds. Thus the transfer issue has nothing to do with SSI. SSI is funded by Annual Appropriations.

          My point was that SOC SEC, as in the retirement and disability programs are not “funded” in the long run. Congress adds programs under the original authority of Soc. Sec., they are all amendments to the first legislation, but never addressed the “obligation” made against the Federal Budget. Thus we are constantly having to “tweak” something to make Soc. Sec. last another XYZ years.

          Key point to your “left wing” antagonists, which they rarely admit, IF SOC SEC WAS IN FACT SUSTAINABLE WE WOULD NOT EVER HAVE TO TWEAK IT.

          THE FACT WE HAVE TO TWEAK IT SHOWS THAT IT IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. BECAUSE THOSE WHO WANT FREE COOKIES WILL ALWAYS BE ADDING MORE BURDENS TO THE PROGRAM.

          THIS IS PUBLIC CHOICE DOCTRINE OR THEORY………….IN ACTION.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            GMAN

            I apologize, I don’t think you confused it, you just worded your response poorly. You said congress never funded SSI but appropriated the money, which is of course “funding” it.

            I suggest you copy the following and use it as your response. It should address her “fear” more clearly.

            “Congress does fund SSI but NOT via the Soc Sec trust funds. Thus the transfer issue has nothing to do with SSI. SSI is funded by Annual Appropriations.”

  19. Worst Christmas letter ever? BamaDad – are you around? Do you have any D friends that can confirm this?

    http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/01/in_holiday_message_alabama_dem.html

  20. Just A Citizen says:

    Was thinking of doing an article on Soc. Sec. but since it came up today lets go ahead and looks at some FACTS.

    First up is a general description, from the Soc. Sec. Admin website:

    “What are the Trust Funds?

    The Social Security trust funds are financial accounts in the U.S. Treasury. There are two separate Social Security trust funds, the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund pays retirement and survivors benefits, and the Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Fund pays disability benefits.

    Social Security taxes and other income are deposited in these accounts, and Social Security benefits are paid from them. The only purposes for which these trust funds can be used are to pay benefits and program administrative costs.

    The Social Security trust funds hold money not needed in the current year to pay benefits and administrative costs and, by law, invest it in special Treasury bonds that are guaranteed by the U.S. Government. A market rate of interest is paid to the trust funds on the bonds they hold, and when those bonds reach maturity or are needed to pay benefits, the Treasury redeems them.”

    Now lets put aside the funny book keeping issue about “different” accounts. Since we were dealing with the “SSI” issue.

    SSI is NOT the same as OASI under Soc. Sec. It is under the act but it is a program which allows the qualification requirements of OASI to be “waived” in order to include others who do not meet the OASI requirement. This happens to include “developmentally disabled” children and adults. “Waiver” programs include joint funding by the Feds and States and are administered by the States under authority granted by the Feds.

    So while SSI is technically under OASI and thus subject to this restriction on moving money between “accounts”, it is not being specifically targeted. As the Dems are trying to claim.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Now lets look at the OASI account data. Again from the Soc. Sec. website:

      http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/FACTS/

      Notice how the categories of beneficiaries are focused on “disabled” workers. That was the primary role and is under what is called SSA when you apply for benefits.

      In my son’s case, he had to be “officially turned down” for SSA before he could apply for SSI. A completely unnecessary paperwork/procedural requirement. I assume one designed to address fraud but a complete waste of taxpayer money and govt. employee time.

      Now also notice the income and expense categories. Anyone know what the “taxes” are that are not “payroll taxes”? I don’t and I am guessing no one else does either. I will do some more searching but the point is we all understand the Soc Sec payroll tax, but this is a separate tax. As are the other fees noted.

      Now the “income” from investments is the ADDED cost to YOU of borrowing the trust funds to pay for other Govt programs. You have paid TWICE for the same program benefits. Hell maybe even three or four times.

      Now what happens when the cost of Treasuries is increased to say 5%??

      Like I said……………SHADY and FRAUDULENT book keeping.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      How is SSI funded? NOT by the trust fund accounts. Sorry, I missed this in the first comment. SSI is authorized under Soc. Sec. laws, but is not funded under OASI trust funds.

      So to answer Gmans question, tell your Dem friend that SSI has nothing to do with the Republicans “procedural change”.

      From Soc. Sec. website:’

      “Supplemental Security Income?

      Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is a Federal income supplement program funded by general tax revenues (not Social Security taxes):

      It is designed to help aged, blind, and disabled people, who have little or no income; and
      It provides cash to meet basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter. ”

      So here is the hierarchy of benefits, if you will.

      First OASI………… if you do not qualify then,

      SSI……………if you do not qualify for the regular SSI then,

      SSI waiver programs. This is where lil’ JAC is located. He as a “developmentally disabled waiver” or “DD Waiver” to receive SSI funds.

      There is also another program, established by Reagan, called Katy Beckitt. It allows people not normally qualifying for OASI or Medicaid, to access Medicaid funds to pay for services within a home setting. At the time children who were institutionalized could get funding to pay for services but not those who lived at home. Katy Beckitt was created to allow them to get similar services while living at home. As Mr. Reagan said, the system was forcing parent to “institutionalize” their children in order to access the professional help they needed.

      Medicaid is not OASI or SSI. But Medicaid uses the OASI and SSI qualifications at times to qualify people for Medicaid. In my son’s case, he had to first qualify for SSI, then he qualified for Medicaid. The Medicaid portion is THE joint Fed/State program and is administered by the State dept of health and welfare. While his SSI payments are administered by the Social Security Admin. office.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      OK, reading back I can see I might create some confusion over these “waiver” programs.

      SSI creates a category which allows people to qualify who do not qualify for normal Soc Sec funding. But these are “federal” funds. That States, I believe can “supplement” these funds if they wish, but that would be separate from the SSI funds themselves, which are administered by the Soc. Sec. administration. Idaho, for example, will provide a small stipend of about $50 per month in addition to SSI. However, the criteria for getting this money is tighter, as our son was disqualified due to him living at home. Yet he can still get his SSI payment.

      Medicaid included the “waiver” categories, which match the special groups under SSI. Thus SSI first then Medicaid. The DD Waiver is one of these. These “waive” the normal Medicaid requirements.

      Now if you followed the discussion between the Colonel, Buck and I you now know that Adults with incomes less than 133% of poverty level are a NEW “waiver” group under Medicaid. But because they are a “waiver” group, the STATES do not have to include them. This is done by State agreement with the Feds. If a State takes on the new program it must meet the “federal minimum standards” in terms of quality controls and funding. BUT a State can decide to fund ADDITIONAL amounts or EXPAND services. The Fed’s set the Floor, the State sets the Ceiling.

      Well, lets see how badly I muddled this whole thing.

      Clear as mud I presume??

      • Will fix if needed. I doubt anyone can understand it anyway, LOL. Not the brightest group over there, but quite entertaining. Our thermometer hasn’t passed 10 since Monday night, so far about 4 inches of snow with a new advisory for 2 to 4 tonight. I don’t know if you heard of the multicar crash that killed three in PA, if so, that happened just South of me near the on/off ramps I use.

      • Ummm, no. I had someone post the same ? as G and was hoping to gain some insight and now I’m just plain confused.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Kathy

          Then ask me any question(s) you want to help clear things up.

          But start with the simple fact that the “rule change” the R’s just made about transferring funds between Soc. Sec and Soc. Sec. Disability has NOTHING to do with SSI and the “handicapped” covered by SSI.

          Because SSI is funded by annual “appropriations”. It is NOT FUNDED by either of the SS Trust Funds.

          • Perhaps if I state what has confused me since I can’t seem to cobble together a question-it would help. Either there is a problem with definitions SSI/social security disability or it’s confusion over how or why we have accounts that are set up to pay social security disability but you are stating that this account doesn’t pay these benefits because they are appropriated-but if changing this statement will effect how Congress negotiates on these benefits-then at some point in some way these accounts are associated with paying benefits. Maybe your point is that the money isn’t being paid out of SS taxes-it is just being appropriated and then added to the accounts, maybe?????

            • Just A Citizen says:

              V.H.

              SSI is completely separate from Soc. Sec. disability, in terms of its funding. It is NOT a Trust Fund. So this rule change regarding transfer of funds between the “trust” accounts will NOT affect it in any way.

              It is part of Soc. Sec. only because it was created by an amendment to the Soc Sec act(s). Thus the authority to create it and to manage it are part of the Social Security Administrations responsibility.

              Soc. Sec. disability was created to help people primarily hurt at work or who were injured and could not work, but were otherwise normal. It was established as a separate “Trust Fund” from the regular Soc. Sec, Trust Fund, which was for “retirement”. But because of the way the two were created Congress has been passing money between the two Trust Funds as needed to balance yearly payment needs.

              SSI was created to help people who were disabled in other ways, like blind or mentally impaired. This includes those who could never work due to their disability.

              The Trust Fund accounts are funded by the payroll taxes and other taxes in the table I linked to above.

              SSI is funded via the appropriations passed by Congress each year. In terms of how the Govt works these accounts are completely separate from the Trust Fund accounts. So any policy changes that “target” the Trust Funds will NOT affect SSI.

              Does that help?

              • One question to see if I’ve got this right-this new rule ” but only if it improves the overall financial health of the combined Social Security Trust Funds” will not affect SSI or even SSA but it will affect the negotiations over regular social security disability.

            • Just A Citizen says:

              V.H.

              I believe SSA is the same as the regular disability and is a trust fund/account.

              If true then this “new rule” WOULD potentially affect SSA. Because if the fund were short it could not be funded by simply moving money from the retirement trust account.

              It will NOT affect SSI.

              • Thanks, I think I’ve got it-I certainly see why you talk about “magical book keeping and stealing of the Soc. Sec. Trust fund.” Why I ask didn’t they just keep these issues totally separate to begin with! Well I’m not really asking.

    • I do prefer concealed versus open, although the heat of the summer really makes that near impossible. I tried large t-shirts, but it’s so obvious I quit I dress comfy and if I can conceal, which is most of the time, great, if not, so be it.

      I do see the point of how criminals would think and totally agree!

      • I have switched to all button down shirts, winter or summer. I wear a inner shirt for the inside the belt holster and leave the outer shirt un-tucked most of the time. Can also tuck & blouse it but have to un-button to draw.

        • I don’t like buttons, more crap to fix or replace, LOL. I like T’s and sweatshirts. Insulated flannel with a zipper in winter, two sizes too big, to layer, works well enough. I have come to the conclusion that I don’t care if people know I’m carrying, I’m legal.

        • I just read this twice. You “blouse” your shirt? Is it pink/pink or more of a salmon/pink?

          😮

          • Geez! Another non-military person! Blousing refers to pulling it out a little bit so that it does not follow the contour. You Blouse your field pants in your boots by inserting the pants neatly and pulled tight in the boot top. You then pull up on them after lacing the boots. They are then “bloused”. A secondary purpose is that they are not tightly in the boot and are less likely to come out when you start moving around and get physical. Gun wise, it prevents the clear outline of the gun from showing.

            I got this really neat E-Mail today thought I would share it.

            hello i am mr john. i was paid to kill you but i like you that is the reason i want to let you no if only you can cooperate with me so that is the reason why you and you family will live. mr what ever you call your seif i have any document about you and your family if want any body in your family to live you most do as say if like notice the police i don’t care all i no if do not cooperate as i said you we see your seif going to hall i have everything about you were you live and your picture so if no what you can do go and do it. if only you want to live and your family.my cooperation with you is 60000 u.s.d.that is for you to live i don’t have anything to say all i need is your reply make it fast before it is two late for you; i give a day for your if did not do that good by for your life,

            Anybody know what to do with it?

            I’m tempted to reply and tell them to bring it on but one never knows what effect a reply would have on my computer and what crap it might open me up to. Sounds like one of those West African scams.

  21. What real purpose, other than to extort money and make business more costly, does this BS do? http://www.guns.com/2015/01/08/chris-christie-administration-proposes-crop-of-new-gun-regulations/

    • It will help him with presidential run. RINO’s support “sensible” gun safety laws. Dem’s who are tired of the extreme left will flock to a moderate, reasonable Repug….

  22. Just A Citizen says:

    Good grief……………..look at the “reasons” given:

    http://money.cnn.com/2015/01/08/real_estate/oregon-moving/index.html

    Now let me fill in the blanks for these mushy thinkers.

    INTEL is building a major facility in Beaverton, OR. It covers around 10 acres, with all the parking. THOUSANDS have come to built the facility.

    When it is done, INTEL is going to EMPLOYEE about 10,000 NEW PEOPLE.

    NIKE is also located there. Last I saw NIKE was also expanding operations.

    These two companies DRIVE the economy in the greater Portland area, which in turn drives the State economy. The other is FARMING. Which has been on a major growth in profitability spurt the past four years.

    Thanks to these three factors, Oregon barely recognized the “Great Recession”. Although if you listened to them you would have thought they were devastated.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      Is the timber industry dead and buried?

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Dale

        The one that used to exist is dead and gone, to never return. At least in our life time.

        The one that remains has been doing pretty well as it depends on its own land base primarily. It is still a big part of the OR economy but not as much as it used to be, in terms of total employment and support dollars.

        The State of Oregon has considerable timber resources. But just as with the Feds. the State is being sued more and more. It is looking like additional timber supplies from State lands will be reduced even more.

        Meaning the shakedown of the timber industry in Oregon is not complete.

        • Dale A Albrecht says:

          Interesting historical note….a company I worked for in 71 used a lot of plywood. Obviously we were cost concious. The plywood that was logged in Coos Bay, as an example, manufactured in the US and shipped to LA, all internal US was expensive. We started sourcing our plywood manufactured in Japan. We traced the production cycle. Logged in Coos Bay area. Shipped to Japan as logs. Manufactured into the same grade plywood we were using. Shipped back to the US for 1/2 the price.

  23. I’m getting to the point where no one will debate me over at the National Memo. I guess those on the Left over there don’t like getting a taste of their own medicine and hate the truth.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      A very successful campaign to advance victimization. Very strongly pushed starting in the 70’s….example the Islamist keep screaming crusaders crusaders ad infinitum implying we’re victims again of the big bad old west.The media has been so brainwashed they refuse to really report history for fear of being branded a RACIST or Islamophobe….Muslim forces were defeated at Tours, mid north France in 732 AD. The 1st Crusade was 1096-1099. Europe was fighting for its survival when they struck at the heart in Palestine. Spain, Sicily, North Africa, Southern Italy all were conquered by Islamic forces long before any crusade, Columbus couldn’t get the money for his voyage until the Moors were defeated and driven from Spain in 1492. Why were the voyages of exploration so critical…..to bypass the trade chokehold of the middle east. Once alternate paths of trade were created to asia it was a matter of time the ottoman empire would collapse. Then Gods little joke…oil. Almost 700 years of what was christian/catholic countries under Islam rule. 1453 Constantinople falls. 1683 Muslim forces attack Vienna….the Coissant was created to honor the austrian and polish victory….late 1700’s early 1800’s why was the US navy really brought into existance…combat arab pirates seizing and holding hostage crews passengers ships until tribute was paid….ala current day Somolia pirates. Europe was paying the pirates to leave their ships alone.

  24. Let’s see……at 1130am the other day….a car with Islamic Terrorists stops on a street in Paris, France and get out armed with AK 47’s. France has one of the most restrictive gun laws in the world……like that of Chicago ( sarcasm intended )…..the gunmen shoot and kill two unarmed policemen….unarmed policemen guarding the newspaper they were supposed to protect. One of the policemen shot in the back with his arms actually raised ( sarcasm intended )….then one terrorist stays outside while the other one forces his way inside and kills several people and wounds several more…..in the ,meantime, neighbors and business’ next door and down the street, after hearing the gunfire run outside and go to rooftops with……..their cell phones to take pictures. No one…..NO ONE organized nor rushed the terrorists,,,,they took frigging pictures.

    I wonder what would have happened in Fort Worth, Texas…….

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Me, me, me, oh please me……………….

      DEAD terrorists.

      Noticed you did not include Dallas proper or San Antone.

      • Dallas would have been the same…..and most likely San Antonio……however, AUSTIN would have asked them to have some Evian Water and discuss their grievances.

    • It’s not like the French are known for their courage and fighting ability…even when guns are available!

      • Just A Citizen says:

        The French have unjustifiably received a bad rap. All because of one bunch of Maroons that thought fixed cannon could defend a nation against modern armies.

        • Probably. Wasn’t Bonapart French and didn’t he try and take Russia once?

        • Dale A Albrecht says:

          The french won battles but lost every war they were in since 1753. They lost WW1 by my take because they quit. French and Indian Wars Lost, Aided us but got their ass kicked in retaliation(sp) Napolean was a great campaigner but never really defeated the enemy and lost the war. Crimean war, Mexico 1860’s lost, 1873 vs Germany lost, WWI debatable loss but landed on the victory side by our intervention., WWII joke and aided and abetted in the holocost. Vietnam lost, North Africa lost…I look at them as the old dowager dressed in the black lace that sits in the corner at the ball resting on her laurels, forgeting they are 250 years in the past.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Dale

            The issue is French “courage” and “fighting ability”.

            So the French lost Viet Nam and by the same standard USA “won or lost”???

            WWI The USA came very late to the game and suffered greater losses than any other army, if measured by number of troops deployed over a “time period” of battle.

            So how does that play to the theory of US superiority in “fighting ability” over the French??

            OH, and the USA did not secure any more real estate than anyone else, yet at a much greater cost.

  25. Gman,

    I went over to NM and looked at some of your discussion on healthcare. One of the arguments I make is we have added thousands of government bureaucrats to the healthcare system to generate the tax codes, enforce them, generate the software for people to sign up, police the insurance companies and so on. None of these people actually add any value to my trip to the doctor. Most of the expenses associated with them will be buried under some other line item in the budget so we will never know the true cost of this program. The insurance companies still exist and still have their buildings full of bookkeepers, accountants, salesmen, and lawyers. How can anyone expect the overall cost of healthcare to go down when we have added this huge new layer of expensive bureaucrats whose sole purpose in life will be to increase their own numbers. Government has no economic incentive to be more efficient since it has no profit motive. Government efficiency is an oxymoron.

    You mentioned alternative medicine. There are lots of reports out there on effective natural cures for many ailments of which the medical industry has no knowledge or no financial incentive to pursue. This is one field where the government could make major contributions. As you know my wife has significant medical problems. I spend over 50% of my income on healthcare so I am quite cost conscious. Among other things, my wife is diabetic and has been for 25 years. One fact I learned a few years ago was that common cinnamon can significantly reduce external insulin dependency. I tried it. It worked. I told my brother who tried it and again it worked. When I mention this to healthcare professionals, the are dumbstruck. Several doctors and nurses I have talked to have never heard of it and yet a quick internet search and a scan of the vitamin aisle at the local drug store reveals it is open knowledge.

    There is no money to be made in selling cinnamon or common solutions/cures for other chronic diseases. If NIH (since they have no profit motive but do have an objective to improve the health of the nation) would pursue these low cost solutions and prove or disprove them followed by an effective information campaign, we might be able to significantly reduce healthcare costs nationwide and worldwide.

    This is one of the reasons why when we went through the ACA arguments in the early days here that I said the ACA did not address the true healthcare problem in this country which is cost. It has made the situation worse. The other mistake being made is equating healthcare to purchasing insurance. We had healthcare but no insurance when I was a kid but a visit to the doctor only cost $10.

    One of the other arguments I make is an analogy. Suppose we insisted that auto insurance covered the cost of an oil change. How much would the oil change now cost? The garage now has to bill the insurance company rather than collect greenbacks from you. So he is going to increase the price to cover his billing and bookkeeping and the delay in getting paid (time value of money). The insurance company pays the bill but also needs to pay there bookkeepers and CPA’s plus make a profit so they in turn jack up the price which eventually gets added to your insurance bill. So your $30 oil change is now free but your insurance bill went up $60. Now add in a government redistribution scheme where the poor do not have to pay the $60 but someone else does, plus they have to still pay for their own oil changes. And to make it more fun, let’s now add in a $30 copay. What did we gain? -$30:)

    • 🙂

    • Thanks T-Ray, some great stuff to use. It’s hard to try and understand economics for me, but I get the supply/demand issue. Trying to explain it to people who understand economics far less than I is a tall task. The cinnamon help with diabetics is now burned into my mind, that’s great info. The oil analogy is great as well 🙂

      Note to Black Flag: If you like your hair, don’t waste your time there, you will pull it out within the first day. LD

  26. http://eaglerising.com/13699/houston-mayor-says-pastors-no-right-jury-trial/

    Rather entertaining. My money isn’t on the Mayor, that’s for sure

  27. @ Buck……..the unfortunate incidents that are happening in Paris is why I was trying to tell you the areas that are on the watch list. Most everyone, including you, want to think that I am an alarmist and that there is really no reason to stay away from these areas. Europe is beginning to finally learn that there is no such thing as multi-culturism that is working. And it is not going to work. Germany has finally learned this and is stopping immigration….so is Denmark, Finland, Spain, (England is stupid and is not stopping anything and there are areas in London that the police are staying out ). France now has a real problem…..multi-culturism is pie in the sky. Let us take Paris, for example. In Paris alone, just like many cities all over Europe, under the disguise of multi-culturism, immigration has not assimilated at all…..most are coming into these countries and not trying to be part of it…they are forming enclaves. You are finally hearing in the news, and I cannot believe that the left wing news is actually reporting this, there are areas of Paris that the police and the government agencies DO NOT GO INTO..they do not patrol it nor collect taxes…nothing…..Muslim areas that are run under Sharia law and allowed to do so by authorities…Paris is not the only city that is doing this. Europe is beginning to wake up of sorts and countries are going to have to realize that these are not “criminal gangs” to be handled by police…they are organized and know exactly what they are doing and they are in communication.

    A couple of years ago, I warned everyone on here, of the areas in Africa and Europe that were fast coming under the control, and I named them, of what everyone wants to call Muslim fanatics. I was laughed at then and received lectures of hegemony and that we created these problems and that our intervention in foreign countries gave birth to these “criminals”…..things like that. I just shrugged my shoulders and told my significant other to watch what unfolds…people have no clue what they are beginning to face and will face in the future….no clue at all.

    What is still baffling is listening to the news and everyone still seems surprised at this….surprised that hostages are now being taken. France watched these people go back and forth to various areas funneling jihadists into Iraq and Iran and did nothing……they have had these people under surveillance…..and did nothing.

    You are going to have to get these guys….you are going to have to extract information from them by various means…and you are going to have to eradicate them. You are going to have to profile……..

    You cannot deal with these people by “trying to understand”….you cannot deal with these people by holding hands and singing….there is only one way…….kill them.

    Several on here laughed at BF and I when we said…..study your history. This is not new and it is not 30 years old…..this stuff goes back centuries.

    Now, I bet that you will see cities of Europe pull away from this multi-culturism movement and you will see the opposite…clamping down and discrimination when all you had to do years ago was enforce your immigration laws and understand that the world is not intended to live together Star Trek Style. Culture clash and will always clash.

    Crazy Horse spoke ! ( Points available if you can name the movie )

    • I’ll guess “The Battle of Little Big Horn?”

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      Just quessing, but could be “They Died With Their Boots On” or “Little Big Man”

      • Great guess……They died with their boots on

        • Dale A Albrecht says:

          Even though the mix of military characters at different times was fictional, there were some scenes and bits and pieces that at 1st you’d think were entirely BS because they were never taught in school history. Specifically the “East Calvary Field” and the repulse of Jeb Stuarts calvary which was an intregal part of Lee’s plan in concert with Picketts charge to defeat Meade. Lee did not have a lapse that day of military strategy, it was just thwarted. Until recently, after Custers ignominious defeat at Little Big Horn, he was pretty much written off in general, no pun intended as an idiot….so D, I figured such a statement would be hidden in that movie, but there never the less.

          I’ve been touring the major civil war battlefields and hiring a private guide to spend the day walking the fields and standing in the spots where the decisions makers stood, seeing what they saw. And walking in the footsteps of the soldiers and at eye level seeing what everyone saw. Well worth it. It changes your prospective on many events. Still can not accept McClellan as anything but a timid, pompose ass.

          • Custer had a pretty neat record before LBH. The most fascinating thing I’ve seen is a documentary a few years back where they trolled the battlefield with metal detectors looking for cartridge cases. The show concluded there were a lot of Winchesters out there on the Injun side. Piles and piles of cartridge cases. The investigators were surprised (I was not). The other more troubling thing was the lack of 45-70 casings in quantity even in places like Custer Hill. Looks like there was a lot of panic. There were a lot of dropped live rounds all over the place. Shot Trapdoor Springfields and can easily understand fumbling cartridges all over the place under pressure. The historians think that battle was a lot shorter than people suppose.

            The most interesting thing was the matching of a 45-70 case to a specific carbine passed down through an Indian family. Had an unusual indent from a defective firing pin. Now, that is some provenance!

            On a hot July day back some twenty plus years walked from seminary ridge to the bloody angle with my sons. Nothing quite like it. Right now I have this delusion that me and a buddy will spend the Oct 11th to Nov 11th 2018 following the footsteps of the AEF through the Argonne Forest. We will both be 72 then, ought to be interesting. Gonna have to follow Charlies diet. I see on Facebook that he plans to hike Mt. Washington this summer.

            • Dale A Albrecht says:

              That was a very interesting battlefield forensic study. Actually, tracing by the firing pin indentations on the shell casings of individuals movements……when ever I think of that battle, the Bill Cosby routine about Custer and Sitting Bull taking the coin toss comes to mind. Whereas Custer lost.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Don’t remember any movie but thought ya’ll would enjoy this. I’m calling BS on this as an actual “quote”, but it does capture the sentiment………..AND the way many of us feel today.

      Crazy Horse.

      This is reported to be the last few words that Crazy Horse spoke after he was run through with a bayonet and murdered.

      Quote.

      “My friend, I do not blame you for this. Had I listened to you this trouble would not have happened to me. I was not hostile to the white men. Sometimes my young men would attack the Indians who were their enemies and took their ponies. They did it in return. We had buffalo for food, and their hides for clothing and for our tepees. We preferred hunting to a life of idleness on the reservation, where we were driven against our will.

      At times we did not get enough to eat and we were not allowed to leave the reservation to hunt. We preferred our own way of living. We were no expense to the government. All we wanted was peace and to be left alone. Soldiers were sent out in the winter, they destroyed our villages.

      The “Long Hair” [Custer] came in the same way. They say we massacred him, but he would have done the same thing to us had we not defended ourselves and fought to the last. Our first impulse was to escape with our squaws and papooses, but we were so hemmed in that we had to fight. After that I went up on the Tongue River with a few of my people and lived in peace. But the government would not let me alone.

      Finally, I came back to the Red Cloud Agency. Yet, I was not allowed to remain quiet. I was tired of fighting. I went to the Spotted Tail Agency and asked that chief and his agent to let me live there in peace. I came here with the agent [Lee] to talk with the Big White Chief but was not given a chance. They tried to confine me. I tried to escape, and a soldier ran his bayonet into me. I have spoken.”

  28. Breaking News

    Gunfire and explosions heard at location where terrorists are holding hostage.

    Heard the gunfire live on TV

  29. The Keystone pipeline issue. Thinking old school, if all the States involved are in agreement, why would the Feds need to be involved at all?

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      Why is the State department involved other than working out the details of a trade agreement. Especially when there are numerous pipelines already crossing in that area NOW….except in the US it will cross sort of a virgin area, currently sans pipelines and rail. Bend the line a little and it will parallel current lines….it’s all obfuscation.

  30. Just A Citizen says:

    Remember……….you heard it here first……………4 years ago. Can’t wait until the left wing hounds try to destroy this guy starting next Monday.

    A new book reports that the controversial Affordable Care Act will eventually become unaffordable because it doesn’t fix the biggest problem of all, the high cost of health care. Lesley Stahl reports on Sunday, Jan. 11 at 8 p.m. ET and 7 p.m. on “60 Minutes”.

  31. http://thefreethoughtproject.com/swat-team-demolishes-home-arrest-man-dui-family-left-homeless/#M5HCmsFbcYRt3mvE.99

    Isn’t there a simpler way to get a guy who is wanted for Failure to Appear on a DUI case? WTF is this country coming to? No wonder the cops get a bad rap at times.

  32. When you know for sure a person lies:

    Choudary: Islam for them is whatever they think Islam is in terms of their own interests. Islam is in accordance to the Koran, of the sayings and actions of the Prophet. That’s it. […] I say to you, look at the Koran, look at the sayings of the Prophet, and check for yourself. Is Barack Obama a liar or am I lying? I think that you will find that he’s a liar. He’s only inventing Islam according to what his own foreign policy is.
    http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/imam-choudary-obama-lying-about-true-nature-islam

  33. Where are all the women’s right’s folks fighting for a woman’s choice to do with her body as she chooses? VH, you should be on this like stink on shit: http://personalliberty.com/update-connecticut-supreme-court-rules-teen-must-continue-receiving-treatment-will/

    • Your not gonna like this answer but I would need a lot more information before I made a decision on this.

      • Love the answer! 17 year old with cancer doesn’t want Chemo, being forced to take it. That pretty much the facts. yet, The pro choice people will fight like hell for a woman’s right to do watch she wants with her body. Plus they want abortions for kids younger than 17 to be without parental consent. This is hypocrisy at it’s worst and should be an example of it!

        • What are you talking about G? I’ve heard plenty on this from the pro choice crowd.

          The issue here is whether the teen was mature to make the decision. From much of what I’ve read it appears she is and should absolutely be able to refuse treatment. However, this issue was presented at the trial court where it was found she did not exhibit this level of maturity – I can’t comment on the evidence and testimony presented at the trial so not sure why or how this decision was reached.

          • I’m sure if they’re speaking it will show up in a link eventually. Even on the Left Wing site I’ve been commenting on has been silent. What I’m really surprised about more then the abortion issue is that the average age of consent is the nation is 16. What I have read, it seems that this really isn’t about the law, but maybe trying to save her life (to the extent possible) until she is a whole 7 months older. I can see the judge doing something like this knowing that it may help and maybe she will change her mind. At the same time, I see the hypocrisy with the law itself. If consent is below 18, then this young ladies rights are clearly being denied.

            What really stinks is that I’m not so sure that the judge is wrong, considering I do have regard for human life and it may save her from certain death. It is also possible that she was not attempting even natural methods, which may have led the judge to see it as a form of suicide. Sad story. First that she has cancer that can be cured and she don’t want the treatment (which isn’t very pleasant from all accounts I’ve heard). Lot more to this than just pro-life/pro-choice. It could be a good subject of debate. It’s interesting as to where one’s rights begin and end depending on the subject.

            • The age of consent changes from state to state and issue to issue. The age of majority in CT is 18.

              • So in a few months she will then be able to refuse treatment? Will a court test her maturity level? I could see some bias on the courts side, anyone that refuses a chance to live must have problems. So a wiser, more mature judgement is required…

                I know none of the details but if I were a teen facing a life of battling cancer, not sure I would. Financial and emotional cost to family. Quality of life. A mature decision might be to bow to the inevitable.

              • I agree with you to a point — but again, not sure about the evidence/testimony presented at the hearing. But yes, ostensibly at the age of 18 she reaches the age of majority and can refuse.

                From my understanding the diagnosis isn’t a life of battling cancer and from what I’ve read the chemotherapy is 85% successful. But even at age 17 with my whole life ahead of me, i don’t know if I would choose to undergo chemotherapy myself – it can be a real horrendous treatment.

              • LOI – to add, from my understanding the treatment would only last 6 months so it could very well be over and done with prior to age 18.

  34. I guess this is why Petraeus has been almost silent. Quite a sword to have hanging over your head.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/10/us/politics/prosecutors-said-to-recommend-charges-against-former-gen-david-petraeus.html?_r=0

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      Why does this smell of a “honey trap” perfected by Markus Wolf. Used against a very successful general who embarassed the administration to put into action behind their rhetoric about Afghanistan being the good war. Clearly regardless Obama and Biden had zero intention of succeeding in that country. Not to say we could have. How Holder has found NO cause to procecute a huge investment fraud by good buddy Corzine, Fast and Furious(himself) IRS to name just a few.

  35. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Enjoyed a great dinner out this evening at a new restaurant in New Bern. Was sitting next to a table where an aunt and uncle were taking their niece out to dinner after her graduation from one of the UNC campuses. This girls was so unprepared for life it was shocking. She was asking her relatives things that she should have learned long ago in her life. Granted you can get seriously warped if you watch only O’reilly and Hannity and conversely Huffpo or CNN. But universities are suppose to encourage debate and thought and prepare one for life….the kids are being programmed by the 100,000 each year and being released upon america…..we are lost….what was it that Bill Ayers an advocate of the overthrow of the government, terrorist and weather underground said, he gave up the violent goal of overthrowing our government in favor of socialism, but the key was to get to the kids in school….basically re-education….taken a few years but the tactic is and was successful….the girls basically said what debate? What questioning? Where do I go to find out the basic foundation of what is going on today?

  36. I’ve read a lot this week about what is not Islam-What I want to know is-Is this Islam?

    http://pjmedia.com/claudiarosett/saudis-begin-1000-lashes/?singlepage=true

  37. I don’t pretend to know near enough about this type of thing but here is an opinion that doesn’t seem to see the light of day much with the LGBT in charge. From what I have read-there are many of these stories and they are being censored by bullying the people who try to bring them to the public notice.

    http://thefederalist.com/2015/01/09/heres-what-parents-of-transgender-kids-need-to-know/

    • There have been a lot of studies going back to the 1960’s . I remember reading one in college. Then there was the sex change therapist,-MD, Dr. Harry Benjamin who was very, very clear that you had to rule out all, repeat all other possibilities before going forward with the surgery. He constantly cautioned about the possibilities of suicide. Merely thinking your solution is a sex change, no matter for how long, does not guarantee that acting on the desire will solve other underlying problems which may in fact be the main problem.

      I’ve said it before, while I loved my career, there are times when I regret not staying in psychology though I do think my patients would have been few and far between. Making folks feel good about things that they should feel bad about is just not my thing.

  38. Global Travel Warning……all points in Europe……expect kidnappings and shootings.

    • Sorry Colonel but travel to Europe remains for the most part extremely safe despite this alert (I don’t believe it was a warning).

      But I will offer again to take over any travel plans you have scheduled!

      • Dale A Albrecht says:

        I believe all the colonel is stating is be warned and also be aware. Do not just go obliviously willy nilly anywhere at any time. Just the other night I was in a club and the bar area was pretty full with district attorney’s who were at a conference. One small area was a lawyer free zone. A retired army officer sat down next to me. As soon as the AD’s left he got up and moved to the opposite side so he could survey the entire room and his back was NOT to the front door and windows. As he moved he flat out said that he can not sit with his back to the room. I would have moved also because I do the same thing, but I was heading out anyway. Lived for to long in areas where drive-by shootings of tourists or competitors of some illegal activity put paid on the bill and you did not want to get caught in the crossfire…..also especially if you are traveling near american military posts overseas and go to bars, clubs or restaurants frequented by service men and women just be aware of your surroundings.

  39. Interesting…..A suspected “white guy” supposedly sets a bomb at a NAACP office and Holder and the White House is all over it…..hate crime, domestic terrorism…..

    But when it is an Islamic terrorist attack…..it is workplace violence…..it is not hate speech,it is not Islamic and it is not terrorism……just workplace violence.

%d bloggers like this: