Monday “Best Ad” Open Comments
by
Tags:
Comments
-
I’d like to vote for the best ad, but since I didn’t watch anything I don’t think it would be right to express an opinion. The parts where half the lights went out was the “welcome to Obamaville” moment as a precursor as to what to expect this summer as the result of his closing all the coal fired electric plants. Get ready, it’s coming to your neighborhood soon.
-
I was disappointed in the ads this year. Not one single ad with a monkey or a midget.
-
If Pluto isn’t a planet because it’s too small, then are midgets really people?
-
Best tweet re: the power outage:
“This time it’s rich people trapped in the Super Dome.” -
Dale Robertson – Chronicle
I always said we’d have to turn out the lights if Jacoby Jones became a Super Bowl hero. #Texans
-
SF tried a variant of the ’89 World Series strategy.
-
Excellent article here about “Kept Conservatives”—the kind that run the Republican Party and serve as their mouthpieces. Worth the entire read (its not long), but here’s an example of the kind he’s talking about:
Counties in America are often governed by a county commission system under three commissioners. The system is set up so that two are of the majority party and the third is of the minority party. In Allegheny County (the Pittsburgh region) that pretty much always meant two Democrats and one Republican. The only real fight the Republicans ever fought was not which party would govern the county, but which Republican would be the minority commissioner. If he didn’t make too much trouble, some small sliver of jobs patronage was thrown his way, maybe a few contracts for his favored vendors with the county, and a small staff on the county budget, plus his salary, benefits, driver, etc. Crumbs from the table of the Democrat machine.
I see the same thing on a national scale right now: Republican congressmen who are more afraid of losing their jobs than they are of losing their integrity. I get it, really I do. D.C. is a company town and the company is government and if the company keeps growing there’s something for everyone. -
And therefore, since I cannot prove a lover
To entertain these fair well-spoken days,
I am determined to prove a villain
And hate the idle pleasures of these days. -
Some tweets:
To learn which end of the gun is which, Obama watched Sarah Palin on TV.—
P Flynn Anderson (@middlemom) February 03, 2013
Sarah Palin with proper skeet shooting form. Note to Obama, you do NOT fire gun at this level. http://t.co/i5Rs5ybe—
(@JMOKC) February 02, 2013
White House Warns: Don’t Photoshop Obama Gun Pic j.mp/YsgnDm #tcot #gop #p2 #topprog #ctl #TeaParty #lnyhbt #tgdn #war—
WisConservative (@CarterFliptMe) February 02, 2013
@CarterFliptMe Warns? So I guess it was ok to photoshop the former guv of AK Palin in a bikini with a gun. The old double standard.—
Suz (@Suzyqforu) February 02, 2013
(snip)
Photo: Sarah Palin with a gun. Crazy gun nut. Photo: Barack Obama with a gun. Eat that one right-wing b*tches. No…no double standards.—
NeoKong (@The_NeoKong) February 02, 2013
(snip)
#NextWhiteHousePhoto Obama and Palin, in the helicopter, hunting coyotes together.—
Melissia (@ProudoftheUSA) February 02, 2013
#NextWhiteHousePhoto With Sarah Palin and her Dad Caribou hunting—
Randy Kessler (@BarryNMooch) February 02, 2013
Obama is like the only person on Earth who looks less cool holding a gun.—
Emily Zanotti (@emzanotti) February 03, 2013
@jtLOL well at least we now have one gun picture that would be safe to carry in school—
Anthony Ball (@acbnok) February 02, 2013Sarah Palin fans encourage President Obama to shoot like a girl
(Any editing of tweets mine) -
As we strolled on the sidewalk on our way home, a pudgy man clad in shabby clothes spots me in my orange Illinois jersey and addressed me with unbridled joy.
“Go Illini!!” he yelled at me.
“I guess,” I replied. “But we just got our ass kicked by Louisiana Tech.”
Not wanting to deal with a man that I believed to be some combination of intoxicated and homeless, I abruptly ended the chat and continued walking. Within seconds, a crushing weight wrapped around my neck and upper back, and, craning my head to get a proper view, I saw the haggard man elevated off the concrete, held up only by my upper torso.
I swiftly bucked him off my back and ran across the street, yelling “Piggyback Bandit” in jest as I distanced myself from this crazy person. I was aware of the Piggyback Bandit’s exploits but considered them a myth from the West, not unlike the cowboys of old. This was a humorous piggybacking coincidence and nothing more. Even after witnessing the same man piggyback my buddy Nick moments later, I still didn’t realistically associate this seemingly eccentric homeless man with the famed Piggyback Bandit. -
#9 Sarge
Comment on your Richard III post:Up the Stuarts.
Down the Hanoverians and the House of Saxe-Coburg & Gotha
Let the English keep their German Queen and the Scots will take the North Sea oil. -
These are really cool. I would like to see them confined to the battlefield and other types of hostile situations. I do not want them used for routine spying on US citizens here in the USofA.
British troops are using a nano drone just 10cm long and weighing 16 grams on the front line in Afghanistan to provide vital information on the ground.
They are the first to use the state-of-the-art handheld tiny surveillance helicopters, which relay reliable full motion video and still images back to the devices’ handlers in the battlefield.
The Black Hornet Nano Unmanned Air Vehicle is the size of a child’s toy, measuring just 10cm (4 ins) by 2.5cm (1 inch), and is equipped with a tiny camera. -
#10 Darren
From the comments in your link:But..but Obama is an expert Marx-man!
Now that had me laughing…yup, still laughing…I think it’s going to be awhile.
But I think that he was Stalin a little before he pulled the trigger
That’s hysterical.
-
#11 hamous
That dude really needs to move to Florida.
He’d fit right in. -
The dead tree version of the comical has an article on page 1 speaking about how Dow Chemical may opt to plant a
$#*&^%loadlot of trees to mitigate the additional pollution from their proposed expansions. They went on and on about how trees reduce pollution and scrub the air, etc, and it was not until the 7th paragraph from the end did they mention that trees also are a source of pollution as they release Volatile Organic Compounds, VOCs. Dow claims, in the article, that the native species they intend to plant, 30 in all, are both resistant to drought and will release fewer VOCs than what they consume.
About the drought thing, has anyone driven past Memorial Park lately, have you seen any surviving mature pine trees? -
Those were weak urban trees.
Dow’s gonna plant strong trees. -
#17 Pyro: From what I have read, most of the pines in Mem Park were planted around WWI and 80-100 years is their expected life span. The drought simply put them out of their misery, and kept them from suffering – kind of like what Obamacare is gonna do to our elderly.
-
#2 Hammy
Not one single ad with a monkey or a midget.
As long as Bronco Bama is in office, it’s too risky to run a racist monkey ad. In fact, it may never be safe to run a monkey ad again. Oh yeah, that Ikea Monkey $1T coin idea had to be killed because it was racist.
🙂 -
I did notice the VW and Coke ads ran despite the howls they were racist.
-
I have this idea for a political ad which will never be run; it involves a football that represents the economy and a chimpanzee that looks “suspiciously” like Bronco. . . .
-
Molon labe, mofo.
-
A government lawyer is attempting to get dismissed almost $700 in traffic tickets given to U.S. Postal Service employees in Cleveland, claiming it is immune from state and local regulations, Yahoo! News reported.
Postal Service attorney Jennifer. S. Breslin says the infractions, which include speeding citations and red-light infractions, should be ignored.Postal Service says it’s immune from local traffic laws, report says
So, that old joke is true:
At a 4 way intersection controlled by stop signs, by some weird stroke of fate, the following 4 vehicles all come to their stop signs at the same time. 1 An ambulance with siren and lights on, 2 a fire truck also with lights and siren on, 3 a police car with lights and siren on, and 4 a postal truck making his daily rounds. WHO proceeds first?
OK, the answer was, the postal van, because it is the only FEDERAL vehicle.
Oh, wait! Now, after all these years, I realize it was a trick question…….. the Postal vehicle didn’t even have to stop at the stop sign because local traffic laws don’t pertain to it.🙂
-
Molon labe
I had to look it up, come and take; I understand the other part.
-
We will be at Tacticle Firearms in Katy at 5pm today to welcome Piers Morgan to Texas. I hope y’all can make it! 1200 S. Mason Rd. 77450
I must get back in the kitchen to finish up making the 1st of the season strawberry jam which I will share with y’all today.
This has been a drive-by post. *pew-pew-pew-pew-pew-pew-pew*/ 7 bullet limit doncha know……. -
#25 – MsST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Howdy stranger! If your ‘digits’ haven’t changed since last we spoke – I just left you a voice mail……………..please fire back to my land line when you can?
strawberry JAM? P E R K™ -
ST!!!!!!! WE MISS YOU!!!!!!
Don’t be such a stranger, dudette!
If I could come today, I would. “Short Piers” Morgan is such a target, it’s hard to pass up. I can see throwing a cream pie in his face, but don’t waste your strawberry jam on him. He’s sooooooooo not worth it. -
If true this or if it turns out to be true or if things even begin to drift towards this direction than this is where Rubo *must* stand against or drop his support for the Senate proposal:
Under a bipartisan Senate framework, Democrats say, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano would have final say over whether the border is secure enough to put 11 million illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship.
If Napolitano does not provide the green light for putting illegal immigrants on a pathway to citizenship, the responsibility for judging whether the metrics for border security have been met will be given to her successor.Senate plan would give Napolitano the final say on border security
Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the lead Republican sponsor of the framework, said the issue is under discussion within the Gang of Eight.
“We’re working on a lot of it,” he said.Clearly there’s things to work out.
-
ST #25;
This has been a drive-by post. *pew-pew-pew-pew-pew-pew-pew*/ 7 bullet limit doncha know…….
But, as a domestic terrorist, you know how to modify those clips, eh?
Good to see ya’ here. -
#28 – pure D reeeeeeeediculousness! (and certainly no shock)
I’d be surprised if Ms Napolitano even knows her own ding dang shoe size -
I’d be surprised if Ms Napolitano even knows her own ding dang shoe size
I’ll bet they’re comfortable, though.
-
There needs to be a group of interested parties to determine whether or not the border is “secure”. This group needs to be composed of landowners along the border, sheriffs of counties along the border and the governors of the states along the border. DC TNs need not apply.
-
True the Vote.
Proving that not all manly parts belong to men only. And we’re not talking about the ones Hillary has locked away.After one of the most expensive congressional races and recounts of 2012 between Rep. Allen West (R) and now Rep. Patrick Murphy (D), Houston-based True the Vote has committed to exposing exactly what happened in St. Lucie County–including hauling Elections Supervisor Gertrude Walker into federal court.
Thus far, Walker has failed to comply with True the Vote’s requests to inspect the election records. The request included, among other things, all records of Walker ensuring non-citizens and ineligible voters did not participate in the Congressional election.
True the Vote Founder and President Catherine Engelbrecht outlined the importance of this lawsuit, stating:
“This dramatic recount was an extraordinary example of how our elections can suffer systematic failure. We run the risk of seeing episodes like this becoming ordinary if citizens do not demand answers and hold election officials accountable. The American people own the voting system–we have the right to ask tough questions when we witness the failure of one of America’s core functions.”
A key demand by the national election integrity watchdog is a request that the federal court order the St. Lucie County Supervisor of Elections to “preserve all election records…
/snip
“Congressman West’s office space on Capitol Hill changed hands weeks ago. Nothing will reverse that. We have an opportunity, however, to deconstruct a recount that St. Lucie County election officials admits was prone to error and led to a vote tally they publicly doubted. How many more times will we allow elections to end on such questionable grounds, without citizens ever bothering to question the process?”I hope she has personal protection, in the form of big burly men properly armed with impressive firearms.
-
this is where Rubo *must* stand against or drop his support for the Senate proposal:
It’s his proposal. He’s part of the “Gang of Eight” that created it.
-
So, can we sue liberalist white-hating professors as an accessory to murder?
“My mind was blank at the time,” he said — but he still remembers what prompted the violence by his own twisted rationale. He cited anti-white ideas he learned at university.
But the prosecutor had a good point:
The defense tried to plead insanity, but Fulton County assistant district attorney Linda Dunikoski set the record straight for the jury.
“He told you he shot Brittney Watts, Lauren Garcia and Tiffany Ferenczy because he had adopted all these racist ideals,” she said. “If race disorder was a [mental illness], then the Ku Klux Klan could murder and kill with impunity.”Take that, you wisses.
-
34 Hamous says:
February 4, 2013 at 10:54 am
this is where Rubo *must* stand against or drop his support for the Senate proposal:It’s his proposal. He’s part of the “Gang of Eight” that created it.
I agree. He agreed to the proposal and agreed to be the mouthpiece because of his “Tea Party Credentials.” The thinking among long time supporters of “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” was that if Rubio was the mouthpiece and McCain kept his mouth shut, we’d all go along with it.
Elitist Establishment Republicans tend to think that this is a Cult of Personality. Its not. They should know by now that we will drop ANYBODY who supports any of the crap that the Establishment has been shoving down our throats for the past two decades faster than 6th Period Latin.
We’re about issues, not about “Tea Party Heroes”. There are no Tea Party Heroes, only Tea Party Issues. -
I don’t believe the gang’s original framework included this provision.
Rubio has repeatedly said he will drop his support of the final bill if it is loaded up with unacceptable provisions.
We’ll see. -
That Calvin Klein commercial looked like it was made up of scenes from Triumph of the Will. Creepy.
-
You’re just jealous.
-
A man and his dog. And his hammock.
-
38 Shannon says:
February 4, 2013 at 11:22 am
I don’t believe the gang’s original framework included this provision.
Rubio has repeatedly said he will drop his support of the final bill if it is loaded up with unacceptable provisions.
We’ll see.The original framework was “Comprehensive Immigration Reform”—the same crap sammich they’ve been passing around, but with fresh mustard and wheat bread. It always called for a “commission” to determine if the border was secure, that from the very beginning was nothing more than rhetorical cover for the Republicans
DO NOT send us a plan that tries to both secure the border and grant amnesty. Secure the border first—it can be done under existing law—-then we can talk about amnesty. But granting amnesty before securing the border on serves to attract more illegal border crossings. -
And how’s that working out for ya?
-
You’re just jealous.
Of a Ken doll?
-
#42 Sarge
Nice serene scene in the woods, in the fog. May we ask, who took the pic?
🙂 -
I don’t believe the gang’s original framework included this provision.
Rubio has repeatedly said he will drop his support of the final bill if it is loaded up with unacceptable provisions.
We’ll see.Exactly my point. It’s the Democrats coming up now saying that this is what they support doing: giving the final / authoratative OK to declare the borders safe. Rubio has always supported allowing the border states to do so. If he cannt get the Dems on board (and he probably won’t) than he *must* withdraw support from the Senatorial proposals.
-
Baltimore. Keepin’ it classy.
-
46 mharper42 says:
February 4, 2013 at 12:39 pm
#42 Sarge
Nice serene scene in the woods, in the fog. May we ask, who took the pic?The guy in the neighboring campsite. I was there doing a review on a pack that I designed and had made (I’d post it, but its in the Donating Members section).
Exactly my point. It’s the Democrats coming up now saying that this is what they support doing: giving the final / authoratative OK to declare the borders safe. Rubio has always supported allowing the border states to do so. If he cannt get the Dems on board (and he probably won’t) than he *must* withdraw support from the Senatorial proposals.
Total crap. Rubio always supported a “commission.” It was in the very first announcement. People are now fishtailing over it b/c they now know how much freaking damage it will do to Rubio.
-
It’s his proposal. He’s part of the “Gang of Eight” that created it.
He has said *clearly* that he will not be part of anything that is not enforcement first. Rubio has alslo stated *clearly* that the states, specifically, the boarder states, should be the ones to sign off verifying tha the border is secure. Rendering supreme power to Homeland Security stands in precise contrary to Rubi’s public positions. thus far Rubio is part of a group that has made proposes. Marco Rubio has stated his specific positions regarding border security. If the Democrats get their way as stated publically there is no way Marco Rubio can retain his credibility asa Tea Partier regarding border security, nor keep his public word. Much of Rubio’s intergirty is on the line if he supports granting Homeland Security supreme authority over border security verification.
As I told you before, this is where the rubber hits the road for Marco Rubio. Either he doesn’t believe what I placed my trust in him to believe or he does what you’ve and others have said he’s doing and will do: be a puppet for collusionists (he being a collusionary farce of a Tea Partier himself). -
He has said *clearly* that he will not be part of anything that is not enforcement first. Rubio has alslo stated *clearly* that the states, specifically, the boarder states, should be the ones to sign off verifying tha the border is secure.
And then he *clearly* stated that the decsion would be *clearly* made by a “commission” and the Democrats *clearly* told their constitutents to go along with it because it was *clearly* bullschizzle designed to give the Republicans cover.
-
funny photoshops of the photoshopped photo.
-
The issue is who will be on the deciding commission. Big Sis all by herself is a non-starter. If she is merely one of several, the next question is whether some animals are more equal than others. I don’t see the Dims agreeing to having people actually down on the border making the decision all by themselves, either.
-
You’re just jealous.
Of a Ken doll?
You tell me.
You’re the one with the self esteem issues.
😉 -
mharper;
Working with the Dems on border security is a near impossibility. “Possible”, yes, not hardly so. They’ll declare the border secure anytime anywhere to get the ball rolling on naturalizing illegal alien residents on their terms.
I’m of the belief that illegal crossing must stop. Marco Rubio has made his position clear and he should stick to it. I’m fully willing to stand against him if he goes against his word but here’s my concern: when and how will illegal crossing get under control? We’ve tried enforcement only before with little to no success. Credit for most of the success goes to Duncan Hunter but he got a very small percent of Republican support in 2008. I do wonder how he’d have done had the Tea Party were around. A lot better I’m sure but I’m not sure if it would have pushed him over the top. So, historically-speaking, enforcement only has not worked. Why will it work not? -
53 mharper42 says:
February 4, 2013 at 1:24 pm
The issue is who will be on the deciding commission. Big Sis all by herself is a non-starter. If she is merely one of several, the next question is whether some animals are more equal than others. I don’t see the Dims agreeing to having people actually down on the border making the decision all by themselves, either.The issue is whether there will be a “commission” at all. Once you buy into their notion of a “commission”, they’ve got you buying into their “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” package. That’s why all the talk is about the make up of the “commission”: so as to divert attention from the amnesty that this terd sammich really is intended to grant.
Everything else, including a “commission” is lipstick on a pig. -
Who isn’t jealous of a Ken doll?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cerjIG4Y2Pw
(sorry if there’s any language. I couldn’t hear the audio that well.) -
Here’s how it works:
1. Propose a “Comprehensive Immigration Bill.”
2. Include a lot of different provisions.
3. Make beleive that one or more of the provisions is “controverisal” (which means the rest of the bill isn’t)
4. Get people to argue over that instead of the overall bill.
5. Let them have a “Victory” that is, in reality, only symbolic and does nothing to stop the original intent of the Bill.
6. This results in enough voters to offset the Tea Party and other Conservatives and both Karl Rove and David Plouffe have a party because they have defeated their common enemy. -
And then once the commission gets into place, Republicans argue amongst themselves who gets to be the minority members on it so they can pass out limited favors to thier cronies and contributors.
-
#58 Shanny
That sow needs a new shade of lipstick!
Stat! -
Rubio has always supported allowing the border states to do so. If he cannt get the Dems on board (and he probably won’t) than he *must* withdraw support from the Senatorial proposals.
Blah blah blah. Gotta agree with Sarge on this one. We’re gonna hear the same old worn out litany of excuses. “It’s not perfect, but nothing ever is.” “We made the best deal possible.” “It’s what the American people want.” “It’s a fair compromise.” “In the best interest of the country…”
-
Sarge, what is your solution to the zippty millions of illegals here? Stepwise, starting perhaps but not necessarily, with securing the border.
-
Four quick thoughts:
Make it easier for businesses to screen out illegals.
Make it more expensive for businesses to hire illegals.
Dramatically curtail public benefits available to illegals.
Implement visa programs that are not too cumbersome to effectively manage and cooperate with. -
1. I hear that E-Verify works fine already.
2. Why can’t the IRS use E-Verify to see if the SSN and the name match up on withholdings? (Not all illegals are paid in cash.)
3. Holy crap YES! Can we start with no more anchor bablies? -
63 mharper42 says:
February 4, 2013 at 2:08 pm
Sarge, what is your solution to the zippty millions of illegals here? Stepwise, starting perhaps but not necessarily, with securing the border.1. Enforce current law regarding border crossing.
2. An idiot can tell when the border is secured.
3. Notice when that happens, then begin talking about Amnesty. -
Blah blah blah. Gotta agree with Sarge on this one.
Do what you think is best. If Rubio, under any circumstance, supports granting Homeland Security supreme authority in declaring the borders secure, than you have every reason to feel justify in you cinicism. If, however, he leaves the party of 8, then, that’s a different story. He’s made his statements clear and now it’s a matter to see what legislation comes asa result and where Rubio places his feet. I still trust what he says but we’ll see.
-
Here’s the big underlying issue, guys, and we need to face up to it.
It is no longer the case that the Republican Party is merely not paying attention to our concerns and issues. They are now actively working against them so as to not have to listen to us ever again.
Then, as with the County Commissioners in PA, they can fight over who gets the minority positions to pass out the minority spoils.
The guys who win whether the Party wins or not want to keep it that way. The best way they see to do that is to create the Republican Party as a permanent minorty. -
3. Holy crap YES! Can we start with no more anchor bablies?
I agree but the courts do not.
-
Do what you think is best. If Rubio, under any circumstance,
supports granting Homeland Security supreme authority in declaring the borders secure, than you have every reason to feel justify in you cinicism. If, however, he leaves the party of 8, then, that’s a different story. He’s made his statements clear and now it’s a matter to see what legislation comes asa result and where Rubio places his feet. I still trust what he says but we’ll see.There you go again.
The issue is whether we pass a “Comprehensive Immigration Bill” that includes in any way, shape, or fashion, any kind of amnesty at all.
You argue about what the Republican Establishment wants you to argue about, we’ll talk about the real issue, OK? -
Make it easier for businesses to screen out illegals.
Make it more expensive for businesses to hire illegals.
Dramatically curtail public benefits available to illegals.1) mharper’s correct, E-verify works fine.
2) That’s definitely doable
3) That’s very difficult with the courts virtually erasing distinction between illegal aliens and legal residential aliens. Even without illegal allies getting access to welfare, they still get tremendous amounts of benefits in the public schools, hospitals, and recently in getting bank loans. -
There you go again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3MXiTeH_Pg
1. Enforce current law regarding border crossing.
2. An idiot can tell when the border is secured.
3. Notice when that happens, then begin talking about Amnesty.I’d agree but when has this been done? Did you support Hunter or Tancredo in 2008?
-
The best way they see to do that is to create the Republican Party as a permanent minorty.
They’re a minorty in the Senate right now and you’ve nothing but contempt for them. Is assuring a Democrat majority helping?
-
I’d agree but when has this been done?
Never. That’s the problem.
Did you support Hunter or Tancredo in 2008?
Do you prefer gerkhins or sliced dills?
My question is about as relevant as yours to the issue.
Its not about me, and I’m not going to let you make it about me. -
They’re a minorty in the Senate right now and you’ve nothing but contempt for them. Is assuring a Democrat majority helping?
No.
That’s why I’m against passing a Comprehensive Immigration Bill that grants the Democrat Party 11 million new voters. -
That’s why I’m against passing a Comprehensive Immigration Bill that grants the Democrat Party 11 million new voters.
But that would help to keep the Republican Party a permanent minority, no? If you’re going to find any single legislator supporting enforcement only, it’s going to be a Republican.
-
I actually think it is what a majority of the American people want, but that should not be an invitation for the Republican leadership to roll over.
And that’s why I’m convinced that crashing and burning is the inevitable and ultimate end game. -
I actually think it is what a majority of the American people want, but that should not be an invitation for the Republican leadership to roll over.
The People are overwhelmingly against Amnesty, and overwhelmingly in favor of securing the border.
That’s why there is all this talk about a “Commission”, and almost none about the Amnesty. The idea is to give the People the impression that the only “controversial” thing about the bill is who gets to decide if the border is secure, and none about the Amnesty. -
Never. That’s the problem.
OK, so when and how will it happen now? BTW, there was enforcement only and I’ve pointed out who was the most successful in doing it. And, it was a Republican 😯 . Butthe party did not support him, nor did the vast majority of voters. Only the hard right wing of the Republican Party supported him. These would be the Tea Partiers of today.
My question is about as relevant as yours to the issue.
Its not about me, and I’m not going to let you make it about me.Beyond “crap” and “tud”, you’ve sad very little. What question did you offer?
And you could not be more wrong. It *is* about you. 2008 was your time to put your vote to where your keyboard is and have supported enforcement only. I did and I did so to the very end of the primaries: until “my guy” dropped out from lack of votes. Who was your guy or was enforcement only not the top priority then as it seems it is now for you? -
But that would help to keep the Republican Party a permanent minority, no? If you’re going to find any single legislator supporting enforcement only, it’s going to be a Republican.
Occasionally you are lucid and make some sense.
That sentence was not one of those occassions. -
COMPROMISE WITH THE DEMOCRATS!!!!!
COMPROMISE WITH THE DEMOCRATS!!!!!
COMPROMISE WITH THE DEMOCRATS!!!!!
COMPROMISE WITH THE DEMOCRATS!!!!!
Its the only way to save the Republican Party! -
Beyond “crap” and “tud”, you’ve sad very little. What question did you offer?
That would be this part:
Do you prefer gerkhins or sliced dills?
See the squiggly thing at the end? Its a question mark. It means I asked a question.
-
The People are overwhelmingly against Amnesty, and overwhelmingly in favor of securing the border.
I think it depends on how the question is asked. If you ask “Do you support amnesty for illegal aliens?” the majority will say no. If you say “Do you support a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants?” the majority will say yes.
These are the sameLIVsmorons that voted for a Marxist, racist, divisive community organizer with absolutely no practical experience in the real world, who has overseen the worst economic recovery in the history of the country. Two times.
I have absolutely no faith in the majority of American voters. -
And you could not be more wrong. It *is* about you. 2008 was your time to put your vote to where your keyboard is and have supported enforcement only. I did and I did so to the very end of the primaries: until “my guy” dropped out from lack of votes. Who was your guy or was enforcement only not the top priority then as it seems it is now for you?
Crap. Turd. Frikkin. Freakin. And any other word you don’t like.
-
I think it depends on how the question is asked. If you ask “Do you support amnesty for illegal aliens?” the majority will say no. If you say “Do you support a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants?” the majority will say yes.
Precisely. That’s why both Democrats and Republicans—and their shills—are making this about who sits on a commission and the people who disagree with them. As long as its about a commission or random individuals on the internet, nobody even gets to hear the word “Amnesty”.
These are the same LIVs morons that voted for a Marxist, racist, divisive community organizer with absolutely no practical experience in the real world, who has overseen the worst economic recovery in the history of the country. Two times.
By your logic, we’d be three weeks into an Assault Rifle ban right now.
-
By your logic, we’d be three weeks into an Assault Rifle ban right now.
Wha? No idea where that came from or what it’s supposed to mean.
-
Wha? No idea where that came from or what it’s supposed to mean.
It means that issue by issue, nothing is as hopeless as the Establishment would like for us to beleive.
There is actually more support for Gun Control in this country than there is for Amnesty. But the Republican Party is not (yet) actively working in favor of Gun Control. -
It means that issue by issue, nothing is as hopeless as the Establishment would like for us to beleive.
When I’m saying “crash and burn” I’m talking much more broadly than issue by issue. The voting drones outnumber the voting worker bees. It’s only a matter of time before the hive collapses.
There is actually more support for Gun Control in this country than there is for Amnesty.
I don’t believe that. There are too many Democrat politicians crawfishing away from gun control as fast as they can. If it was a winning issue they’d be all over it like ugly on ape.
-
Hey Sarge
I respect yours Simple and Super Dave’s knowledge on firearms etc., with all due respect to everyone else… well except maybe bunsonburner 🙂
I was looking at that Obama shooting picture and there appears to be a flash of smoke escaping vertically about 5 inches behind the muzzle of the barrel. You have any idea what that is about? I cannot say I have ever seen anything like that.
thanks -
I haven’t noticed that the proposed commission is the only objection being raised.
-
BTW Sarge,
Just my opinion but that picture screams photoshop to my eye. There are some “things” in that picture that ain’t right and that flash of smoke is one of them. I just ain’t ready to call BS yet. -
I was looking at that Obama shooting picture and there appears to be a flash of smoke escaping vertically about 5 inches behind the muzzle of the barrel. You have any idea what that is about? I cannot say I have ever seen anything like that.
thanksIt is apparently a muzzle break. Several upscale models have them. The idea is to direct escaping gasses in a certain direction in order to reeuce the effects of recoil. I’ve never seen one that is that far behind the muzzle, but there may be a bit of an optical delusion rather than an indication of location.
-
I actually think it is what a majority of the American people want, but that should not be an invitation for the Republican leadership to roll over.
And that’s why I’m convinced that crashing and burning is the inevitable and ultimate end game.I disagree. It’s not what the majority wants but what a vast majority of people want. No, the Republican leadership should not roll over what the people want which returns us to my main point: Marco Rubio should not be part of that. He’s already on sensitive ground by proposing amnesty alongside enforcement. He’s made public statements that he will be firm on enforcement and so he should be and his ephasis should be on the states verifying enforcement; not the federal government.
As for crashing and burning, I have a theological view on that. I do not think there’s going to be a United States of America part II. The United States of America and its Constituton are God’s political blessing of freedom to the world. God wants all His children to be freeto follow Him according to what their conscience dictates; not at all from the force of the state. If America as is goes, that’s it. I think the Second Coming will come before any “new America” raises from the ashes. But I’d be a fool for knowing this for sure as I do not think anyone knows the particulars of the Lord’s return to earth in full His godly glory. So all that is to be seen. I personally think America’s got at least one good revival in her before the end of times. That’s what I want ot be a part of. -
When I’m saying “crash and burn” I’m talking much more broadly than issue by issue. The voting drones outnumber the voting worker bees. It’s only a matter of time before the hive collapses.
There is actually more support for Gun Control in this country than there is for Amnesty.
I don’t believe that. There are too many Democrat politicians crawfishing away from gun control as fast as they can. If it was a winning issue they’d be all over it like ugly on ape.
That’s kind of my point. One of the reasons that it is not a winning issue is that it is one of the few issues where the interests lf Conservatives and Republicans, and a number of Democrats, intersect.
Immigration, OTOH, is one where the interests of Republicans and Conservatives diverge, and thus the Democrats fear those in thier base who are against Amnesty less.
Another factor is the power of the NRA. If Border Security types had an organization as powerful as the NRA, both Democrats and Republicans would fear them. The Republicans are now actively trying to insure that the Tea Party does not get to the same point as the NRA.
The issue is Amnesty. As long as we keep that the issue, we have a chance to put this terd sammich back in the toilet we put it into back in 2006 & 2008 (even if we didn’t vote for Duncan Freakin Hunter or Tom Frikkin Tancredo) -
90 Shannon says:
February 4, 2013 at 3:26 pm
I haven’t noticed that the proposed commission is the only objection being raised.Its the only one the Republicans—and their shills—are raising.
-
Remember when I said last week that I had heard that the Republicans were going to spend the week looking at what was being said, then issue a talking points memo over the weekend?
Talking point: The issue is whether or not Janet Napolitano gets to make the final decision or if a Commission gets to. -
I’ve never seen one that is that far behind the muzzle
-
92 Sarge
Thanks. I never thought of that and it does make sense, much as I loathe defending the picture.
I located the “source” picture on the Whitehouse Flickr page. There is no indication in the “exif” data that the picture has been tampered with but that data can be manipulated too. so I will move along “nuttin” to see here. -
Its the only one the Republicans—and their shills—are raising.
I don’t know what you are watching or listening to, but i have seen/heard numerous other objections.
I don’t disagree that a substantial percentage of the Republicans are treating passage of some kind of bill as a fait accompli. -
Talking point: The issue is whether or not Janet Napolitano gets to make the final decision or if a Commission gets to.
Talking point #2:
If Janet Napolitano gets to make the final decision, he should pull out of the deal. But if there’s a commission, that was his original intent, and that’s good.
Talking point #3:
We’re in the minoroty, so we need to get the best deal we can. -
I don’t know what you are watching or listening to, but i have seen/heard numerous other objections.
There are a number of “kept Conservatives” that are parroting the Party Line.
I don’t disagree that a substantial percentage of the Republicans are treating passage of some kind of bill as a fait accompli.
Yep.
And its our repsonsibility to push back as hard as we can whenever we see ANYBODY parroting the Party Line. -
The little boy is free, finally! And his kidnapper is dead. Details to come.
-
But but but once it is passed all the Latinos will become right wing lunatics.
-
103 Shannon says:
February 4, 2013 at 4:05 pm
But but but once it is passed all the Latinos will become right wing lunatics.But only after a commission tells us they are.
-
As far as TBO’S “proof of masculinity” photograph, I have a few comments:
1) it looks staged.
2) I’ve read reports that the one time he was seen in the presence of skeet shooting, he couldn’t wait to get away
3) If he “shot skeet all the time,” there’d be more corroboration
4) Carney tried to say that TBO didn’t go to Camp David “to make pictures”. BS. There’s a photographer with him almost all the time. Presidents barely get to move their bowels by themselves.
5) Given #4 – the picture could have been provided much more quickly than it was. That smacks of trying to cover up a presidential lie. Carney also looked uncomfortable, trying to fend off those questions.
6) See #3 – there would have been many multiples of pictures if he “shot skeet all the time” with various visitors.
7) Why does TBO have to lie about something like this? Does he really think people will believe him? Oh, crap, forgot about “the other side”….
8) This picture will do nothing to change his image on either side. The libs’ll say “See! He really IS for the Constitution?/swoon” They’re great at DoubleThink. The conservatives will say “See! He Really IS lying again!”
9) Given that this picture means nothing by itself, it is yet one more example of a thin-skinned “leader” of the free world who can’t stand to be criticized, otherwise he wouldn’t have felt the urge to try to be “one of the guys” and be “understanding” of the 2nd Amendment supporters. Especially to the point where he might have to actually touch one of those evil guns. You know, like the ones that protect his skinny little wiss.
10) Further on #9 – the admonition that this image shouldn’t be Photoshopped — laughable. This is a president who thinks he’s emperor, who can command and be blindly obeyed. And he doesn’t realize he’s naked. -
5) Given #4 – the picture could have been provided much more quickly than it was. That smacks of trying to cover up a presidential lie. Carney also looked uncomfortable, trying to fend off those questions.
It was a calculated decision by the Preezy’s team and folks should be hep to it by now.
They knew they had the pciture when they first declined to provide one. The “journalist” who asked for it was probably told to ask the question—just as George Snuffleupagus asked the question on contraception in the first debate.
Then they wait for some folks to make fun or call into question so that they can later release the picture and add the word “birther” to the controversy they created to show that thier opponents are a bunch of nut cases. -
That’s kind of my point. One of the reasons that it is not a winning issue is that it is one of the few issues where the interests lf Conservatives and Republicans, and a number of Democrats, intersect.
Which is why this didn’t make any sense to begin with.
By your logic, we’d be three weeks into an Assault Rifle ban right now.
-
Most muzzle brakes are symmetrical around the muzzle. Seeing one vent in one direction is unusual, but not unheard of. Many models of the Thompson sun machine gun were fitted with a muzzle brake that included a Cutts Compensator which vented gas out the sides and top but not the bottom of the barrel. This helped fight muzzle climb especially when firing in full automatic.
Some shotguns are fitted with these. -
#105 tedtam
I’m surprised they didn’t have a picture of him whacking a bear like Pooty-poot. -
Do you prefer gerkhins or sliced dills?
Ah, that’s as relevant to who you supported in 2008? Good grief, Sarge, our first go around on immigratinon reform about a week ago you were assertively screaming about how it’s all about you and your vote. You bestowed the virtues of a direct democracy and as such you the voter is what mattered and that was that. No diaglogue, no dealing, nothing, just that the elected official must do as you the voter want. Now you’re saying that this issue has nothing to do with you and that who you supported in 2008 is akin to pickles?
If enforcement only is such an important issue to you now that you’re willing to burn the Republican Party down and force them to forever be a minority party if they do not do what you want them to do (but it’s still not about you) than in 2008 you had two candidates whose central issue was border enforcement first. That was Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter. Which of the two did you support? I supported both but not at the same time. Tancredo was my first choice but he weirded out on lots of other issues. So I switched to Duncan Hunter who not only had border enforcement first as central issue but has, more than anyone else, actually achieved some degree of enfocement first. I also found him solid on other issues. Why didn’t you support him? -
I did a write in vote for Duncan Hunter sometime this century. Mighta been 2008.
-
Okay, here’s a story I’m not sure I want to read:
A Suspect Should Never Waive His Rights And Tell The Cops, “I Was Trying To Make The Horse Have A Baby.” -
I did a write in vote for Duncan Hunter sometime this century. Mighta been 2008
That would be my guess. 🙂
-
TT;
😯 -
#112 TT: The last line of the story gives us a little peace:
Mendoza’s criminal career subsequently ended when he hanged himself in a county jail, where he was being held on indecency with a child and trespassing charges.
No longer a scourge on humanity, he self deported – to h3!!.
-
Crap. Turd. Frikkin. Freakin. And any other word you don’t like.
The issue is Amnesty. As long as we keep that the issue, we have a chance to put this terd sammich back in the toilet we put it into back in 2006 & 2008 (even if we didn’t vote for Duncan Freakin Hunter or Tom Frikkin Tancredo)
It’s not that i don’t like freak, freakin’, freasome, freakify, or even Frank Sinastra. In fact, I love those words. When implored as a nadjective it makes it impossible to argue against. For example, since you said, “Duncan Freakin Hunter or Tom Frikkin Tancredo” not only as adjectives but also as middle names for two of the 2008 candidates, it’s impossible to argue against your position, especially since Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo were the two, and perhaps only two candidates who anyone knew of a 100% certainty would NOT support amnesty. In other words, they would carry out the will of the no amnesty voters in our direct democracy nation.
-
he self deported – to h3!!.
To hell or to three hydrogen atoms? 😉
-
And just to show how asinine (that’s puting it kindly) Ron Paul can be:
Ron Paul On Murdered Navy Seal: He Pretty Much Deserved It -
ST, glad that you dropped by. I’d say, Strawberry Jam = Bambi Summer Sauage,….just sayin’
😉 -
Argentina freezes prices to break inflation spiral
I witnessed first hand the effects of this economic approach in Brazil. It’s a nightmare. -
Bambi Summer Sauage
No one can make that better than ST.
No one can gather fresher ingredients than ST. -
#121 Darren, the Bambi Summer Sausage is some that I had made by a deer processor in Pasadena, dang good stuff. It was a bribe dontcha know. 😉
-
Luap Nor is an idiot.
-
Ah, that’s as relevant to who you supported in 2008
No, Darrren. Go back and read the post instead of knee jerking into it, OK?
I said that your question regarding Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo has about as much relevance to the issue as does pickle choices. I’m not going to follow you dowhn rabbit holes,
What is happening here is that the Republicans found out that this issue was going to tank thier hopes for a Rubio candidacy, either as President or Veep, in 2016.
So how do they avoid this?
Well, rather than casting him as the Villian that brought us Amnesty and adding to the size and cost of government by creating a Commission that will come with high salaries for the participants, along with staff and office budgets to go along with them (so they can reward cronies with government jobs), we will cast him as the Proven Conservative Leader who prevented Janet Napolotano from becoming the sole arbiter of Border Security.
Even though we all know that was never going to happen in the first place because there’s already been an agreement on the formation of a Commission, that the Democrats have already agreed to it, and that’s because they recognize that it will be nothing but rhetorical cover for the Republicans.
Now you can cloud that up all you want with mentions of the names of a couple of candidates that the Republicans already de-legitimized the last time they fought us on this issue (odd that they are now using them to shore up thier “Border Security” credentials after doing so, isn’t it?), but its not going to change the fact that Rubio and the others have already agreed to that and are now trying to give the impression, as Shannon said, that the bill is a fait accompli and that the “new” issue is whether Rubio and the others can hold the line where they already agreed it should be. -
I mean, seriously.
“If you didn’t support Tom Tancredo or Duncan Hunter you have no credibility on Border Security.”
What freaking genious thought that one up? -
We’ve got lots of friggin geniuses around here, it’s hard to keep ’em all straight. I predict Hammy is going to ask for some measure of decorum if this keeps on much longer.
-
Which is why this didn’t make any sense to begin with.
We have two issues, both of which portions of the base of both Parties agree with.
In one of them, the Republican Party is fully aligned with those portions of both Parties, thus the Democrats will back off lest they lose support from those in thier base that might vote for Republicans because of it.
In the other, the Republican Party disagrees with thier base—vehemently. The Democrats therefore feel safe in going against thier base because they know they won’t go over to the Republican Party because of it as the Republican Party agrees with the Democrat Party on the issue.
But, if the Democrats were elected becaause of overwhelming public support of everything they do, and they enjoy such a commanding position that they can get anything they want, then they could ignore their base and we’d be three weeks into an Assault Rifel ban right now.
I don’t want to burn our society down and rebuild from the ashes.
I want to burn down the Republican Party and build a Conservative Party from the ashes. -
#119 – I scored Jam AND B&B pickles and didn’t havta trade nuttin! HA
-
If the Republicans were smart (which they’re not), they will use the Gun Control issue to prevent a Democrat takeover of the House in 2014 (which they won’t). They will instead focus their time, energy, and money to see to it that the candidates most favored by thier base either lose thier primaries or elections and to prevent any of their sacred cows from being primaried by the Tea Party.
-
128 Katfish says:
February 4, 2013 at 6:42 pm
#119 – I scored Jam AND B&B pickles and didn’t havta trade nuttin! HAGherkins or slices?
-
I don’t want to burn our society down and rebuild from the ashes.
I don’t want to either. I just think it’s no longer in our control.
I want to burn down the Republican Party and build a Conservative Party from the ashes.
You’re still not going to have enough influence to overcome the parasites. If you can’t get enough like-minded individuals to vote for conservative candidates in a party that is nominally conservative how do expect to accomplish it in society at large?
-
I was looking at that Obama shooting picture and there appears to be a flash of smoke escaping vertically about 5 inches behind the muzzle of the barrel. You have any idea what that is about? I cannot say I have ever seen anything like that.
That’s what happens when you pose with a golf club and an amateur photo shops a rifle/shotgun in its place.
They should’ve hired you Bro Squawk. Heh. -
131 Hamous says:
February 4, 2013 at 6:48 pmI don’t want to burn our society down and rebuild from the ashes.
I don’t want to either. I just think it’s no longer in our control.
I want to burn down the Republican Party and build a Conservative Party from the ashes.
You’re still not going to have enough influence to overcome the parasites. If you can’t get enough like-minded individuals to vote for conservative candidates in a party that is nominally conservative how do expect to accomplish it in society at large?
The parasites did not win the election. If it were as bad as that, we’d be three weeks into an Assault Rifle ban.
The Republicans presented a candidate who snubbed his base and had as bad a record on Gun Rights and Health Care as his opponent did and insulted fence sitters with his 47% comment.
The parasites did not win. The Republicans screwed up a sure win election with thier stupidity, which they are blaming on the people who told them it would happen if they ran the sumbiotch in the first place. -
Gherkin is the language that Cucumber understands. It is a Business Readable, Domain Specific Language that lets you describe software’s behaviour without detailing how that behaviour is implemented.
Gherkin serves two purposes – documentation and automated tests. The third is a bonus feature – when it yells in red it’s talking to you, telling you what code you should write.
Gherkin’s grammar is defined in the Treetop grammar that is part of the Cucumber codebase. The grammar exists in different flavours for many spoken languages (37 at the time of writing), so that your team can use the keywords in your own language.
There are a few conventions.
Single Gherkin source file contains a description of a single feature.
Source files have .feature extension. -
Psssst.
The parasites won. -
The parasites did not win the election. If it were as bad as that, we’d be three weeks into an Assault Rifle ban.
That doesn’t make any sense whatsoever. The parasites won. Just because they want free stuff doesn’t mean they want to ban guns.
-
#130 – slices actually (with some onions) YUMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
-
That doesn’t make any sense whatsoever. The parasites won. Just because they want free stuff doesn’t mean they want to ban guns.
If the parasites had won, and it were as bad as you say it is, then the Democrats would have absolutely nothing to fear from any kind of legislation, from Gun Control to Abortion on Demand for Junior High School students.
Both the Republicans and the Democrats want to foster that attitude, however, as they see that as the primary method by which they will both get the Comprehensive Immigration Reform they both want.
The very fact that the Democrats need the kind of cover that “compromising” with Rubio and the others is evidence that the parasites did not win. Had the parasites won, the Democrats wouldn’t NEED to compromise with ANY Repulbicans, let alone the ones that have always wanted it in the fist place.
They are no where near as strong as people are letting on. -
If the parasites had won, and it were as bad as you say it is, then the Democrats would have absolutely nothing to fear from any kind of legislation, from Gun Control to Abortion on Demand for Junior High School students.
The Democrat Party won the election because they promised the parasites the most free stuff, not because the parasites share their “progressive” ideology on gun control and abortion. If the Democrats interpret the election they way you do and start passing gun control legislation the parasites will vote them out of office like they did in 2010.
-
#128 KatFish
#119 – I scored Jam AND B&B pickles and didn’t havta trade nuttin! HA
Been there, done that, I’ve had strawberry, blackberry, dewberry jam and those grerat bread & butter pickles, BUTT, being that I’m a gentleman, I’ve given back, I.E. bambi summer sausage, smoked sausage and backstrap. 😉
-
The Democrat Party won the election because they promised the parasites the most free stuff, not because the parasites share their “progressive” ideology on gun control and abortion. If the Democrats interpret the election they way you do and start passing gun control legislation the parasites will vote them out of office like they did in 2010.
But if it were as bad as you say it is, all the Democrats would have to do is promise free stuff if they give up thier guns and help them take the guns of others.
If it were as bad as you say it is, the parasites would let them have Immigration Reform in exchange for more free stuff.
You logic hinges on the promose of free stuff being the prime motivator that the Demcrats use to get people to do the things they want the people to do.
But they’re not promising any more free stuff, which means they know it isn’t going to work. They are backing off on Gun Control and “compromising” on Immigration Reform. -
My argument hinges on the fact that the Republicans want to promise free stuff too (and have for at least the last two Republican Presidencies and definetly through the last Republican Majority in Congress), and they want the freedom to do that without being bothered by thier base.
They are in favor of Smaller Big Government Run Better, but that’s about it.
But they do that not becasue handing free stuff out works—they do it because they can make money off of handing free stuff out—which is the same reason Democrats want to do it, BTW. Gummint jobs, patronage positions on Commissions to Study The Problem, Commissions to Work Out a Solution to the Problem and Commissions to Implement the Solution to the problem. Thats what the free stuff is really all about. -
Alright Sarge. Build your party. Forget for a moment that you can’t even convince Republicans to be conservative. I’m sure you’ll have more luck with the parasites.
-
Reply to No. 105:
If you want comments, how about posting the picture and I can write some captions for it. Here is my first caption: “What do you mean I didn’t pass the ‘background check’ to get a concealed handgun permit?” -
#134 Shannon
Gherkin is a tad dated these days. We code in Gherkin++ now. -
143 Hamous says:
February 4, 2013 at 8:09 pm
Alright Sarge. Build your party. Forget for a moment that you can’t even convince Republican LEADERSHIP to be conservative. I’m sure you’ll have more luck with the parasites.I repaired it for you.
Its a simple thing. Anytime you see somebody coming forward with the Party Line, you tell them to go back to thier masters and say we’re not buying it. We’re willing to fight you AND the Democrats. You tell them that the Whigs made the same mistakes, and that’s how thier freaking Party got started in the first place.
Want to see how it works?
Watch the HCRP for the next two years. -
OK, so Dan Patrick is on Piers Morgan’s show, but why is he wearing a shirt that he stole from a Mexican Proctologist?!?!
-
Southern Tragedy & Sandra Taber are starting to post pix from the Tactical event in Katy today. On FB.
-
The bigger question is what you are doing watching that show.
-
#150, I’m an IDIOT?! I know, I know, he’s trying to bump up his ratings but with Texan line up that he had I could’nt resist. Nuggent is up next.
-
I think Piers is out at Tactical for a remote broadcast from the wilds of Katy, Texas.
-
My #151, as bad as I hate the IDIOT from the UK, watching the “Motor City Madman” slice & dice him made it worth it! 😀
-
Want to see how it works?
Watch the HCRP for the next two years.I’ll do better than that. I’ve watched it for the last 20 years. 2nd verse same as the first.
-
I’ll take a stab at answering SD’s question. He was hoping to see me kick him in the gonads?
SuperDave? You know I’ll always share with you. Strawberry is the freshest jam. But I’ve got plenty of last years left. I’m planning on a fishing trip up your ways pretty soon. We’ll hook up then!
BTW: Daniel Freakin’ James showed up as well. He sends his love……. 😉 -
ST, did ya’ miss my #140 when I was trying to S’plain to KatFish what I was talking about?
Oh and why don’t you just say what you really mean, don’t hold it back. 😀
Sarc Off -
FWIW; The Dale County Sheriff is on Fox and CNN talking about the little boy that was saved today.
-
I finally turned up a short note about the rescue. Had to get it from Oz for some reason.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/2013/02/05/09/17/alabama-boy-held-hostage-in-bunker-release -
Oh and one more thing Paul Harvey’s “God made a farmer” was great! He talked about my Dad.
-
Super Dave;
For me, Paul Harvey spoke in part of my dad but more specifically of my grandparents, mainly of my grandfather.
https://www.hamous.org/?p=6205#comment-86685 -
Sure Dave#122;
LoL, I’m sure it’s good stuff. Niki’s grandpa gave me some deer meat once and frankly I did not like it. He said it was of good quality so I guess one needs to build up a taste for it. Until then I’ll stick to pork and angus beef. -
Shannon #123;
He was on that one. Rand Paul’s come out in support of America’s deadliest sniper, calling him a hero. That made me happy. -
Sarge;
“If you didn’t support Tom Tancredo or Duncan Hunter you have no credibility on Border Security.”
What freaking genious thought that one up?Apparently you did. That said, I do think it goes to one’s credibility, though not entirely, if one calls for the burning down of a major political party and forbidding the 2016 nomination for the golden ring of US President based around, as per this dialogue, being laps on border security when only one election cycle ago you did not support either of the two candidates who were unquestionably the strongest on border security. And, yes, your question had everything to do with who you supported in 2008. The level of vehemence you display here is not in accordance to when you recently had a chance to support a candidate who would have done precisely what you say a presidential candidate should do, lest you withdraw your support entirely from that candidate. And I’m not talking about Tom Tancredo. there was a world of difference between Hunter and Tancredo, even on border security. Hunter was actually doing what Tancredo said should be done, and what you say should be done. If the direct democracy which we do not live in has everything to do with you in opposing Marco Rubio for President, then how in the world does it not have anything to do with you in skipping out in supporting the man who did exactly what you say he should have done? As one who did support that person in 2008 I openly wonder now how we are going to get enforcement first on the border?
(Forgive my run one paragraph. I still hate blogging on iPad) -
Katfish #128;
I wouldn’t mind at all scoring some of ST’s homemade jam, that’s for sure. -
Ron Paul explains his asinine remak regarding the shooting death of Chris Kyle:
As a veteran, I certainly recognize that this weekend’s violence and killing of Chris Kyle were a tragic and sad event. My condolences and prayers go out to Mr. Kyle’s family. Unconstitutional and unnecessary wars have endless unintended consequences. A policy of non-violence, as Christ preached, would have prevented this and similar tragedies. -REP
Ummm, that’s not much better.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/04/ron-paul-account-tweets-shock-message-about-former-seal-snipers-death/
I’ll still pay closer attention to Rand Paul. -
In the words of Boe and Luke Duke,,”yeeeeeeeeehawwwwwwwww“
-
Southern Tragedy was on Channel 11’s 10 o’clock news, commenting about the Piers Morgan appearance/show. She was part of the crowd outside, of course, as the building was reserved for Piers and guests on his show. Good to see and hear her. 🙂 And the jam she makes is wonderful.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.