The EPA’s New Power Grab

thHN4OE9YBThe Environmental Protection Agency was happy to announce that they, along with the Army Corps of Engineers, have reached a final rule that would once and for all decide the fate of any body of water around the country and protect it as a “waters of the United States.”

Under this update to the Clean Water Act (CWA) and with public health in mind, the EPA can now fully regulate and control any water on any property they determine to drain or flow to another body of water used for public consumption or use. From the ruling:

This final rule interprets the CWA to cover those waters that require protection in order to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, or biological integrity of traditional navigable waters, interstate waters, and the territorial seas. This interpretation is based not only on legal precedent and the best available peer-reviewed science, but also on the agencies’ technical expertise and extensive experience in implementing the CWA over the past four decades. The rule will clarify and simplify implementation of the CWA consistent with its purposes through clearer definitions and increased use of bright-line boundaries to establish waters that are jurisdictional by rule and limit the need for case-specific analysis. The agencies emphasize that, while the CWA establishes permitting requirements for covered waters to ensure protection of water quality, these requirements only apply with respect to discharges of pollutants to the covered water. In the absence of a discharge of a pollutant, the CWA does not impose permitting restrictions on the use of such water.

Basically, if it rains, the EPA could technically fine you if you use weed killer or some fertilizer’s.  In my case, I live at the top of an area that is surrounded by flowing creeks in every direction.  Because rain water flows down to these creeks in one fashion or another, the EPA could fine the average person for simply using weed killer on their lawn (I don’t, but just saying).  It is easy to see water runoff and it’s pathway.

It will be interesting to watch and see some of the insane actions this rule will garnish. It’s just another way for the Fed’s to extort money from the people.



  1. AS is the norm, any subject is open for the debate. Have a great weekend SUFA 😀

    • You are so funny……catching up? This was the last thing we had to do…..we can now open carry handguns…to add to what we could open carry before….shotguns, rifles, automatic and semiautomatic weapons…knives with blades over 6 inches and we can possess silencers. But you are correct….it took longer to get this through.

      NOw, if you will also notice…..another bill is being sent to the governor and that is to allow the weapons on public college campus’ for those who possess a license to do so. Can you do that there, sir?…..but I am glad to see this because it did not make sense that we could open carry automatic weapons but not a handgun….however, the no open carry was actually a very old law that went back to the 1800’s.

      • Most certainly meant to be funny 😀 As far as colleges, private colleges in Pa make their own rules on the subject. Each one may be different. State colleges are also different as each has it’s own rules governing students. Visitors with conceal carry licenses are legal to carry on the property (as it is not a crime in Pa to carry legally in most places, but one can be asked to leave on private property). PA also doesn’t abide by the federal no gun zones at any schools. Local school districts make the choice on how to handle that. Still, it’s not a crime to carry concealed, despite local ordinances, but one may be asked to leave. Refusal is a trespassing ticket.

        I have no problem with local school districts making their own rules. Same with colleges. However, making rules that put the school responsible for protection has it’s detractors. Licensed conceal carriers are rarely messed with. I have not heard or read of an incident involving such, that includes women. Castle and Stand your ground laws trump any local rules, including on private property. Few outside of the largest cities are willing to be sued for failure to provide adequate protection when they go “no gun zone”. Bad decision anyway.

        • Yes sir….but these are students that can carry to class.

          • I’m in full agreement that students should be permitted to carry concealed on campus, especially at State run schools. The fact that so many have accepted that we need laws to permit what is already permitted in the Constitution is still somewhat baffling.

  2. Reblogged this on

  3. A brain teaser for the morning!

    Denny Hastert has now proven himself to be a ball of slime.

    For the sake of argument, assuming his offense was a momentary indiscretion and not an ongoing problem, how, from a moral point of view, should he have handled it when first approached by the blackmailer?

    What is SUFA’s take? I will reserve my own feelings until others have commented. . .

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Black and white:

      He tells the FBI.

      Then he takes his lumps.

      I find it odd that there is not an arrest for extortion in this story. They are apparently going to let the black mail stand without contest.

    • Tell the blackmailer to pound sand, then report it to the cops. Allegations of wrongdoing have to be proven. Without proof, the blackmailer goes to jail. Hastert just maintains his innocence and claim the blackmailer just wanted to strike it rich.

    • Is no one upset about the big brother banking laws that trapped him? If he pulls out large sums, the FBI gets curious, if he pulls out many small sums, the FBI gets curious. Kind of a catch 22. So his crime was lying to the FBI instead of telling them to go pound sand. If the blackmailer had hired a lawyer and threatened to sue, a settlement with confidentiality agreements would have been in order. Do the same thing without an attorney and you are screwed. Of course the lawyer does not get a cut in the latter deal. Is that the problem?

      Hastert may be a a sleezebag for all I know. He grew up in the same area my Mom did. I have been by his farm a few times. Nice place.

      • YOu do know that it is the bank that actualy sends the info…….at least that is how it is done here…..if you want to take out money in large sums… $4999……it does not get reported unless you do this same amount numerous times…..this really sucks.

        For example, the sig other and I like to go to Vegas….whether you take cash or send a wire, it is reported if it is a large amount Usually $10,000 gets attention… Vegas, if you use that for front money, it is best to draw on your account there amd just carry the cash home… is not reported….however, if you deposit large sums….the same scrutiny happens. All part of the Patriot Act……

        • Free country? Try police state, more and more each day.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          Ah hem there Sir. The Casinos REPORT all winning over some magic threshold to the State and to the IRS. Do not let them tell you otherwise.

          It is true, you can use your home account to get chips then cash in and carry it home and I do not think that is reported. But WINNINGS are reported.

          • Yes sir…I am well aware of that and I know the threshhold and the way it is reported. The largest thing that gets reported are the large slot machine winnings and cars…..on the tables, there is no reporting. None. If you are a rated player, the casino does keep tabs on you but not for reporting is for comps and freebies, which are never free if you lose. If you are playing on a tournament and you win, it is reported.

            Now you have to be careful where you gamble. One of the largest scams around are the Indian casinos. Most Indian casinos in this area, do not have the normal table games… craps. A lot of Indian Casinos will withold up to 25% of your winnings under the guise of sending it in to the IRS and then they do not send it in as there is no requirement to send it in. If you play the slots and you hit big, you will most likely be taxed immediately. But there is a real interesting aspect here……if you gamble and are not rated, then you really have no proof of losses. If you are rated and you hit it big but your rating also shows that you have gambled and lost the same amount……it is a wash……..and should not be reported. If you are a rated player, you can ask for your ratings and losses.

            Here is a copied post straight out of the requirements.

            “Generally, gambling winnings are reportable to the IRS if the amount paid is (a) $600 or more and (b) at least 300 times the amount of the wager. This requirement primarily applies to lotteries, sweepstakes and other big winnings from small bets. It does not apply to winnings from bingo, keno, and slot machines.

            Casinos report gambling winnings for these games to the IRS when a player wins $1,200 or more from a bingo game or slot machine or if the proceeds are $1,500 or more from a keno game. When you exceed these amounts, the casino may withhold taxes and will provide you with IRS Form W-2G. They keep the original and give you two copies of the form. (If state income tax withholding is required on gambling winnings in your state, additional taxes may be withheld.)

            The rules are different for table games (such as blackjack, baccarat, craps, roulette or other spinning wheel games.) Since Nevada casinos do not know the amount you started with, they are not able to determine how much you won (…your taxable gain.) As a result, federal law provides that there is no withholding or even reporting of table game wins to the IRS. It therefore follows that table game winners probably do not report their gambling profits to the IRS.

            I do nothing but play craps, when I play seriously. I am a rated player which means I want the casino to keep track of me. Since craps winnings are not reportable, I want to be rated for comps. I am pretty good at craps because I am good at math and craps is played on odds. But being good at math is not the only thing because the game moves really fast…and you have to ready to challenge the table because they even make mistakes when calulating the odds. The secret to winning at craps is knowing when to quit because if you hit it hot and you keep going, the odds will bite you in the ass. Craps moves fast and quick but can be very profitable. I rarely lose in craps….never hit for 6 figure dollars but when I figured it up last time I was in Vegas over a three day period, I spent about 4 total hours on the craps table and won $6500…..that figures out to $1625 per hour. But that is not betting $5 at a time, None of that was reported to the IRS by me or the casino. In addition, I was comped on all meals and rooms and show tickets. I am also not a high roller, as they call it. My average bet on the table at anyone time is usually around $125 spread over 7 numbers per roll and always on the odds. I never bet against another player and I never bet on the come line. I never bet the sucker bets where you see the odds are 30 to 1….there is a reason they are that high. THe high roller average bets are usually $1500 spread over the numbers for each roll. They get a lot of attention because the color of their chips….high denominations. I like to stay below the radar. I do not get the same comps they get….Limos, Penthouses, personal valets, etc……but I get food, rooms, and show tickets.

            So, JAC….being in Idaho, you are not that far away….want to meet me there in about three weeks? We go out there three to four times a year. The sig other and I like to go to Red Rock and climb….we like to go to the Valley of Fire and explore…we like to go to Mt Charleston and the observatory….this next time we are planning on a trip to Palm Springs by car. I will not fly a private plane anywhere in California….the landing fees are exorbitant and it is the only state in the union where landing fees are mandatory to general aviation. So everyone flies to vegas and drives to Palm Springs. I can get your meals and room and tickets for free…..

        • Thank you for your comments. About what I expected from this group. Tell the truth about the blackmail and let the chips fall.

          I do have one other question though. What is this “Lying to the FBI” shit? Are you under oath? Is this the inquisition? Every two bit hood lies to the authorities when he is caught. What law makes the FBI so special that if you lie (or they say you lie) you can be prosecuted and sent to prison.

          My one experience being a witness in a federal prosecution for the defense involved me telling the truth (under oath) and explaining a very complicated series of government programs to a young and not very bright Federal Prosecutor. He had absolutely no clue about what I was talking about but tried all his tricks to call me a liar in everything but name. Could I have been charged because of his interpretation?

          • Lying to the FBI…..One is protected from incriminating oneself, what is the difference if one lies or remains silent? If I see a crime, I don’t have to claim I saw it, nor do I have to discuss it. Seems like Haslert may have a good defense.

            • Again, exactly when did this “lying to the FBI” become a crime. Was it so in J. Edgar’s day? or is this something new they cooked up to go along with entrapment done under the Patriot Acts.

          • When asked about what would happen if the Patriot Act expired, Richard Clarke says the FBI could obey Fourth Amendment as temporary stop-gap measure.

            Yesterday, ABC News ran the headline, “NSA Domestic Surveillance Program ‘Likely’ to Expire Tonight, Former Counterterrorism Official Says.”

            The former counterterrorism official was Richard Clarke. He served as the counterterrorism “czar” under Bill Clinton and then continued until 2003 under the Bush Administration. He made his remarks to George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s “This Week.”

            “What I think will likely happen tonight is the law will expire,” Richard Clarke said Sunday morning. “And then later in the week, the USA Freedom Act, which is essentially the same as the PATRIOT Act with the exception of the telephony metadata program, that act will pass and most of the authorities will be restored.”

            Though the White House says even a temporary lapse in the NSA’s authority could affect national security, Clarke says it’s unlikely to endanger Americans.

            “It probably is not as big a deal as the president is making out,” he said, noting that the FBI can use other tools, like warrants, in the interim.

            “We’re likely to be faced with only a few days where the FBI won’t have a handful of tools that, frankly, they don’t often use,” said Clarke, who in 2013 recommended that the Obama administration end bulk metadata collection.

            Was Clarke being sarcastic? Possibly, since he has advocated that the NSA’s program be scrapped.

            But nothing in the text of the story gives you any hint that he was being sarcastic. Also, the incredible quote isn’t his own words but is a summary written by the journalist. We are supposed to take it completely seriously when we read that, “the FBI can use other tools, like warrants, in the interim.”

            So what is the writer telling us?

            In his summary of Clarke’s statement, he is saying that the FBI can temporarily revert to following the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as a stop-gap measure until some new affront to the founding law of the land is devised.

            Warrants in the interim. You can’t make this stuff up.


            This is the entire article with link. Thought it was rather ironic 😀

            • @D13, I posted this in the wrong spot, LOL.

              @SK, what is totally hypocritical is that the FBI can lie to a person to get a confession. Example, your wife already told us the truth……when in fact she had done no such thing. Best thing to do with them, say nothing and ask for a lawyer.

  4. Just A Citizen says:

    Oh, more irony or is it hypocrisy.

    Local and State Govt’s pass laws that REQUIRE a baker to make a cake for a Gay Wedding and to serve ANYONE who comes in the door.

    EXCEPT……… those who carry guns LEGALLY per the laws of the same town/state.

    Your Private Property Rights and your Right to Association is enforced when it comes to gun toting citizens, but NOT for others, no matter how much you disagree with their other “behavior”.

  5. Wow…..just saw an interview where some stats came out….. this country is more violent than 8 years ago, has greater poverty than 8 years ago, more people io public assisstance than 8 years ago, more people unemployed than 8 years ago….and the one that is his signature legislation……more people not on health insurance than 8 years ago, Over 32 million now and climbing.

    • Liberal Democrat policies are a complete failure and have been for decades. Why people want them is because they are simply brainwashed by the propaganda they are fed (and lied too) on a daily basis. The Left Wing must LIE to achieve any political gain, because any half wit can figure out what a bad thing their policies are. The TPP scares the hell out of me, I hope I’m wrong!

    • All by design, Colonel. All by design. There are more ways to wage war on a country besides bullets and explosives. And the grand finale is yet to come…

  6. Some more stats from the WSJ…….Gun violence is climbing at astronomical rates and it is not because there are more guns…..this rise in violence is marking the end of a 20 year national decline. St Louis reports that shootings are up 39%. robberies by 43%, and homicides by 25%. Baltimore is reporting gun violence up by 60% over last year with 32 shootings over the Memorial Day weekend.

    Homicides are up by 180% over last year. Atlanta reports murders up by 32%. Chicago homicides are up17% and shootings 24%. New York is reporting murder rate rise of 13% and gun violence up 7%. Violent felonies are up 25% in Los Angeles. One of the largest increases is New York’s East Harlem Precinct with shootings up over 500%.

    In looking for a common denominator…..these are all black neighborhoods and it is 98% black on black crime says the WSJ. Police chiefs are saying that the administrations fixation that law enforcement in black communities is infected by bias, Eric Holder refuses to believe that the crime is black on black because that does not show bias which is what this administration wants to show. This phenomenon is call the Ferguson effect.

    The minute New York scrapped the “stop, question,and frisk” program, the shootings escalated are still doing so….the program was stopped because of the perception of racial bias. The WSJ reports that the statistics are proving that it was not racial bias because the crime that is increasing is black on black.

    All police chiefs are reporting that officers are simply not going to put themselves into dangerous situations because everytime that a shooting occurs or a policeman arrests a black on the street, it draws crowds. Routine traffic stops are drawing violent crowds if they are black. The WSJ reports that the “black lives matter” movement could easily be blamed for this….so when the activists mayors put the reins on police…..the crime sky rockets. New York is changing its policy to a philosophy of “broken windows” policing where police are going to target low level crimes public offenses.

    With the media hyping everything for its ratings, all the police chiefs are in agreement that the gains over the last 20 years will be lost in one year…which is being proven. It is obvious that hard policing of crime ridden neighborhoods was functional and having results….pulling out of the neighborhoods and changing the policing policies…..the streets are going to run red, so says New Yorks Commissioner William Bratton.

    THere is a direct link to lack on black crime because in all of the cities that have been listed are where the police have backed off and the crime is in the black neighborhoods. So, how do you stop it now?

  7. There are just some things that actually happen, it should be shared. This happens to be about the super duper education system than seems to be led by the Left (ROFLMAO) :

  8. Just A Citizen says:

    The fact that there is a debate over the appropriateness of reading a sexually explicit poem to a “High School” class shows how deep the sickness is running among us.

    Hint for the “progressive/liberal/moral relativists”: College is NOT High School. Take this stuff to college where everyone is at least of adult age.

    • I’m not sure this stuff even belongs in college. There is a difference between x rated porn and poems about sexual experiences. The fact that this particular poem is about a homosexual experience isn’t the point, it is the Excuse for allowing smut that they wouldn’t allow on any other basis. I’m gonna post the whole poem to make my point but it isn’t anything I would encourage anyone to read and I sure wouldn’t call it poetry.

  9. Just A Citizen says:

    Interesting. Like the author said, it was Manhatten. “think of your President before you vote”. Wow, what kind of debate argument is that?? Says a lot doesn’t it!

  10. We have heard the “Official” story of the Waco Biker club shootout, now for some not so official stuff.

    Frankly, it would not surprise me in the least that not ONE bullet from a bikers gun killed anyone.

  11. Just A Citizen says:

    This was not about discrimination and I doubt very much she was in “tears” over her embarrassment. At least not until the other passenger lashed out at her. Then maybe.

    I used to fly a lot. Never saw an “un-opened” container given to a passenger. They did not want carbonated beverage spewing around the cabin.

    Sounds to me like just another pain in the arss person with “hygiene” issues or “entitlement” issues making things hard on a flight attendant. She just happened to be Muslim. So now we get subjected to the Islamophobe rant.

  12. Money rules, once again proving that voting is a joke:

    When this super secret trade deal gets done and this country is screwed even worse than now, I hope some of you wake up to the TOTAL corruption in DC.


    Rather comical and a good idea! Although I don’t have any expectation of privacy, unless it’s claimed to be protected (like buying things, paying bills etc).. I don’t think the feds should be saving phone calls/text messages without a warrant, on an individual basis. What used to be called HIPPA is a joke under Obamacare, and this includes your bank information. If you think this is OK because you have nothing to hide, you are sadly mistaken, just ask those who have been targeted by the IRS for their political views. What’s next? Get ready for the next election for most. What a sad joke.

  14. The Senate let the NSA spying programs lapse (which doesn’t mean that they are not still happening) and the media is freaking out about how dangerous the US just became. I have one word for them (especially the RINO’s at FOX), GARLAND!

    If they want to spy, profile! There is no need to collect the amount of data that they are collecting. If Garland doesn’t show that the program is a failure and needs ended anyway, what will? Unless they get off by reading the text messages of little girls hitting puberty, it’s time to have a program that is specific to the threat. Anita and VH are not threats. Just another example of wasted money.

  15. G Man…there are still some provisions of the Patriot Act left intact. If you read the media, it sounds like the whole Patriot Act is gone and abolished….it is not. There are several sunset dates in the act…the one you are talking about is jujst the collection of data.

    • Yes Sir, there were 3 provisions that lapsed yesterday. I would like to add another reminder that the bulk data collection is a failure and probably isn’t being used as intended, that would be the Boston Marathon bombing. AS far as how the bulk info is actually being used, while only a hunch on my part, is for political purposes. I have a feeling that somewhere down the road, there will be people who suffer from politically motivated attacks that are the result of this data collection. Just a hunch though, it’s not a conspiracy theory at this time 🙂

      • LOL…..I am sure that you are familiar with Fort Huachuca..the military intelligence gathering Center, which includes SETA. I don’t know if you remember when I spent some time out there recently looking and learning how the intercepts work because we wanted to see how that would relate to the Texas border. Here are my observations:

        1) The NSA receives the bulk of its data from this location..
        2) There was no “eavesdropping” going on…I saw the entire data gathering area.
        3) Voice prints are being used.,,,and are very effective at stopping a lot of things at the border.
        4) It takes a court order for anything other than known voice prints of drug dealers, terrorists sites, and Interpol suspects.
        5) all this data collection is immediately encrypted and computers try to match voice prints of know bad guys.
        6) there are approximately 700,000 voice prints being compared every MINUTE.
        7) Once a voice print is matched to a known bad guy, this is sent immediately to the NSA with triangulation location GPS coordinates. ( I do not know what happens afer that )

        Note: The voice prints are being compared not stored. However, the tracking that is stored are the voice prints of known bad guys,,,,,but here is an issue. The bad guys know this so they use what is termed “burners”. Use a cell phone once and throw it away. But it does not matter, the voice matching still usually catches them. THen they can start a track of the bad guys even though they are using burners.

        I really do not have a heart burn with this..perhaps you could clue me in on why you would not support this type of data collection.

        • ..perhaps you could clue me in on why you would not support this type of data collection.

          I sure can! Because the “bad guy” has a recent habit of changing, when it comes to the actions of Federal agencies, e.g., the IRS and the DOJ. Let us not forget that the DHS has a nice little list of who they consider homegrown terrorist’s (or who could be). Examples would be veterans, 2nd Amendment supporters, Ron Paul supporters and on and on (this would also include references to Christians).

          As you said, what you were shown was how cell phones are used to track the “bad guys”. Do you really think they are going to tell you everything they do? Back to the bad guy thingy. I’m a firm believer we have the Bill of Rights for a reason. The 4th Amendment is quite clear on the need for a warrant. A person should be secure in his person and papers (in this case a cell phone). Wiretapping requires a warrant. Tracking people, bad or not, via “their” property, without their permission is an invasion of their privacy (it seems the courts have agreed recently) without having a warrant issued.

          My point, follow the law, namely the 4th Amendment and if the feds or the cops want to spy on people, get a warrant. Once a warrant is issued, then spy away 🙂

          • Also. They will keep doing it, with or without the Patriot Act. The only difference is that what they get can’t be used in court, BFD! The whole “drama” is just more MSM nonsense to keep the sheople stupid.

          • The phones are private….but the airways or not. There is no expectation of privacy on the air. ( Do not get me wrong here..I agree on wire taps..)…but airwaves….how do you claim that there is an expectation of privacy…I cannot come up with a valid argument.

            • I could see your point, when using a CB radio or a walkie talkie. But a cell phone should be, under the law, to be no different than a landline, when looking at privacy issues. I have a phone number, exactly like a landline (with an area code) and I’m calling another person, also with a phone number and area code, exactly like a landline. If I recall back (way back), when party lines were in use, there was no expectation of privacy, and that changed when phone numbers were given to individuals (or address’s). Why shouldn’t the same laws apply to cell phone numbers as they do to land line numbers? Why should better technology result in a loss of privacy?

              Of all organizations, it’s the government’s number one job to protect the Rights of the people. Suspicionless, excessive spying is the polar opposite. If they want to listen to a phone call, record a phone call, landline or otherwise, they should require a warrant. Personal privacy trumps bulk data gathering.

              Let me add, that they are also collecting text messages, not just voice calls. There is much more to how we are being watched and spied on. If the powers that be feel I’m breaking a law (which is unlikely), then they should be required to get a warrant to collect any data that passes through my property. My cell phone is my property, just as my home is. If they want to know what is inside, or passes through, get a warrant.

              • One more note. Just because communication’s can be intercepted with other technology, doesn’t mean it should be used to violate ones privacy. Just because we now have drones with very good cameras, that doesn’t meant they can take pictures in my window from ten miles away.

              • If they are getting text messages, it is not through Ft Huachuca…cell phones operate on frequencies…you cannot isolate one frequency. Just like police scanners….or tying into the air traffic control towers to listen, or listening in on fire calls…..same thing.

              • It is my understanding that the NSA has asked an is receiving bulk emails through the providers. Regardless, privacy should trump simplicity. I’m not against the proper use of warrants (and even that has been abused), but we as people have the Right to be free of government spying. If it isn’t stopped, it will be turned against the people, just as the IRS has acted, for political reason’s. It is the inevitable direction of government. Metadata collection is the actions of a police state, not a free state.

              • I posted this above by accident:

                When asked about what would happen if the Patriot Act expired, Richard Clarke says the FBI could obey Fourth Amendment as temporary stop-gap measure.

                Yesterday, ABC News ran the headline, “NSA Domestic Surveillance Program ‘Likely’ to Expire Tonight, Former Counterterrorism Official Says.”

                The former counterterrorism official was Richard Clarke. He served as the counterterrorism “czar” under Bill Clinton and then continued until 2003 under the Bush Administration. He made his remarks to George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s “This Week.”

                “What I think will likely happen tonight is the law will expire,” Richard Clarke said Sunday morning. “And then later in the week, the USA Freedom Act, which is essentially the same as the PATRIOT Act with the exception of the telephony metadata program, that act will pass and most of the authorities will be restored.”

                Though the White House says even a temporary lapse in the NSA’s authority could affect national security, Clarke says it’s unlikely to endanger Americans.

                “It probably is not as big a deal as the president is making out,” he said, noting that the FBI can use other tools, like warrants, in the interim.

                “We’re likely to be faced with only a few days where the FBI won’t have a handful of tools that, frankly, they don’t often use,” said Clarke, who in 2013 recommended that the Obama administration end bulk metadata collection.

                Was Clarke being sarcastic? Possibly, since he has advocated that the NSA’s program be scrapped.

                But nothing in the text of the story gives you any hint that he was being sarcastic. Also, the incredible quote isn’t his own words but is a summary written by the journalist. We are supposed to take it completely seriously when we read that, “the FBI can use other tools, like warrants, in the interim.”

                So what is the writer telling us?

                In his summary of Clarke’s statement, he is saying that the FBI can temporarily revert to following the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as a stop-gap measure until some new affront to the founding law of the land is devised.

                Warrants in the interim. You can’t make this stuff up.


                This is the entire article with link. Thought it was rather ironic 😀

  16. Obama Tells Senior UN Official “The United States Will be a Muslim Country by 2016″

    • So I guess when the fuel screws up one’s motor, we can sue the EPA ?

      • Good luck with that… I see this as large scale government paying someone to dig a hole. Then they pay someone else to fill it in. Ethanol has been shown to be a net zero energy gain. No reduction in emissions. Increases food costs. Now requires importing corn to meet mandates. This is a tax everyone pays every time they buy gas or any consumer product. At least, everyone in America and most of Europe. We “progressive” countries that are fighting global warming. So it’s also almost a subsidy to China…..

  17. The socialist and fascist war against economic reality continues, but those laws always win. Fools who believe modern politicians—of either major Party—always lose.


  18. Black America has been used since the events of Ferguson, Missouri, to manipulate local law enforcement into pulling back from inner cities and other crime-ridden, largely black, communities in order to create a national crime wave.

    The cynic in me thinks this is not just some random stupidity by the Left but an actual plan.

    These sorts of conspiracies — yes, conspiracies do exist, media and official denials notwithstanding — always have a goal that is not immediately clear from the events and often may seem to be the opposite of actual results.

    That’s because the Left works from Marx’s model of thesis-antithesis-synthesis. Apply that to the events that have grown out of Ferguson.

    If the notion that blacks are oppressed and abused by local police is the thesis, then pulling back police from those communities is the antithesis. Obviously, this creates an unsustainable situation as the result is soaring crime. (In the overall picture, you have to figure in the collapse of our southern border and the wave of criminals and possibly terrorists crossing it daily, but let’s just talk about the Ferguson fallout for now.)

    The “synthesis” then would be to bring in federal, not local, law enforcement to police our cities. We’ve seen this already as the Department of Justice has begun getting court orders and using other legal maneuvers to take over control of the Ferguson and other local law enforcement agencies around the country.


    This is becoming an interesting situation. Will the Feds take over these police departments? Will this give the gun grabbers more ammo for gun control? (this one don’t matter because most of us will tell them to pound sand), With these events and more riots expected by many over the summer, is this the plan to implement a true police state? Why can’t blacks stop killing each other at such a high rate as compared to other racial statistics.

    @Buck. What’s your view on all of this?

  19. Conservatives will LOVE this classic clip of Wayne shutting down Claudette Colbert’s false notions of the proper role of government. Watch and listen (below) as Wayne explains in Without Reservations about who succeeded in America, and why liberty is always better than government control. This is an EPIC lecture that should be taught in school to our children:

    There was none better than the “Duke” 🙂

  20. In partial answer to my own question about “lying to the FBI” as a crime.

    Then they got around the Fifth amendment. If I read the brief synopsis of the case in question, the FBI, already knowing the party was guilty and having the evidence questioned him for the sole purpose of making him lie so that they could add another charge. The Supremes, 7 to 2 went along with this!

    I am glad I testified in ’91!

    • Just A Citizen says:


      I am a little surprised you were unaware of this.

      It is why you are told to NEVER answer ANY QUESTIONS by law enforcement.

      What you say can and will be held against you……….. no matter when you said it of if you were Mirandized.

      Now to a key point. Why are not the “prosecutors” and the “federal agents” held to the same standard? Legally speaking they are supposed to be but in practice we know they withhold and even distort factual information.

      • Must admit came as a bit of a shocker to me. I guess you can’t know everything and even when you do come up with interesting stuff, people tend to think you made it up. I’ve never been one of those, I like to know stuff.

        My latest attempt to ‘splain things is “Bi-bilingualism” in the US. A self-inflicrted wound if ever there was one without even any calls being made for it at the time (1965). I know the NY City details. With a heavy Hispanic population who assimilated almost as fast as they arrived within a generation they all spoke English and if you arrived as a kid, you spoke it through “immersion” by the end of your first year in school.

        The Colonel being a year younger than I probably could tell me how things were in Texas in the ’50’s and ’60’s. Were there any calls for two languages or did Mexican immigrants learn English like their Puerto-Rican NY counterparts? Was there ever a need other than to keep us politically divided?

        I can understand the Canadians because of the thick headed French and the Quebec separatist movement but we never offered it in Louisiana to the Cajuns.

        • There was no call for bilingual at all….none… a matter of fact, the languages that were pushed were Spanish (Castillian, the formal Spanish). I am pretty fluent in Castellano Spanish….but this crap down here is mostly informal TexMex……..then came German as there is a large German population here, and French….who knows why. As a further fact nothing was written in bilingual until well into the 80’s……now, political correctness has taken over….

          I do have some fun using the Castillian Dialect……drives the Mexicans crazy.

          • My limited Castillian Spanish always got me admiring comments from the Dominican ladies in Washington Heights!

            Thank you for the info. The bi-lingual mess comes out of that ’65 immigration bill. Hard to imagine it was anything other than political. Same theory as legalizing the illegals, balkanize the place, divide and conquer, and the party offering the most goodies gets the votes.

            As I put forward MY immigration ideas which involve legal status only, no path to citizenship, I get blank stares like I am speaking Urdu or something. I think this is on purpose. Pretend you do not hear ANY rational discourse and the yours is the only viable and “fair” idea.

  21. Just A Citizen says:

    Re; the Patriot Act expiration.

    Here is the big question at the moment. What is the impact on Rand Paul’s candidacy???

    Will this cause it to thrive or did he just commit political suicide?

    How will WE the People react to this man who exhibited HONOR in his actions??

    I will tell you this. On all the lefty sites they are patting him on the back while trashing him. The basic response runs like this: “I have to agree with him but he is a Republican and therefore I will still vote for Hillary”.

    So if you have a problem with the outcome of elections in this country maybe the problem is not corporate money or corrupt politicians. Maybe the problem is the American voter.

    • Hurting Rand Paul? I think the primaries are so far off that it won’t hurt him a bit, UNLESS, something happens that can be attributed to his actions. It’s one of the few times I can say a politician showed some honor. In that I can agree! 🙂

      The problem with elections is people vote for corrupt politicians. To have one or two honorable politicians by no way makes this government any less corrupt.

      Let’s not fool ourselves, the courts have already ruled the metadata issue illegal and now it has expired. Anyone want to bet they are still doing it? And will continue?

      I’m still betting that it will be Bush v. Clinton. Unless Hitllary gets thrown under the bus and Obama orders an investigation under the RICO Act, she will be the Democrats choice. A lot of people will believe Paul made them less secure. That’s what the MSM is spewing.

    • Rand Paul is dead….

      • Dead why?

        Seems to me the Patriot Act failed to protect us from the attack in Boston, Ft. Hood, a car bomb that failed to detonate in Time Square? Supposedly all officials questioned say there in not a single instance it has been the resource that foiled any planned attack. And yet everyone in our government insists we HAVE TO HAVE IT. Why? If it doesn’t work, why have it? And remember the only issue here is domestic spying, not foreign. The NSA is still free to spy on friends and enemies. Obama can kill whoever he wants with his drones as long as it’s not here. If they have a suspect, they can still get a warrant and obtain the information from the phone or internet companies.

        And I wonder if any of the Homeland Security agencies are any different than the TSA? Failure after failure and they can insist only they can and are keeping us safe….

        • All that was asked….what did people think his chances were…….my opinion is that he will get no further…….nobody that I know likes him….I do not think he is Presidential even though he has some pretty good points.

          But what the hell…I did not think Obama was Presidential either……he proved me right. Rand does not represent the Tea Party but media is labeling him and that will be the death-nell…….now, to me…I perceive him to be a really loose canon.

        • Correct! Let us not also forget that the vast majority of plots they have foiled like my friends up here, the Fort Dix Six were all entrapment. Personally I think Paul will inspire the youth. You are all however correct about him being so 180 degrees to the rest of the party that they will do almost anything to sabotage him.

          Revisiting the ’64 race, While Goldwater had strong backing in the South and West the election was lost by the establishment , Romney, Scranton, Rockefeller and their cohorts. Goldwater may have been right when he said that in no case was the country ready for a third president in less than two years but the damage those guys did was incalculable. In my own case, four years later, I supported Nixon not necessarily because I knew much about him but because he had stayed out of the bash Goldwater melee. That was a mistake. (not for Watergate but for the EPA, DOE etc.)

      • Just A Citizen says:


        You are almost certainly correct. Not that I wish it were true, only that it is true.

        There are simply to many “hawks” and “leftists” in the Republican party for him to get the nomination.

        And to many “progressives” in the Dem Party for him to win the general. They will never forgive him for pointing out the Unconstitutionality of the Civil Rights Act provisions forcing private businesses to serve “protected classes”.

        I am not sure what you mean by he is “not” Tea Party. But if that means a true “libertarian” type I would agree as well.

        I disagree with you on him being a “loose cannon”. I think he is far more predictable than all the other candidates and best fits the very arguments we have made here on SUFA.

        One other agreement. He does not “project” that “presidential timber”. But then many don’t until they sit in the big chair.

        I think Paul would be the best choice as a “transition” from the old Progressivism/Activism to a more Constitutionally grounded future.

        • By loose canon, I actually see him doing the same thing that Obama does with exec orders…he is so wired into the libertarian mantra… Obama is wired into the leftist mantra.

          • Somebody should probably ask him that question. He comes across as a Constitutionalist so I really would be surprised if he followed that route.

            What is your take, people, on Jim Webb?

            • Just A Citizen says:

              I think Webb has serious chance if he could get to the General.

              Need to hear more from him before I go further than that.

  22. Just A Citizen says:

    SCOTUS has one again decided that we “must” accommodate other’s “religion” whether it fits our business model or not. In this case the wearing of a head scarf.

    I have over time come to believe Justice Thomas may be the ONLY one in that group who has his principles in tact and can defend them consistently. The one they ridicule the most may be the brightest bulb in the lamp.

    Here is his “SINGLE” dissent, in part:

    “JUSTICE THOMAS, concurring in part and dissenting in part.
    I agree with the Court that there are two—and only two—causes of action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as understood by our precedents: a disparate-treatment (or intentional-discrimination) claim and a disparate-impact claim. Ante, at 3. Our agreement ends there. Unlike the majority, I adhere to what I had thought before today was an undisputed proposition: Mere application of a neutral policy cannot constitute “intentional discrimination.” Because the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) can prevail here only if Abercrombie engaged in intentional discrimination, and because Abercrombie’s application of its neutral Look Policy does not meet that description, I would affirm the judgment of the Tenth Circuit.
    I This case turns on whether Abercrombie’s conduct constituted “intentional discrimination” within the meaning of 42 U. S. C. §1981a(a)(1). That provision allows a Title VII plaintiff to “recover compensatory and punitive damages” only against an employer “who engaged in unlawful intentional discrimination (not an employment
    Opinion of THOMAS, J.
    practice that is unlawful because of its disparate impact).”The damages award EEOC obtained against Abercrombieis thus proper only if that company engaged in “intentional discrimination”—as opposed to “an employment practice that is unlawful because of its disparate impact”—within the meaning of §1981a(a)(1).
    The terms “intentional discrimination” and “disparate impact” have settled meanings in federal employment discrimination law. “[I]ntentional discrimination . . .occur[s] where an employer has treated a particular person less favorably than others because of a protected trait.” Ricci v. De Stefano, 557 U. S. 557, 577 (2009) (internal quotation marks and alteration omitted).“[D]isparate-impact claims,” by contrast, “involve employment practices that are facially neutral in their treatment of different groups but that in fact fall more harshly on one group than another and cannot be justified by business necessity.” Raytheon Co. v. Hernandez, 540
    U. S. 44, 52 (2003) (internal quotation marks omitted).Conceived by this Court in Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401
    U. S. 424 (1971), this “theory of discrimination” provides that “a facially neutral employment practice may be deemed illegally discriminatory without evidence of the employer’s subjective intent to discriminate that is required in a disparate-treatment case,” Raytheon, supra, at 52–53 (internal quotation marks and alteration omitted).
    I would hold that Abercrombie’s conduct did not constitute “intentional discrimination.” Abercrombie refused to create an exception to its neutral Look Policy for Samantha Elauf ’s religious practice of wearing a headscarf. Ante, at 2. In doing so, it did not treat religious practices less favorably than similar secular practices, but instead remained neutral with regard to religious practices. To be sure, the effects of Abercrombie’s neutral Look Policy, absent an accommodation, fall more harshly on those who wear headscarves as an aspect of their faith. But that is a……………… “

    • Just A Citizen says:

      More on the problem with We the People. Read the numerous comments on this case at HuffPo. Notice how virtually NOBODY has a grasp on the legal issue, let alone the ethical issue relative to “govt. law” trying to thread a needle on “discrimination”.

      There are days when the BF seeps into my brain, thinking all is hopeless. Just for a moment. And this is one of those moments.

      Along these same lines, I watched Glenn Beck the other evening visiting with a bunch of millennials on the issues of the day and what “their” beliefs are. Unfortunately Beck decided to do more “teaching” and not enough listening. But there was moment I found most disconcerting, although not surprising.

      Beck asked them about the difference between our “national interests” and “our principles”. As part of that he asked “WHAT are our principles”?? ARE there some key principles on which the country was founded and if so what are they.

      I did not hear a defensible opinion from any of the youngsters. Many did in fact cite “interests” that are taught in our schools. There was ONE person who attends SMU, in Texas, that gave solid answers to history and other things, but even he struggled with this one.

      Beck led this discussion into a conclusion that the US is violating its principles when we form Alliances with and support countries like Saudi Arabia. Per him, we share “principles” with Israel but we have “interests” with these other countries. Pursuing these interests cause us to violate our principles. Such as individual freedom, liberty, free speech, freedom to practice our religion, etc.

      I think he misses in many places but he is one of the few who at least is asking questions in the right places.

      Oh, almost forgot this one for SK. He “accurately” pointed out that Teddy Roosevelt and the “Progressives” were the first to completely replace principles with National Interest in American foreign policy. Since that time academics never ask about the core values, only whether some policy is “truly” in our “National Interest”. Thus you could argue that invading the Middle East and actually TAKING those countries would be in our “National Interest” in the long term. That is if we could hold onto it.

      Add to that the ethic of Altruism and you get the possibility that the loss of hundreds of thousands of Americans to take and hold the Middle East under our control is a “reasonable sacrifice” for “the greater good in the long run”.

      Just a little food for the brain cells this fine morning.

      • Our “national Interests” are just manifest destiny on steroids!

        I suspect everybody should have just sat back after the Spanish American War and analyzed what we had just done. If the same logic had been in place after the Mexican war, the former Mexico would now be an English speaking place and we would have about five or six additional US States.

  23. Obama touts that center to his legacy is how much the world now likes the United States…..Really? Just more proof that his head is up his ass.

    • Saw him today. In the past week I have seen Dem propaganda on the 130 million who now have health care because of Obamacare. There have also been pieces released on how little fraud there has been with Foodstamps (the Govt. claims 1%).

      The stats are out of his Ass. Does this man remind you of the guy (nameless) in the bunker in Berlin in ’45 waiting for the mythical Ninth Army to come save him?

      There was a cute TV series on when my kids were young by Jim Henson using dinosaur hand puppets. It was modern problems couched back in the old days by dinosaurs who lived and dressed like us. The Dad, kind of a Ralph Kramden/ Archie Bunker mix worked for a company. They would often do stupid things. The name of the company, prominently displayed was BECAUSEWESAYSO. When our hero would ask why they were doing things the way they did, his supervisor would just point to the sign with the Company name on it. Our government has currently co-opted that name.

  24. Just A Citizen says:


    Wasn’t you that some time back suggested we would be better off with women running the place. Is this what you had in mind???

    I wonder what made them angry. That some men figured them out, that they didn’t want it public, or could they actually not recognize they are different.

    • Better issue a trigger warning with your sexist commentary, no need in them getting their brooms fired up.

      Guess I shoulda placed an adjective in my suggestion, Conservative women! We’ve been given so many titles that we wear them as a badge of honor.

      I’m liking what I’m hearing from Carly. She is taking it to Hillary without shame. There are many conservative women I could get behind. Malkin, Ingraham, Condoleeza, Pavlich, Love, Palin, Crowley, Monica not Candy. I’d roll my eyes at Michelle O, Reno, Dunham, DWS. Maddow, Jackson Lee.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        LOL………. I apologize for the lack of “trigger warning”. Just can’t get a handle on all this PC “stuff”.

        Having worked with women managers for years, including some “elected” types, I can’t find anything wrong with what the consultants were telling their audience.

        The truth apparently was very hurtful to those who “tote brooms”. 😉

        I also like Carly, always have. I felt she got the short end on the HP exit. Everyone called her merger a “stupid” move, yet it positioned HP for greater market share. The reality is that the HP “heirs” were out to get her and anything would have been a media feeding frenzy.

        They all wanted to target her “merger” deal while ignoring that she tried to reestablish HP as a leader in innovation and new product development. Which is what made HP so famous and desirable. Now they have fallen back to making printers in order to make money selling their “ink cartridges”.

        I also would give heavy consideration to Condi Rice. She is one very, very impressive person. One I would like to meet and spend some time discussing issues with.

  25. It never ceases to amaze me how the gun grabbers seem to lack credibility when on TV and having to quickly answer questions. Case in point, a guy from the Bloomberg gun grabbing group claimed that people can bypass background checks by buying from an online company. Talk about lying through his teeth, any halfwit 3rd grader knows that online purchases must be delivered to a person/company with a FFL at which time, guess what must occur before the licensed person/company releases the gun? Yep, you guessed it, conduct a background check as if you purchased the gun from the person/business with the FFL.

    Buck, are Left Wing gun grabbers just stupid, just liars, or both?

    • From the Brady Campaign website:

      “Currently, roughly 40 percent of gun purchases are not subject to a Brady background check. This includes guns sold online and at gun shows when sold through unlicensed sellers.”

      • The Brady campaign aren’t known for their honesty. Once again, read what I wrote above. NO guns purchased online can be directly delivered to the buyer, UNLESS they are FFL holders. I know this because I have done it and researched the law. As far as gun shows, FFL holders do background checks, others do not. What is the difference if one sells a gun at a gun show or a garage sale? I bought my pistol from a private owner. It’s never been used in a crime, because I’m the first and only person to ever fire it. Just for arguments sake, would you like to see the list of those who committed mass shootings who DID pass a background check? It’s lengthy and would likely surprise you. The background check law is a joke and doesn’t work. Criminals don’t go to gun shops to get their guns anyway, they steal them.

        • See my correction below. Private sales were not part of the claims made by the gun grabber on TV. He was specific in naming a legitimate business, which, will not send a weapon to an unlicensed person. Private sellers are exempt from such laws. However, it may only be me and those I know, but I wouldn’t buy a gun from anyone online, unless they are a legitimate business.

      • Just curious, but where did the Brady campaign get their info for their claim? I can answer for you, they made it up!

        • The claim that guns are bought online through unlicensed sellers is true, because for my entire lifetime, one could answer a newspaper add and buy a gun from a private seller. My point was buying from a legitimate business, as the idiot on TV stated. The online issue is a non-issue, when considering that private sales have been a part of Americana since it’s existence. There are so many laws concerning guns and such, I think it’s above 22,000 different laws on the books now, that should simply show the gun grabbers that laws don’t affect criminals, they only affect the law abiding citizens who follow the law.

          IN short, those of us who are law abiding citizens will no longer accept any more idiotic laws. NONE! We will not comply. This includes any new regulations that come out from this administration.

          • “My point was buying from a legitimate business, as the idiot on TV stated.”

            Calm down there G — I didn’t hear what the guy on TV said and you didn’t post the full quote or provide full context. All that was posted was you calling the guy either stupid or a liar for saying that online sales are subject to background checks.

            Not all online sales are, as you readily admit.

            • 🙂 I’m just soooo tired of the lies being spewed on TV, and I this includes stuff that FOX news people say. Last night I had some old Godzilla movies on TV (the Smithsonian Channel), and any more those movies have more truth to them than the garbage being said on TV News. I can’t even watch the Weather Channel anymore because of their idiocy. I miss the days of 3 channels, Walter Cronkite and honest journalism. Those old Godzilla movies were my favorites as a youngster, used to love when they came on during a cold Saturday afternoon. They were so cheesy, it makes me laugh today 😀

              • Walter Conkrite and honest journalism? Ever watch any of his shows on gun control? How about his reporting from Viet-nam? Regardless of whether it was right or wrong for us to be there, after Tet when their collective asses finally came out in the open and got severely kicked, the “most trusted man in America” said we lost!

                CBS was always hopeless, NBC not much better. ABC, the poor third with Howard K. Smith and Harry Reasoner usually got it right. Always liked those guys because when they had an opinion (like Smith on Gun Control) they called it “opinion” and not fact.

                Also ABC had the only two real reporters in the field during Viet-nam and they were there a long time. Ted Koppel and Jim Giggins.

      • For better or worse, we are mostly gun folk here. Since I retired, I have bought twenty or so rifles and pistols to fill out the collection I started at 15. Most, have been ordered online. ALL have been then picked up through a local licensed dealer (off duty cop). All have been done with a background check.

        The stat is very old, from the first year or two of the background check requirement and based on a 400 person sample without scientific basis.

        If you pay attention, you will also hear the following, “You are 16 times more likely to be killed or have a member of your family killed with a firearm purchased for home defense than using it to stop a criminal”. That little gem has been used by everyone from Teddy Kennedy to Michael Bloomberg to the CDC and has absolutely no, none, nada, basis in fact. It cannot even be traced. As they used to say, made up from whole cloth. Do the research if you doubt me.

        • Facts and reality don’t seem to fit the Liberal agenda. Let’s see, gun control, nope, facts don’t work, HMM, global warming, nope, facts don’t work there either. HMMM, Obama says we’re more respected now then when he took office……..BWAHAHAHAHA!

  26. The US Congress passed another bill condemning Russia and Putin. Now that’s pretty funny. The Clown from out of town and his minions are pretending to be rule makers in a world where they think they are king. They’ve constructed a “New World” Order” of money and power for the privileged few. The punks in public office continue to lie to themselves and their voters hoping Russia’s power and wealth will magically vanish through propaganda, terrorism and sanctions. The US eagle can poop everywhere but the Bear can still do whatever it wants.

    I am not speaking about the hard working conservative Americans who know there is a God in heaven. People who pray “Thy will be done” bowing in obedience to the Almighty. They carry the Word of God in their hearts. I am speaking about that brood of vipers in Washington who dare live in a city named after a great general, president and man of deep faith. The insanity comes from the politicians who sold their souls to the devil. Men and women who would never bow at Christ’s Holy Sepulcher like Putin did more than once.


  27. Buck! Don’t get left behind. It’s National Leave The Office Early Day. Run!

    • Not today….I’ll be here a bit later than most days unfortunately.

      But only because I’m meeting a friend after work for some drinks who gets out later than me…

  28. @Buck, The Group I was speaking of have a history of lies, Everytown for Gun Safety. here are two examples:

    This is typical of gun grabber groups, because facts don’t fit into their worldview and agenda.

    • Sadly its also very typical of pro-gun groups…

      • Example? I can throw up hundreds of articles of law abiding citizens defending themselves with their weapons (including an eleven year old girl, just recently reported). I can show FACTS that show crime drops when more people carry concealed (like where I reside). I can show crime statistics from those places that have the harshest gun restriction laws (Chicago being the best known). What lies Buck?

        • You’ve always been blind to the half-truths, outright lies, misused statistics, etc. employed by those you politically agree with…

          I don’t have time to go digging around and post link after link – from a quick google search:

          • Though I’m sure you’ll simply dismiss both out of hand due to the source…c’est la vie.

            • Out of respect, I read from both. I’m not a member of the NRA and don’t always agree with what they say. However, I have no doubt in my mind that if Obama could outlaw guns, he’d do it in a minute. He as much said that he was amazed he couldn’t get control laws on the books after Sandy Hook.

              I didn’t notice anything beyond political related stuff from the Factcheck site. The top was some claim that some Democrat knew Bloomberg when he said he didn’t, LOL. Like, who cares? It’s seems OK for politicians and those associated with campaigns and such to make claims that are lacking of truth. I think Harry Reid recently admitted so.

              I haven’t researched either site, if that helps, so I’m only going to guess they lean Left. Now, about those statistics………

              • “I have no doubt in my mind that if Obama could outlaw guns, he’d do it in a minute.”

                WHY? What support do you have for such a proposition? Absolutely nothing that he has done indicates that he has this as a goal/motivation.

                “Now, about those statistics………”

                I’ll try to find time later on to post some links to misused studies and statistics and the line by the pro-gun groups…

              • Sensless arguments……let the proof lie in the pudding, to coin a well used phrase…

                Use New York City as an example…..New Mayor and the dissolution of the stop and frisk:

                Result is an increase in shootings and homicide…East New York an immediate increase of 37%…in Brooklyn an immediate increase of 44%….directly tied to the elimination of stop and frisk…..pretty simple actually.

                A quick browse of the FBI stats….the cities with the toughest gun laws ( Chicago, Baltimore, Los Angeles )….facts speak for themselves…might as well stop arguing about it…

                The residents of East New YOrk and Brooklyn are asking the stop and frisk be resumed.

            • Australia, Canada, England. All English speaking all similar in many ways all have restrictive laws and have banned many types of formerly legal firearms.

              I’m the NYC expert. The difference between 1963 when I bought my first rifle in NYC (not a semi-automatic) and now is literally night and day. The first rifle I bought, a 1917 vintage Lee-Enfield bolt action is illegal today in NYC.

              The progressively tighter and tighter rules in NYC were incremental and seemed “reasonable” to the governing class yet some weapons like my old Lee- Enfield or the 110 year old Winchester or my pump action shotgun or the Remington .22 though never used in crime in NYC were include in the ban.For what purpose? You guess.


          • Just A Citizen says:


            How funny. The guy writing the article is also guilty of “lying” if you recognize deliberate ignorance of reality a lie.

            “For starters, the motto for this year’s convention was: “If they can ban one, they can ban them all.” So fear was the very slogan. Then, the NRA’s Executive Vice President and CEO Wayne LaPierre upped the fear factor by telling the attendees: “There’s no telling how far President Obama will go to dismantle our freedoms and reshape America into an America that you and I will not even recognize.” Now even assuming Obama wanted to somehow “dismantle our freedoms,” as LaPierre claims, how could Obama do that in the final 18 months of his presidency when the Republicans control the Senate, the House, and the Supreme Court?”

            I see this little trick used a lot on the lefty sites. Create the appearance that nothing can happen while ignoring how it is happening. In this case the author has selective amnesia about “executive orders” and the various efforts by agencies to use “rule making” to implement what they could not get Congress to pass. And yes, guns is one of those things they are trying to bypass Congress.

            • Didn’t we just go through this whole thing about green tipped .223 ammo that they wanted to just outright ban? The loud, persistent screaming stopped it.

              Don’t talk about lies on the NRA’s part at least to us old timers. We remember what was, what has been tried how it was thwarted and how it all comes back over and over again.

              I live in a peculiar state with laws that seem to be made up on the spot. I am required to travel with my firearms, rifles, pistols shotguns cased and locked in my trunk. I have two Minivans with no trunk!`I go to the range with the weapons encased behind the third seat knowing that what I am doing is in keeping with the spirit but not the letter of the law. Let’s see, my first minivan was in ’85 before that I had a ’79 station wagon. You would think by now the state would have addressed the issue wouldn’t you?

              • LOL….Stephen, we are not supposed to bring up history and how many times that it is a declared wish of democrats that all guns could be picked up. You and I have seen this many times.


    Lots of Gallup numbers worth noting. I wonder at which point will the people rise up and end this sad state of affairs?

    • Very sad state as the courts are packed with activist judges and when you use selective enforcement being done and activist DOJ…….it begs for mistrust.

  30. What I find really interesting, is browsing the internet on gun control laws. What I am finding out there is that the left wing sites are deliberately printing false facts. Especially something called WIKI HOW….

    Another example put out by the BRady foundation is a map that shows several states that do not require background checks from internet sales and personal sales at Gun Shows. It shows Texas as a State that does not require background checks and that is simply not true.

    Here are the rules for gun purchases at Texas Gun Shows:

    1) IF you arrive at a Texas Gun Show in Fort Worth and there are two every month and you have a conceal carry license, you will NOT be allowed to enter a Gun Show loaded. You will go to a table that has uniformed police officers sitting there and you must present your CCl and your magazine. No loaded weapons allowed. If your magazine is loaded, you have 2 choices…take the rounds to your car or the police will unload it and throw the rounds into a trash bin they control. You do not get the rounds back.

    2) If you wish to purchase a long gun ( rifle or shotgun to you yankees ), you must be 18 years of age, with a picture ID and the only ID’s acceptable are military, State driver’s license and/or pssport. Then you will fill out the proper background check forms, which include your SSN, and a background check will be performed. They will check your criminal background.

    3) If you wish to purchase a hand gun ( pistol to you yankees ), you must be 21 years of age and the same background requirements need to be met.

    4) The dealers DO NOT have to have an FFL to sell a weapon but I will guarantee you that to be a vendor, before you are allowed a spot, your background will be checked.

    5) If you are a just a private Joe Tentpeg, and you brought a couple of weapons with you and you wish to conduct a private sale while at the gun show, you can do that and there is NO background check made. Private sales are exempt. To this, I disagree with every ounce of my being. ( I know, Gman, you will not like this but it is how I feel ). There are too many other ways to sell a weapon privately without doing it on the show room floor.

    6) If you wish to purchase ammunition, there is no limit. Purchase all you want and there is no background check to purchase ammunition.

    7) Texas allows full-auto weapons, suppressors (silencers), and short barreled rifles and shotguns, but you have to have a Class III weapons permit…..To lawfully possess any NFA Firearm in Texas, you must meet certain Federal requirements (generally the same restrictions as when you purchase any other firearm, but with additional paperwork, money and an extensive National criminal background check). IT TAKES FOREVER for the ATF to approve your application to possess a NFA Firearm (8+ MONTHS). You also fill out different ATF paperwork (either ATF Form-1 or ATF Form-4) than a normal firearm purchase. And then there is the payment of either a $200 or AOW $5 Federal Excise Transfer Tax. Every time a NFA Firearm is transferred from one person to another or Dealer/Manufacturer to Individual, the $200/$5 tax must be paid– usually by the purchaser.

    • To this, I disagree with every ounce of my being. ( I know, Gman, you will not like this but it is how I feel ). There are too many other ways to sell a weapon privately without doing it on the show room floor.

      I’m not for or against the practice, kind of a free market thing to me. I don’t go to gun shows often, just not my thing I guess. Never bought a gun at one either. I have seen folks bring in their own, as you mentioned t, to trade or sell on the floor. Not the way I would sell, but whatever, I ignore them.

      AS for background checks, I don’t believe they work for the most part. Just more hoops to jump through that only affect law abiding citizens (what better way to know who has guns without actual registration). Criminals and killers will get guns no matter what dumb laws are put in place. So far, all the laws being suggested by the Left wing will only affect the law abiding and will have no affect on violent crime. The latest is a push to require liability insurance, which is totally stupid and unconstitutional. It would also require gun registration (much like expanded background checks the left want). I don’t need to say that I’m totally against both.

      There is no such thing as common sense gun safety laws. There is common sense gun safety. Love this picture:×300.jpg

      • I know G man….there is a fine line and a slippery slope argument to use as well and I understand both….but as I said above when talking about Texas guns shows and law…i get upset when sites that are anti gun deliberately print false stuff and I said which ones.

        I firmly believe in the addage that when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns…….and that goes to an over reaching government as well….which is what we have now….we have an outlaw government that prosecutes politically.

        But the semantics of gun control are useless….We are gun “toters” here just as a bunch of you up north,,,,but I think that one basic difference in Texas thinking is that it is a border state and gun running is an extremely lucrative business. So, I think that the proximity is a challenge and the fact that the Federal Government is not stopping the gun running business….it would be real easy to do. We, through our State Guard, have put a serious dent in it, but it is just switching to the west.

        It is real hard to convince anti gun people that our gun laws, while appearing very lax, are actually very good at tracking the criminal element.

    • Colonel, didn’t we reach consensus on this issue not too long ago?? I don’t recall precisely what we had agreed to though…and I don’t have the time to wade through the SUFA Archives in search!

  31. “Most of the concerns from the petitions I have read, is that they are worried about the kids seeing guns on the walls as they walk by our shop to the local 7-Eleven.

    You just can’t make this stuff up 🙄

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Progressive ideology at it’s finest. Sorry Buck, but your side is seriously screwed up in the head.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      I find this little tidbit very interesting: “Special needs students with behavioral issues were mainstreamed into regular classrooms, a position openly advocated by PEG.”

      This is an “old” concept. One that I, as a parent of a special needs child, had to fight AGAINST in public schools. Like all do gooder suggestions those proposing these changes never consider HOW to implement them and HOW to balance the goal with real life constraints, LIKE THE BUDGET.

      Put a bunch of special needs kids in a classroom and add ONE untrained Aid for the teacher. What do you get? Chaos and little teaching of the regular students.

      Mainstreaming these kids is a worthy goal. But it takes MAJOR MONEY to make it happen properly. Classrooms aren’t configured properly, staff are not trained properly, there are not enough staff…trained or otherwise.

      Of course the same can be said of those kids we consider “normal” but who do not thrive in the old classroom style of teaching.

      If I had been on the School Board I would have dismissed the entire proposal as bulldookey just based on the fact they were pushing mainstreaming the special needs kids. Lack of understanding in this key area is an indicator these arrogant academics are equally lacking when it comes to dealing with poor black kids from the inner cities.

      • But JAC-supposedly there were too many black children in those special classes-so of course they aren’t really necessary.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          Unfortunately that is probably true. When we moved to Montana our son was placed in a “separate” class instead of being “mainstreamed” like he was in Idaho. We soon discovered there were two classes of this type.

          One was for the severely disabled. Students required significant assistance in this class, especially physical accommodations.

          The other was a class mostly of students with maladaptive behavior problems. This is where most kids with Autism would fit. The problem was that the class was mostly filled with students who simply had anti social and other social/behavioral issues. Our son’s teacher told me that these kids did not really qualify for “special needs” programs but were being segregated in this way to keep order in the regular classroom. This created serious issues for our Son and others with real needs because they would mimic the bad behavior or in my Son’s case he would start yelling at the “bad” kids. You can imagine how that devolved!

          When in Idaho and Oregon these kids with no real mental handicap were offered “alternative schools”. These schools had entirely different classroom methods, less restrictive, and small class size. Many of these kids were able to complete their HS education via this method.

          “Alternative” schools cost money of course. They also require visionary and activist School administrations. One reason the schools were so messed up in Montana. At least the town where we lived.

          Back to the point. These “consultants” should have known about these other options. The irony that the self righteous from Progressive Town USA would simply shove those troubled kids back into the classroom. Sometimes I do wonder if their actions are born of ignorance and arrogance or if they are deliberately sabotaging the system. Most of the time I give them the benefit of the doubt and presume them misguided, but I do wonder at times.

          • I remember when I was in school they had classes for the low performing, regularly disruptive kids-I don’t know if that included students that really required special ed because back then there wasn’t much talk about these issues unless they were extreme enough to diagnose. Now they are diagnosing kids with all kinds of problems. But the separation didn’t seem to hurt anyone as far as I could tell. The kids in these classes interacted with everyone else in all other situations, most of them were quite popular-we all kinda liked the class clowns and the rebels. 🙂 And the kids I personally knew, graduated.

            • gmanfortruth says:

              V, we should all start asking why. Autism is on the rise, kids with ADD s and ADHD are also on the rise. I haven’t dug deep. But would bet these issues are more prevelant in urban areas. I have some thoughts on why that is, but it’s speculation until I can get some supporting science.

              • I think people are questioning it-everytime I turn around I’m being told some kid is bipolar or has some other problem-I believe many of them do have problems, many I see have obvious problems, so I take the idea seriously-but I worry that we as a society are maybe over diagnosing behavior problems as medical problems.

                But while you’re thinking about it-Think about this too:


              • It is a frigging scam!

                I can think back to many friends growing up who would fall into the “spectrum” today. They went to school like the rest of us, took their lumps and more or less survived some better than others.

                The education industrial complex wants everyone in special ed. They get to hire a whole lot more teachers, counselors and psychologists and build more buildings. We have a friend teaching who has five kids in her class and a full time aide. She draws well over $ 80,000 per annum and benefits.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          I should have read your new link first. While PEG is obviously everything I described above we have to lay the blame where it belongs. The SCHOOL DISTRICT.

          The district that contracted with this wingnut group has the authority to ignore their advice. So it would seem that those at the top are aligned mentally with those in PEG. Otherwise why would you upset the system that was addressing the behavioral/educational issues.

          So that leaves a new question. Is the district administration made up of people who believe this “white privilege” garbage or were they “shamed into accepting it” under the latest PC pressure.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          One last comment on something in the article. That of how “black kids” are held back because we teach under the structure of “white culture”.

          Back in my college days the debates over IQ tests were raging. The argument was that IQ tests were racist because they included many questions that were based on “white cultural” experiences.

          One of the examples the accusers used stuck with me all these years. This was an IQ test for younger children. It was a picture question involving a house in the winter. One of the choices had smoke coming from the chimney and the others did not. It was pointed out that most “black kids” did not pick the “correct” house. The argument was that Black Kids in the south did not grow up with chimneys in their house and would not have a cultural reference to draw from. Thus the question was “racist” in its nature.

          While there is merit in the point that selecting the correct picture was not a measure of IQ there was an obvious flaw in their argument. One I raised in the class where we were discussing this. In those days dissenting opinions were not ridiculed and my professor agreed with my argument. That was that if you looked at all “poor” kids from the “south” you would get an overwhelmingly consistent response. The “cultural” factor was not color but one of living in moderate climates and those living in poorer housing without fireplaces or wood stoves. Something I still find hard to believe since all the poor people I grew up with were heating their homes with wood and/or coal. But then I grew up where winters were real.

  32. Just A Citizen says:


    Would the “left” take guns away if allowed to? ABSOLUTELY. They have said so. While I agree that the NRA has become more inflammatory over the years the fact remains there has been truth in the “fear”.

    I also believe Mr. Obama would BAN guns outright if he could. But he can’t and he knows it. So he will do what he can while continuing the DNC practice of using “gun safety” as the dog whistle for “red necks want to kill you”.

    To say this is false because no Democrat has “proposed” such legislation is an absurd argument when looking to what their belief system is and how far they would go to carry it out.

    The only reason the “politicians” do not propose outright bans and confiscation, prior to Heller, is they know they would lose the next election, if not get recalled. They also know it would trigger a revolt. But if you hang around on some of these “Progressive” sites you will find a large number who actually look forward to such a revolt. They think they control the Army and Police. They want a shooting war with “teabaggers” and those “Rube Texans”. Why do you think these people think this would be a positive thing?

    And lets stay focused on these “left wing” radical types. Claiming the other sides radicals are the same is not an explanation nor an argument.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I have read similar comments on Left Wing sites. Rather laughable and very shortsighted. Not to mention they would lose in a matter of hours.

    • “I also believe Mr. Obama would BAN guns outright if he could.”

      Based on what?

      “To say this is false because no Democrat has “proposed” such legislation is an absurd argument”

      No it isn’t, not at all. It is completely false to claim that Obama and the Dems are trying to get your guns. Do some progressives have this as a goal? Sure, I’ll give you that. So what? No one in the Obama administration has either (i) stated this as a goal nor (ii) pushed for this to occur.

      “Claiming the other sides radicals are the same is not an explanation nor an argument.”

      Of course not…besides, I would posit that the other sides’ radicals are worse! 🙂

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Based on his commentary and my understanding of his philosophical viewpoint. His sarcasm and other negative comments is I “believe” an indicator that he is of this same “left wing” group.

        The question was whether they “wanted” or “would like” to. Not whether they are “coming to take them”. I am not commenting on the NRA here.

        I am commenting on your question as to Mr. Obama’s “beliefs” as well as those of many in the Democrat’s Party.

        Careful there my lawyer friend. Remember I am a Radical Right Wing Liberal. You don’t want to catch me in your BIG net. I might just pull a Sailfish on you.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Fiennstien has openly stated if she had the votes, it would be “turn them in ” while not all Dems want all guns gone, if political winds were blowing that way, they would jump on it. I’d bet I could find Obama bloviating as much

      • Just A Citizen says:


        One other point from the article you cited. The author made a claim that the recent SCOTUS ruling, I assume Heller, was that the second amendment “conveyed a personal right to own guns” upon the people.

        Now lets look at what it really said. The second amendment prohibits the Govt. from banning gun ownership because it prohibits such an encroachment on “the people’s right to bear arms”.

        The Second Amendment does not CONVEY a right. This comment reveals one of several thing about the left that bothers me so much. Foremost is this lack of understanding, or outright refusal to acknowledge historical facts, about the purpose of the Constitution. It functional purpose. It was designed to form a govt,, delegate it certain authority, and restrict actions in listed rights as well as those retained by the states and people.

        The notion that the Framers conveyed basically unlimited power to Congress via the authority of taxation and the power to pass such laws as needed to implement its other authorities is mindboggling to me. Yet that is the crappola fed to all the young ones by their “teachers” and “mentors”.

        Another irritant is this believe in a “monarchist” Presidency. I find the hero worship and messianic behavior towards Democratic Presidents revolting. With all the love given to Reagan by conservatives nothing ever approached the tears and fainting that Kennedy, Clinton and Obama garnered. Sorry! Got off track and needed to vent a little.

        I know you are not of the same cloth. But much of the Democratic party viewpoints and behavior is being driven by people like those I describe. I am feeling much the same as the Colonel about those claiming to be “P”rogressives these days. I think folks like you need to reclaim the “liberal” label and leave these crazies to their own devices.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      You got that right!

      Because this dude is a professor of “philosophy” he is “imminently qualified” to address these issues??? Really?????????? Yeah….if he agrees with us.

      How about these:

      “This situation requires a review of our basic anti-retaliation rules. I hope that this will both remind you of your obligations and demonstrate without cavil that our policies are completely consistent with freedom of speech, properly understood.” GOT THAT? CONSISTENT AS LONG AS THEY ARE “PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD”. WONDER WHAT THEY THINK AFTER YESTERDAYS SCOTUS RULING ON THE FACEBOOK THREATS?


    • If I read this correctly, the bakers denied a wedding cake, for a wedding that was at the time illegal, and they are getting fined for following the law (at the time). I smell a really big lawsuit resulting from this. The other stuff is just “icing on the cake”. Pun intended. 🙂

  33. Former campaign advisor David Axelrod responding to a question from the media on Obama’s disdain for Israel….he quoted the POTUS as saying…” you know, I think that I am the closet thing to a Jew that ever sat in the White HOuse.”

    I wonder if he said that with a straight face.


    Progressive ideology hard at work, killing more people.

  35. CHICAGO (TNS) — Former U.S. House Speaker Dennis Hastert is scheduled to be arraigned Thursday at the federal courthouse in downtown Chicago on charges he agreed to pay $3.5 million to a longtime acquaintance to cover up wrongdoing in his past and then lied to the FBI when asked about the suspicious cash withdrawals from several banks.

    So let’s get this put into perspective. Man take HIS money from bank. Government questions why he is taking HIS money from bank. Man should not have to answer a question about HIS money, and is certainly entitled to LIE about HIS money withdraws when it’s none of the phucking governments business to begin with. Man is arrested and charged with a crime, because he didn’t tell the truth to the government about HIS money.

    Police State in your face. Don’t forget to vote 🙄


    In continuation of my above comment on this case, Hastert is a pedophile pervert and should be tried and convicted as a pedophile pervert. This is not a subject that I have nor read about in detail, as there are quite a few interesting investigative reports and videos the cover the subject, which includes many of the current Congressmen serving. The whole story behind Boystown is simply too sick and twisted to begin to unravel. Pedophilia is quite prevalent in DC and in politics in general, both here and abroad (especially in the UK).

    I had considered an article on the subject, but wondered, who would want to talk about something that is sick that we would all agree on?

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Agreed, no need to discuss pedophiles in Govt, D.C. or anywhere else. What is desirable is to discuss the cover up of those in power. And of course the use of this information for political destruction.

      I guess I am the only one here who remembers the rumors about Hastert back when he became speaker. The source of these rumors was the DNC and certain democratic party operatives. While these rumors may have existed before, they did not become political fodder until he gained the Speaker’s chair. As I recall it was the increasing rumor mill that contributed to his “retirement”.

  37. “According to PEG, white culture is based on “white individualism” or “white traits” like “rugged individualism,” “adherence to rigid time schedules,” “plan(ning) for the future,” and the idea that “hard work is the key to success.”

    The minority cultures, according to PEG, value “color group collectivism.” This entails “fostering interdependence” and group success, shared property, learning through social relationships, and making life choices based on “what will be best for the family” or the group.”

    “First, teachers are taught to see their students according to their race. PEG doesn’t put it quite that bluntly, but it does instruct teachers to identify “focus students,” adding that “it is preferable for all the students to be of the same racial group.” (“African American and Latino focus students” are the only groups identified by name in PEG’s Minneapolis Power Point presentation.)”

    • Just A Citizen says:


      My oh my how far we have “PROGRESSED”. When attending the mandatory “cultural awareness” classes many years ago one of our “instructors” was a young lady from the Flathead tribe. She went into some length describing the perceived “cultural norms” or American Indians. Laziness, slow working and mostly late for work. Even showing up when they want, which might be a day or two late. Most “whites” in these parts had come to call this “Indian time”.

      Her key point was this…………. All of these “cultural norms”, including “Indian Time” were pure garbage. They had been constructed by those who wished to rationalize lousy behavior. We were instructed to treat the Native employees just like all others and if they were habitually late or no shows, or did not work to the same degree we should FIRE THEM.

      I am guessing she would not make it in the “consulting” world today.

      • No, I don’t think she would 🙂 But it’s more than just excusing bad behavior. It is just to coincidental that these supposed cultural differences are based on the political differences between left and right.

        And it is insulting to conclude that believing in individualism, or working hard, etc. excludes the ability to care about whats good for the family etc. and visa versa. It promotes the idea that white Americans care about nothing but their personal success. and that minority Americans are incapable of caring for themselves.

        And those words “fostering interdependence” can be taken a lot of ways and most of them aren’t good.

  38. I’ve always agreed that education was the key to success -never felt a caveat was needed for that statement until now.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      They COUNT on the vast majority of us sending our kids to public schools without questioning or challenging the curriculum or how it is taught.

      The greatest challenge of the Tea Party movement is to “take back” our public school system. That is take it back from the radical Progressives.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Another article on the topic of “lack of education” today.

      • I really don’t understand their objection to phonics. Is it some inner belief that if things aren’t changing they aren’t progressing.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          I think your summary conclusion is pretty close to the truth based on the following. This article includes a pretty good summary as well as detailed explanation of what whole language is, what it is based on and why it has been found wrong. It is pretty long but you won’t have to read the whole thing to get the picture.

          P.S. I find the use of “natural skills/abilities” rather interesting. I might have used “instinctive” instead of natural. After all, the ability to invent a written language is part of “our nature”. 😉

          • “Those invested in defending whole language criticized traditional achievement tests as unauthentic and replaced them with measures of motivation, enjoyment, or self-esteem. Attitude, not achievement, became the outcome of concern in the reading education research community. A positive attitude toward reading was expected to lead children automatically into more and better reading. Many reading-education researchers replaced standardized, reliable, validated assessments with alternative assessments that probed attitudes. The goal of teaching became love of reading, not the ability to read. The effects of whole-language methods on student achievement were thus impossible to determine.”

            Well, obviously if one doesn’t know how to read they will not love reading-they might enjoy being read too. 🙂 I do however understand why people like the idea of whole language-sounds like a wonderful tool for comprehension and anytime you can make learning interesting and fun it is a plus-BUT they are obviously putting the cart before the horse. I also think that self-esteem rant has been proven to be very destructive and used as an excuse for failure.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          And to be fair and balanced, the opposing viewpoint. I notice a similar pattern of argument in this as in other fields where “progressive” thought is used to claim “traditional views” are wrong. Picking at nits for the most part. Also mischaracterizing the other viewpoint, while claiming they are doing the same.

          Can’t help but notice the author ignores the primary critique of whole language. That children don’t have the same cognitive skills as adults and cannot therefore learn the same way.

          I also can’t help but notice the “it would work better if it were just done properly” meme. Like that old adage about why Communism failed in Russia and China.

          This is a pdf file so I hope you can read it.

          • I’ll try to read this tomorrow if I can-it’s gonna be a busy day-but it’s TV time right now 🙂 have a nice night.

  39. Oh, isn’t higher education wonderful. But I have to say, I’m not at all sure what this teachers point is-she seems to be trying to make a point but her personal ideology keeps tripping her up.

  40. Just A Citizen says:

    Because “we are not going to put boots on the ground”………. President Obama

    • JAC,

      I can not access the link right now because it’s blocked so I will check it out when I get home. BUT, if Obama said no boots on the ground, then there are NO boots on the ground. He could not say it if it were not true. In fact, a truth does not actually exist until Big Barack actually speaks it. 😀

  41. Just A Citizen says:


    Question: Do psychologists put out left leaning research findings because of their political views or do they hold their political views because of their professional research?

  42. And now it is unfair, according to unions and progressives…..Disney World, Orlando.

    Disney World is just one of the latest employers to fire American workers of ten and 20 years to make room for……………………………H1B immigrants to work those jobs and Disney as well as other employers are tying severance bonuses to how well the fired employees train their replacements.

    Walmart, McDonalds, etc…..are saying, ok, forcing minimum wage up to $15 makes it cheaper to sponsor H1B immigrants that will work for much less.

    So, progressive thinkers, you want a global marketplace and you want open borders and you want to have unfettered rules and diversity…… got it. And now you have no argument to make…….and jobs being picked off from American workers.

    • Oh, and don’t try to make this an issue of “greedy corporations”…….these are progressive rules. Oh, as JAC puts it, the irony of it all.

    • What this will lead too…..the need to raise taxes because of lower tax receipts. I do not think I have read or seen one Progressive who has a clue about economics, and I have barely above a clue 🙂 and that isn’t saying much 😀

  43. The former psychiatrist in chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital is pouring rain on the Bruce Jenner “Call Me Caitlyn” parade that’s sure to have the former Olympic athlete’s cheerleaders steaming.

    Not only does Dr. Paul R. McHugh consider changing sexes “biologically impossible,” he thinks being what is popularly called “transgender” these days is actually a “mental disorder.”

    McHugh, who has authored six books and at least 125 peer-reviewed medical journal articles, made the statements in a piece he penned for the Wall Street Journal that argued surgery is not the solution for patients who want to live life as the opposite sex.

    Such people, he wrote, suffer from a “disorder of assumption” in believing they can choose their sex.

    Read more:

    I am not sorry that I think all this gender identity crap is nothing short of crap and a mental problem. JMHO!

    • This is why he is the “former Head”. one cannot say these hurtful, judgmental things anymore. Truth and facts are what you say they are regardless of evidence.

  44. Just A Citizen says:

    Sitting here this morning scanning several news and editorial sites. Lots of coverage and commentary on the numerous elephant POTUS candidates and now maybe some donkey candidates.

    So many choices and all I can think is that NOT ONE OF THEM is really worthy. That includes MRS. Clinton. It is as if one of Ayn Rand’s books has come to life. Incompetence is ruling the world and only the mush is reaching the top.

    I am speaking here of more than just stated political positions, propositions or supposed beliefs. I am talking about their overall character, knowledge, understanding, social intelligence, projection of Honor and “command presence”.

    I was thinking back to our earliest years where heated debates and even venomous rhetoric dominated Presidential campaigns, but the people knew that no matter the winner they were getting the best their communities had to offer, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, et al.

    One scholar once told me that these men fought hard to carry the day regarding their views on how this country should function. But their differences were over the process, not the underlying values. The ALL believed in freedom, liberty and justice. They simply differed in their view of how a “federal” govt. could or could not further those ideals.

    Can we say the same thing of all these people vying for our attention and ultimately our vote?

    Right now……….today………….. I am not feeling it.

    • It would not shock me if it’s Bush vs. Clinton. Both are globalist’s, and globalist’s run the election.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        You act as though “globalist” is a pejorative. Why would it be a negative connotation?

        Perhaps you should explain!

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Fair enough. I think of glbalists as the elite ruling class, including the ultra wealthy, whose primary driver’s are power and money. Those who espouse the “New World Order”, whose allegiance is NOT necessarily with those they supposedly serve. This group would include the overpopulation and Agenda 21 crowd. I could add more but I think you get the gist. No, I do not use the term as a term of kindness.

  45. Just A Citizen says:

    Was watching a news piece the other night on this rift with police created by Baltimore, NY, Ferguson, etc., etc.. It must have been Fox because Mark Furman, not one of my favorite people, was one of the PAID guests.

    In the back and forth, the other guest was supposed to represent the “black community’s concerns”, Furman and the other fellow agreed on several points. But then Furman said something that gets to the heart of this supposed “work slowdown”.

    He said that the usual patrols and arrests will continue. What is being stopped is the “pre-emptive” policing that increases community safety. That is stopping the guy walking down the street that the cops “know is probably caring an illegal weapon”, or “stopping those on parole and checking them for drugs or guns”. He listed several other examples.

    I think this highlights the possible primary source of so much disagreement and tension. When the police move from catching obvious bad guys to trying to “prevent” crimes from happening we set them up for a conflict with our own values.

    Because like all public employees, they will strive to be better and better at whatever it is they think their mission. I We the People tell them it is to “reduce” violent crime they will find ways to get “threats” off the street. And the more they are successful the greater the chance that innocent people are harmed and that Civil Rights are violated.

    The other thing I got from Furman’s comment was his lack of recognizing this conflict. He was rationalizing police behavior under the goal of “prevention”. He was using the goal of “prevention” as the “excuse” for the occasional bad event. Like most Cops I know, he fails to see the connections and immediately goes on the defensive.

    There was one other point made by Furman to which the other fella responded, that is also telling of why certain “areas” of the country are more violent. Furman’s complaint was that the locals want the cops to back off but they won’t turn in the actual bad guys. They don’t call 911, they won’t testify, etc. etc. The other guy’s response was that of course not. If the bad guys find out they will probably kill them. Because the police cannot protect these people.

    Talk about your basic Catch 22.

    • This is the argument about the “perfect world” vs. the one we actually live in.

      I’m not black and have had at least five run ins with cops in my lifetime. One back when I was an unobtrusive fat kid at 13 when a Sgt. thought I got too close to a car accident (no injuries) and used the point of his nightstick in my kidney to explain that. The second when I was about 20 when an out of control cop put me and my date through a half hour of hell. The next two were much later and relatively minor. Stopped for “a seat belt check” and a possible traffic infraction the real purpose was to see what the white guy was doing in the druggie neighborhood. The last was the real fun one. Having gone to a really bad apartment building with a 25 year history of drugs (back to Frank Serpico!) with my boss, when we left in his shiny red jeep, we headed in the general direction of the George Washington Bridge which was close to our office. At the last intersection before the bridge, we were swarmed by at least five plain clothes officers with guns drawn, get that, guns drawn (and pointed)! I immediately put 2 plus 2 together and actually started laughing. My younger boss merely turned white and almost fainted. I think the laughing part plus my white hair broke the tension cause I did the dumbest thing imaginable, got out of the car. They apologized after checking us out.

      Don’t pretend to know the answer. I think there are things that would work like “Operation Exile” where you enforce Federal Gun Law and lock up the recidivists until they get really old. Community policing is an excellent idea but if the beat cop does not have some latitude, he becomes furniture first and Officer Krumpke next. That’s where NYC and Baltimore are now. The cops have had their balls effectively removed.

      The sad part is that while most cops are damned good at what they do and careful not to go too far, the bad ones really destroy the image and effectiveness of the rest. The 99 good things get ignored, the one bad one hangs everybody. A NYC murder rate that drops from about 2,300 to 300 with a one million increase in the population says something.

  46. Just A Citizen says:


    Good morning Sir. I have an important question for you.

    Is Ted Cruz for real???

    I am getting an increasing pit in my stomach over his tendency to spout off about things but do nothing substantive about them.

    I ask this not just because he is running for Pres. but because I am wondering what he would do if he had a seat at the SCOTUS house.

    Would his rulings follow his rhetoric or is he something other than he pretends to be?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Sorry, to many words. Let me put it in terms we both understand clearly.

      Is Ted Cruz all hat and no cattle?

      • Ten gallon size!

        • But out of curiosity, what is it that scares you. Most Texans do not think he is presidential material…we like him to stay local.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            Nothing “scares” me about Cruz. I am growing very disappointed.

            The reason for my question is whether he would make a good Constitutional Supreme Court Justice.

            If any of the NON Rhinos get the POTUS chair they will probably have at least one SCOTUS appointment to make.

            Based on how Cruz talks I would consider him for the job. But based on his lack of action I am concerned whether he would actually follow through on his rhetoric, if given a chance.

            I had hopes of his presidential potential, but agree with you and your friends. He is not showing that level of gravitas.

            Now I am also a long range thinker. So from my perspective I would like to see one of the Tea Party Governors get the POTUS job and all the Tea Party Congressmen and Senators stay in place. Or be replaced by other Tea Party types with less “Potomac stink” on them.

  47. Just A Citizen says:

    Thought of the Day.

    Saw yesterday where the new Democrat POTUS candidate thinks our Total conversion to Metric is a major campaign issue.

    Then as I struggled today to get the right drill bit size to set a bolt in a post for the new stair rails I’m installing it suddenly dawned on me.

    The push to Metric in the USA was a precursor to the Affordable Care Act. Or more accurately, the ACA was to the last 20 years of hybrid metric/English standards as Metric Conversion is to Nationalized Health Care.

    Measurements of various products in this country are a MIX of metric and English and some times English which “approximates” a metric measurement. You cannot buy 3/4 inch plywood today. Not construction grades. It is “almost” a 1/16″ off, which is some “metric” equivalent.

    What caused me to realize the similarity of metric conversion and the march to Nationalized health care was the sudden feeling I had trying to get my project done. It was………….”Damn, I wish they would just convert to metric and be done with it”.

    For those who don’t know the history, the US Govt. has been pushing conversion to metric since the 70’s and maybe earlier. The PEOPLE said hell no. The Govt kept trying and in the process created incentives and other agreements, like trade and contracting polices, to encourage some conversion. I remember bidding on Govt. contracts where all the measurements were in “metric” but when converted to English came out to standard English measurements, like 1/2, 1/4, 7/16, etc.. That was because all the parts made in the USA, a Govt. contract requirement, were in English but the Govt. policy (Clinton) was to advertise in metric……to force business to speed up the conversion.

    This has now got most people I know so frustrated we would be more willing to accept full metric conversion. At least things would MATCH when you go to fix something. Maybe the nuts and bolts with the kids toy, to be assembled, would be ALL the same unit of measure. Instead of needing a metric socket for the nut that fits the bolt that uses and English Allen wrench to tighten it.

    In short, the Govt has created such a mess I can’t take it anymore. Give me the Metric System…………………..Or drop the damn thing all together.

    • We had the opportunity to switch to metric under the Articles of Confederation but it was defeated. Carter made a big push in the ’70s but it too failed. The auto industry went along for a while. I am not sure if they have totally reverted or not. 1/8″ ~ 3 mm, 1/4″ ~ 6 mm, 1/2″ ~ 13 mm, 3/4″ ~ 19 mm. 1″ ~ 25 mm. Shingles on the west coast are 1 m long instead of 1 yard because they are coming out of Canadian factories.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Last time I worked on my Ford pickup it had BOTH metric and English nuts/bolts.

        Much of the forest products industry converted to metric when their markets expanded to overseas. In doing so they just pushed the metric stuff off on US customers. Cause now you can’t find the English alternative. Unless you shop at “used lumber yards”.

        But you are also correct that the US does not produce as much “shake and shingle” stock as it once did. The rotten logs used for these products occurred in what are now “protected Old Growth” stands. And of course, we logged most of the rest………… 😉

    • 55MPH – 88KPH

      Remember the signs well. The ’79 Aspen had the KPH on the dash larger than the MPH.

      Tell them to stuff it!

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I agree, I would cost a fortune to convert. At 18 trillion in debt, they can stick it. Maybe they are not being reminded enough of the debt.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      ROFLMAO! Yes, remember it well back in the 70s . I have tool sets in both. Pain in the butt, but I like our measurement system versus metric. Just more ” globalist” crap. 🙂

      • Being 68 they can do just about anything they want after I’m gone . My Dad’s take was that during the moon landings, despite years of training when asked about the depth of the dust, Armstrong said “about six inches.”

        Remembera piece about forced conversion in England not that many years back. Butchers and such used to maintain a lbs. scale for the convenience of old farts such as myself. The government finally had to ban them completely and impose a fine to get them off the counter. The little old ladies just woudl not get with the program.

        I stick with rough from my limited time in Europe. Roughly four liters make a gallon, Roughly 2 1/2 pounds make a Kilo. Meter is roughly a yard. Brits get me though with this “I weigh 14 stone stuff”.

        • We deal with chemical and petroleum companies worldwide so see both English and metric units. Believe me, even those on metric units have trouble and use the system incorrectly. I see the unit of pressure (force per unit area) presented in many ways. When dealing internationally, the easiest standard unit is 1 atm which is 14.7 lbs/sq in, or 760 Torr (mm of Hg). In metric units it would be 1.01325 bar or 101.325 KPascals (Newton/sq m). I frequently see it as kg/sq m (mass/unit area) or some other weird unit. What is even more troubling is that many foreign countries are too lazy to do the conversions which are simple with online tools. Per European requirements, all our drawings are supposed to have metric units as the primary and English as an optional secondary. Since we deal with about 50% US companies, all our drawings are English [metric] which is technically illegal.

          It even gets more fun when dealing with international electrical standards for hazardous areas. There are 4 basic standards, ATEX in Europe, UL in the US, CSA in Canada, and IECEx in Australia. Many other countries have their own standards but most accept one of these 4. It is now possible to get one agency to certify all 4 but each set of tests must be run independently even though they are redundant. So the costs escalate. The whole thing is one giant boondoggle to impede trade. We try to build one product that meets all standards so all components have to be certified for all right down to simple 18 awg wire.

          Since about 50% of our business is in metric countries, I decided a few years ago that all new products would have metric fasteners. It is much easier to get a metric screw in the US than an English screw in India. All our optics are in metric since the that is the industry standard. However, all other parts of the mechanical design are done in English.

          For anyone that lives in the Midwest, I would like to see how we change the 1 mile section roads to metric.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            Just think of all the “jobs created”. An ARMY of surveyors trekking across the US of A surveying everything ALL OVER………AGAIN.

            Massive changes to court house records because property lines are tied to “Section” corners, which are 1 mile square and 640 acres in size.

            I figure the Govt. “planners” that were pushing this must have been the fathers and mothers to those yahoos who were pushing “shovel ready jobs” this last go round. They seem incapable of looking for impacts past the end of their nose……….or their pipe dreams.

  48. As a matter of fact, Federal Communications Commissioner Ajit Pai went so far as to say: “It is conceivable to me to see the government saying, ‘We think the Drudge Report is having a disproportionate effect on our political discourse… and we want to start tamping down on websites like that.'”

    The Republic is lost. Voting is a joke, the government no longer abides by the Constitution. Welcome to Amerika!

  49. I would like to ask…..because I am not sure on what I been reading on here … Is there any one on here that really thinks there is such a thing as global warming?

  50. Question….and think about it before answering…what actually defines your parameters as a prelude to war? What has to happen before you would say….this is war.

%d bloggers like this: