If They Come for Your Guns, Do You Have a Responsibility to Fight?

solgunsI feel a tremendous responsibility to write this article though I am a little apprehensive. Thinking about the possibility of rising up against our own government is a frightening thing for many of us. I am not Johnny Rambo and I will be the first to admit that I do not want to die. The reason I feel compelled to write this, however, is simply because I don’t think the average American is equipped with the facts. I feel that a lot of American citizens feel like they have no choice but to surrender their guns if the government comes for them. I blame traditional media sources for this mass brainwash and I carry the responsibility of all small independent bloggers to tell the truth. So my focus today is to lay out your constitutional rights as an American, and let you decide what to do with those rights.

About a month ago I let the “democracy” word slip in a discussion with a fellow blogger. I know better. Americans have been conditioned to use this term. It’s not an accurate term and it never has been a correct term to describe our form of government. The truth is that the United States of America is a constitutional republic. This is similar to a democracy because our representatives are selected by democratic elections, but ultimately our representatives are required to work within the framework of our constitution. In other words, even if 90% of Americans want something that goes against our founding principles, they have no right to call for a violation of constitutional rights.

If you are religious you might choose to think of it this way… Say that members of your congregation decide that mass fornication is a good thing. Do they have the right to change the teachings of your God? The truth is the truth. It doesn’t matter how many people try to stray from it. Did I just compare our founders to God? In a way I did, but please note that I am not trying to insult anyone. For the purpose of the American Government our constitution and founders who wrote it are much like God is to believers. It is the law. It is indisputable.

Our founders did not want a “democracy” for they feared a true democracy was just as dangerous as a monarchy. The founders were highly educated people who were experienced in defending themselves against tyranny. They understood that the constitution could protect the people by limiting the power of anyone to work outside of it much better than a pure system of popularity. A system of checks and balances was set up to help limit corruption of government and also the potential for an “immoral majority” developing within the American People. We have forgotten in this country that we are ultimately ruled by a constitution.

Why is a democracy potentially just as dangerous as a monarchy? Let’s look at something that Benjamin Franklin said because it answers that question more fully and succinctly than I can.

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin

Even 230+ years ago our founders were perceptive enough to realize that democracy was a dangerous form of government. How so? Because the citizens of a country can become just as corrupt as any government. We have seen evidence of this throughout history. Ask Native Americans and African-Americans if this population can become corrupt.

I think in 2012 we are seeing evidence of what Franklin was trying to tell us. Just because a majority of people may support certain ideas it does not mean that those ideas are just. In simple terms, just because most Americans love our president and voted for him, it does not mean that he has the power to go against our constitutional rights.

Next I’d like to review the text of the second amendment. It is very clear. This is the law of this land. So when Senator Feinstein or President Obama talk about taking your guns, you need to think about something. Are they honoring their sworn oath to uphold the constitution?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

supremeThis is a pretty clear statement. The fact is that it took 232 years for the Supreme Court to even rule on this amendment because it has never been successfully challenged. In 2008 a case of Columbia v. Heller the Supreme Court ruled that a handgun ban in Washington D.C. was unconstitutional. One also has to take this into consideration. The Supreme Court supports your right to own guns. If you want to research this decision further you can start here.

For those who try to debate the spirit of the 2nd amendment, they are truly no different from people who will try to take Biblical quotes out of context to try to support their immoral decisions. The founders were very clear on the intent of the 2nd amendment. Let me share a few quick quotes here:

The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. -Thomas Jefferson

Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that is good. -George Washington

The Constitution shall never be construed….to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. -Samuel Adams

founderspicI could find hundreds of quotes like these. This country was built on the right to bear arms. It was built on the rights of an individual to bear arms, regardless of what his government or neighbor happened to think. This is crystal clear. Ironically the people who voice their opinions against this right have their free speech protected by your guns. Without guns in this country, all other amendments become null and void, simply because “We the People” will lose our power of enforcement.

We need to keep this in mind as our “representatives” try to push gun bans. I don’t care if 99% of people are in support of gun bans (which is far from the case), it is a violation of our constitutional rights, plain and simple.

A constitutional republic protects the rights of the individual even when their ideas are very much  in the minority. If I were the only person in America who believed in the 2nd amendment, I would still be within my rights to call upon it. You would all think I was insane and possibly celebrate if I was gunned down, but in the end I would be the only true American among us.

Our framers were very clear on this. If my government comes to take my guns, they are violating one of my constitutional rights that is covered by the 2nd amendment.

soulonfireIt is not my right, at that point, but my responsibility to respond in the name of liberty. What I am telling you is something that many are trying to soft sell, and many others have tried to avoid putting into print, but I am going to say it. The time for speaking in code is over.

If they come for our guns then it is our constitutional right to put them six feet under. You have the right to kill any representative of this government who tries to tread on your liberty. I am thinking about self-defense and not talking about inciting a revolution. Re-read Jefferson’s quote. He talks about a “last resort.” I am not trying to start a Revolt, I am talking about self-defense. If the day for Revolution comes, when no peaceful options exist, we may have to talk about that as well. None of us wants to think about that, but please understand that a majority can not take away your rights as an American citizen. Only you can choose to give up your rights.

Congress could pass gun ban legislation by a 90%+ margin and it just would not matter. I think some people are very unclear on this. This is the reason we have a Supreme Court, and though I do not doubt that the Supreme Court can also become corrupt, in 2008 they got it right. They supported the constitution. It does not matter what the majority supports because America is not a democracy. A constitutional republic protects the rights of every single citizen, no matter what their “elected servants” say. A majority in America only matters when the constitution is not in play.

I just wrote what every believer in the constitution wants to say, and what every constitutional blogger needs to write. The truth of the matter is that this type of speech is viewed as dangerous and radical or subversive, and it could gain me a world of trouble that I do not want. It is also the truth. To make myself clear I will tell you again. If they come for your guns it is your right to use those guns against them and to kill them. You are protected by our constitution.

Most of the articles I am reading on the subject are trying to give you clues without just coming out and saying it. I understand that because certain things in this country will get you on a list that you don’t want to be on. I may well be on that list. This blog is small and growing so I may not be there yet, but I have dreams. I also have my own list of subversives and anyone who attempts to deny my constitutional rights is on that list.

I am not the “subversive” here, it is the political representatives who are threatening to take away my inalienable rights. If they come to take my guns and I leave a few of them wounded or dead, and I somehow survive, I have zero doubt that I will spend a long time in prison and may face an execution. But I would much rather be a political prisoner than a slave.

If I go down fighting then I was not fighting to harm these human beings. I was simply defending my liberty and yours. It is self-defense and it is what our country was built on. We won our freedom in self-defense. We would not be ruled by a tyrannical government in the 1770’s and we will not be ruled in 2012 by a tyrannical government. There is no difference.

This is a case of right and wrong. As of now the 2nd amendment stands. It has never been repealed. If Feinstein or Barack have a problem with the constitution then they should be removed from office. They are not defending the constitution which they have sworn an oath to protect. It is treasonous to say the least. They would likely say the same about me, but I have the constitution, the founders, and the supreme court on my side. They only have their inflated egos.

I am not writing this to incite people. I am writing this in hopes that somehow I can make a tiny difference. I have no idea how many of my neighbors have the will to defend their constitutional rights. 2%? 20%? I am afraid that 20% is a high number, unfortunately. When push comes to shove many people may give up and submit to being ruled. I believe that our government is banking on this.

What I do know is that this country was founded by people who had balls the size of Texas and Patriotic Americans take shit off of no one, especially our own government. For evidence of that, you might research the Revolutionary War. My question is how many Patriots are left?

I would hope that our officials come to realize that, regardless of our numbers, we still exist because they are calling Patriotic Americans to action. They are making us decide if we want to die free or submit to their rule. I can not tell you where you should stand on that. I do know that it may make the difference between living a life of freedom or slavery.

thinkingYou must start thinking about this because I believe that the day is coming soon and I personally believe it has already been planned. Not all conspiracy theories are hogwash. They may throw down the gauntlet soon and my suggestion is that you prepare yourself to react.

I mean no disrespect to our elected officials but they need to understand that “We the People” will not be disarmed. If they proceed then it is they that are provoking us and we will act accordingly. We are within our rights to do so.

For those who are in support of taking the guns, you need to ask yourself a very important question, and I am not just talking about the politicians, because if you support them, you have chosen your side.

Are you willing to die to take my guns?

Click Here to Follow The D.C. Clothesline on Facebook

IMPORTANT UPDATE From Dean Garrison!!! When this post originally went viral I was trying to answer every single comment and that lasted for almost 48 hours. Then I came to grips with the fact that I am human and I can’t do it. If for no other reason I value my family and I can’t steal time from them to constantly be on the site. I want you all to know that I appreciate your support and good debate whether you agree or disagree. I also want to thank each and every American Patriot who has made the honorable choice to serve their country. Anyone who wants to repost this on their blog or website is also given permission to do so, so long as nothing is changed in the text of the article, and a link is provided back to this site. Again, thank you so much. I am humbled. It’s now 16 days later and this is still the most popular post on our blog. Keep fighting for what is right. We must stand united. -Dean Garrison 1-20-13

Advertisements

About Dean Garrison

Dean Garrison is a father of five, who faithfully pursues the American Dream. In the greatest country on earth there are hypocrites and liars abound, and he tries to expose them one at a time. It's time to get rid of the servant leaders who treat us as slaves.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5,148 Responses to If They Come for Your Guns, Do You Have a Responsibility to Fight?

  1. Mark says:

    An illuminating note that, for me highlights a major problem in the American psyche.

    http://dcclothesline.com/2013/04/17/state-run-liberal-propaganda-media-blames-right-wing-extremists-for-boston-marathon-bombing-i-blame-obama/

    In Chad Miller’s disgraceful rant he says “this brutal act was done by animals who deserve a bullet to their heads”. He doesn’t say they deserve the full force of the judicial process, due process etc etc. “A bullet to their heads”.

    Justice from the barrel of a gun.

    While this is the justice that “patriots” demand, and while this is the language used on the streets, then the act of shooting someone can be justified by those who look for the smallest of justification for their major injustices.

    • 7delta says:

      Mark said: In Chad Miller’s disgraceful rant he says “this brutal act was done by animals who deserve a bullet to their heads”. He doesn’t say they deserve the full force of the judicial process, due process etc etc. “A bullet to their heads”.
      Justice from the barrel of a gun.

      I don’t know Chad Miller, but he would not be the first, nor the only person on earth of any nationality, to express that the death sentence of a heinous murderer is deserved. It’s figurative language. If Mr. Miller had the choice of due process or literally putting the bullet in the head of a suspect, I would bet Mr. Miller would choose the Rule of Law over pulling the trigger himself or encouraging someone else to do it without due process or without justifiable self defense. That choice, of course, is contingent on safely taking the suspect into the judicial system. If directly threatened, everyone has the right to self-defense.

      Information gained from a living perpetrator is quite valuable, especially in events like Boston. I’m sure Mr. Miller realizes this, but that does not lessen the fact that the suspect deserves the death sentence for his crime against innocents.

      You’ll note that, at the time of this post, one of the suspects has been killed by authorities because the two brothers brought force against them, resulting in the death of an MIT officer and another officer critically wounded. Even authorities have the right to self-defense.

      Did the perpetrator deserved death? Yes. Was his death by bullet appropriate? Yes. Was law enforcement wrong to use equal force against the perpetrator? No. He deserved a bullet to the head and he got it, but it was because he left law enforcement no alternative. LE would have preferred to interrogate him and to go through the legal process. If found guilty, he still deserved the ultimate consequence of death. He deserved what he got. It just wasn’t the preferable method of delivery.

      Are you familiar with Tolkien? When Frodo lamented that he wished his Uncle Bilbo had killed Gollum in the cave when they first met, Gandalf told Frodo, in the movie verse, that many people who do not deserve death die and many who deserve death live, but it’s not our choice, that there are more powerful forces in control. We don’t know what role even the most evil may have yet to play in order to accomplish true justice. Frodo was simply lamenting Gollum’s participation in evil and imagining a different scenario if justice had been served earlier and Gollum didn’t exist. However, it’s notable that Gandalf slew, without compunction, those orcs and men of evil who came against them and that Gollum was necessary in the end for the destruction of the One Ring. Gollum brought about his own demise, just like Suspect #1 did. Justice was served. Self-defense brought death to those who deserved it, not vigilante actions. Frodo’s expression that death was deserved did not mean he thought they should hunt Gollum down and deliver it on the spot without immediate provocation. He was speaking in the hypothetical, just like Mr. Miller.

      Mr. Miller’s statement that people who would perpetrate the kind of crime as these brothers deserve death is not indicative of a troubled mind set, but an expression that the ultimate justice of a perpetrator forfeiting his life is justified in this case, similar to what Frodo lamented about Gollum. It does mean or promote that murdering a murder suspect is acceptable or right. It just means the murderer deserves death. The troubled mind set belongs to a person who would indiscriminately kill innocent people, someone who is so consumed by evil their existence is a threat to mankind.

      Does the remaining brother at large deserve death? Does he deserve his day in court? These two concepts are not mutually exclusive.

      Calm down, Bud. Mr. Miller is simply expressing that justice of the highest magnitude is warranted for someone who would willingly place a backpack filled with explosives down next to an 8 year-old boy, then detonated it. ‘A bullet to the head’ is merely an expression to convey this concept and not exclusively American.

      • 7delta says:

        I’m seem to be good at screwing up the formatting lately.

        My comments begin after Mark’s statement: Mark said: In Chad Miller’s disgraceful rant he says “this brutal act was done by animals who deserve a bullet to their heads”. He doesn’t say they deserve the full force of the judicial process, due process etc etc. “A bullet to their heads”.
        Justice from the barrel of a gun.

        I’m sure people can figure this out, but just in case there is any confusion….

        • 7delta says:

          Seriously, I need an edit button;

          My statement: It does mean or promote that murdering a murder suspect is acceptable or right. Should read: It does NOT mean or promote…..

          • Mark says:

            7delta,

            The point I was making is that in the UK, and I expect in other countries that dont have a gun culture an author of a similar post to that of Chad would not have said a “bullet in the head”. I dont think any European countries have the death penatly so your “ultimate justice” is not an option.

            I read an interesting article the other day, i couldnt find it again sorry, that talked about the American experience of gun culture has developed, over years a desensitising of the act pulling the trigger. While obviously the majority of society abhors this violence and maybe Chad doesnt want to pull the trigger himself, the fact that the “figurative language” of choice involves a gun is a particularly American phenomenon. The authors of the article were American. I read a transcript of a debate from a guy called Shapiro, a pro gun American, he also suggested that part of the problem was American societies acceptance of justice delivered from a gun.

            I dont need to calm down this isnt a rant. I am pointing out something that has occured to me since I started to know more about this debate, that Americans are in love with their guns, that isnt meant condescendingly. You love the freedom that they give you. This is hard for a non American to understand. I do not understand it. But it seems to me that this love of guns is at a heavy cost. It has developed an arms race between good guys with guns and bad guys with guns. It will only bring more and more death.

            • 7delta says:

              Mark said: The point I was making is that in the UK, and I expect in other countries that dont have a gun culture an author of a similar post to that of Chad would not have said a “bullet in the head”. I dont think any European countries have the death penatly so your “ultimate justice” is not an option.

              As I’ve explained before, we have a dual sovereignty structure. The federal government has the death penalty. Massachusetts does not. Since the perpetrators broke both federal and state laws, he could be subject to the death penalty under federal law, but it takes decades usually for the penalty to be served, as the system provides a check and balance of exhausting appeals before it’s carried out. We don’t just off people who have been found guilty of heinous crimes that carry the death penalty without allowing multiple courts to review the evidence and for the defendant to plead his cause to them. The death penalty is rare, even in states that recognize it. No state shoots people in the head or employs firing squads. The condemned actually get pretty humane endings, considering they’re being put to death, unlike their victims.

              It may be true that in Great Britain it would be unusual for someone to use such a phrase as Mr. Miller, but I would bet that after the London subway bombings, pubs were alive with angry voices who, in comparable hyperbole, proclaimed loudly the perpetrators deserved to the ‘hung from the top of Big Ben’, ‘shackled in the Tower and left to starve’, ‘drawn and quartered’ and maybe even the occasional suggestion they ‘deserved a firing squad’. I doubt everyone sat around discussing protecting the murderers’ human rights, securing comfortable and humane quarters and providing the perpetrators with nutritious meals while he awaited his due process of the law. It’s human nature for people to vent their feelings with over the top statements that they would never actually do or support. It means little more, in most instances, than they’re upset and want justice.

              Whatever figurative language is culturally pertinent, a person hung by the neck until dead, starved, flogged to death or drawn and quartered is just as dead as a person who is shot in the head.

              I read an interesting article the other day, i couldn’t find it again sorry, that talked about the American experience of gun culture has developed, over years a desensitising of the act pulling the trigger. …I read a transcript of a debate from a guy called Shapiro, a pro gun American, he also suggested that part of the problem was American societies acceptance of justice delivered from a gun.

              Interesting, since I’m not aware of any desensitization of the American citizen about pulling a trigger or that society accepts that justice comes from the barrel of a gun. If anything, there’s more awareness of wise gun ownership than ever before. Besides, it was Mao that made a similar statement to Mr. Shapiro’s, but he phrased it as political power comes from the barrel of a gun. Mr. Shapiro, whoever he is, may have given away his influences. In fact, those much reviewed statistics show that violent crime has been steadily decreasing in the U.S., including murder and crimes involving firearms. Mr. Shapiro has nothing evident to support his claim. I don’t where he’s coming from, but it’s not the behavior or mind set of the average gun owner. Most gun owners never want to pull the trigger on another human being. Criminals don’t care much, because they are devoid of moral conscience or adherence to the law. The average legal gun owner is not a criminal and has no desire to be one. They much prefer the Rule of Law to the barrel of a gun. It’s not a game or an emotional high to shoot somebody. It’s devastating for most people, even for well trained law enforcement officers, which is why most departments offer counseling to officers who shoot someone in the line of duty. It’s a serious responsibility to pull that trigger and gun owners know it.

              You love the freedom that they give you. This is hard for a non American to understand. I do not understand it. But it seems to me that this love of guns is at a heavy cost. It has developed an arms race between good guys with guns and bad guys with guns. It will only bring more and more death.

              I agree that it’s hard for you to understand. I accept that.

              There is no arms race between law abiding citizens and the bad guys. We have the unalienable right to keep and bear arms. They do not. But let’s say it is an arm’s race. Disarming the gun owner will not stop the criminal. Should we just let them win? Should we be willing to offer up our lives to make a small segment of our society who think guns are evil feel better? If you think the cost is high now, wait until no one is armed but the street criminal or the criminals in a government that see political power from the barrel of a gun as obtainable. People are evil, not guns. Guns don’t cause people to be evil. People are evil because they are emotionally deficient and have chosen evil as their modus operandi, whether they use a gun or a backpack filled with explosives.

              And remember, the criminal never does something he believes is wrong. Yes, you read that correctly. In his mind, he’s justified in his actions. His moral boundaries are not the same as everyone else’s. Those boundaries will not be altered by force or by removing an instrument that can be used to accomplish his goals, especially if removed from potential victims. They can be contained by incarceration or by temporary physical restrain–hopefully before they enact a planned crime. To change aberrant boundaries, they must be taught and learn new standards of coping and behaviors. Some are not capable. They truly are mentally and emotionally deficient. Some of these people are high functioning and in positions of authority. They’re often charismatic and manipulative and usually blame others for problems they themselves are guilty of doing or is indicative of what they want. Most, however, especially if taught early, can grow into human beings of conscience and moral discipline.

              With the nature of man in mind, I would go so far to say that if Great Britain went back to allowing gun ownership with restraints only on the criminal, you would not see a rise in murders or crimes. You may see a shift in method, but overall, you would not see more people killing more people. A person dead by physical assault is as dead as a person shot. There is no guarantee that a person stabbed is more likely to survive than a person shot, nor is there any assurance that a person shot will die. People survive head shots. There is no guarantee that someone bent on mass murder won’t use another method just because guns are in short supply. The vast majority of Brits are not criminals and would never harm anyone except in self defense. The criminals are still going to be criminals and will still do what criminals do.

              Guns do not make criminals. Don’t help them be criminals by attaching more significance to their tools than to their responsibility to be self-disciplined, moral human beings. Help them learn to solve their problems within the boundaries of choosing to do good, not evil.

              • Rob Price says:

                A “bullet to the head” may have been a touch harsh, but with that being said, if the “death penalty was re-instituted and used like it was meant to be, violent crime would go down and it would save taxpayers money-if all appeals were limited to one per case. Statistical data from the FBI and various States bear this out rather plainly. The problem is that the progressives thinK that Capital Punishment is “barbaric”. Well, so is murder of innocents and rape, kidnapping, terrorism, and pedophilia. What is worse? Capital punishment or rampant crimes and murders?

                • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                  A touch Harsh!!! They blew up and killed and wouned alot of people with the intent to kill more!! What the hell is wrong with you liberals?? Politically correctness is the most stupid thing that ever came out of your peoples thought process. Have you never heard of calling an ace and ace and a spade a spade? Theres a reason for that saying, if you hide and cover stuff up it eventually becomes distant and not real. Which in cases like this is very damn dangerous!! Hey Rob have you ever heard of the Bazzarro world in superman comics, well that brother is where there so called progressives reside in their own little minds. The world is cold and cruel, thats a fact, you cant sugar coat it and survive it.

      • 7delta,

        Thank you, another eloquent and intelligent explanation of a concept certain people will never understand. Tolkien is a favorite author of mine. That exchange between Gandalf and Frodo is very apropos.

        I would like to remind some people of some celebrities comments made after Sandy Hook, that innocent NRA members deserved to be shot simply because they are against more gun control laws. These supposedly ‘enlightened’ celebrities, who want stricter gun control laws, called for the shooting of INNOCENT people just because they have a different opinion than the celebrities.

      • DanD says:

        Of course, you presume that the government is telling you the truth about whether these two young handjobs really even had something to do with the Boston bombing … or whether the fact of their CIA employ is not true … .

        DanD

      • Jean says:

        I understand what you are saying, and yes, if at all possible, no man should be shot and
        killed if it is possible to arrest and give him a fair trial. This is so easy to demonstrate in the case of the Boston Marathon Hoax. We have learned that it was an exercise set up
        by homeland security merging military with police and even private contractors such as Craft International. They have irrefutable proof that they used parapalegic actors and fake blood packets. The young guys that they fingered were Muslims from a section of Chechnia and the current political trend to demean the Muslims in the middle east,
        specifically Syria and Iran to condition the dumbed down public so they will approve of
        an attack on those countrys. However, they may have just been a component of the whole act, and the shooting of the oldest son may have just been a made for film presentation to make the whole lie realistic. If this was the case, just an exercise and
        they killed the oldest son they are guilty of first degree murder. I suggest that you
        type into your search box, Youtube, boston bombing hoax. and look at the evidence.
        Bottom line statement, every man regardless of race,religion or political beliefs deserves
        a fair and honest trial by honest people with a truly honorable judge and no information
        brought forward by the defense should be disallowed if there is a chance that it is relevent to the charges and may aid in proving innocence.

        • Rob Price says:

          The people who lost limbs and their lives in Boston, and the students and faculty members who died in Mass., who surely disagree with you on giving these criminal’s their “constitutional rights” to a fair trial. They certainly didn’t have their rights upheld-they died and bled in the streets and hallways not knowing what was happening or why. Justice? The only true justice is “an eye for an eye”, and if you don’t believe that, well, then America has fallen farther than I ever imagined!

          • 7delta says:

            Rob Price said: The people who lost limbs and their lives in Boston, and the students and faculty members who died in Mass., who surely disagree with you on giving these criminal’s their “constitutional rights” to a fair trial.

            Even though I’m certain the victims and their families are grieving and perhaps angry, to say they don’t want the law upheld is a rather sweeping statement. Your statement is not the same as the one made by Brad about ‘what they deserve’. His statement was theoretical about what the outcome should be, not about foregoing the process to derive punishment. You are advocating lawlessness then projecting it onto the victims as if you are privy to their innermost feelings and thoughts. I have no doubt some have been so emotionally and physically wounded that they have felt an overwhelming desire for revenge at times, but when the pain becomes more manageable, it’s not likely they, or the majority consensus, would agree that the surviving perpetrator should be denied access to the justice system or, as an American citizen, to his Constitutional rights. Having rights does not mean he will not be held accountable. It does mean his accountability will be determined by the justice system, by the Rule of Law and by a jury of his peers. It doesn’t just protect him from being railroaded by corruption, where facts are more important than feelings, it protects you from it as well.

            Whether we like it or not, the surviving perpetrator is an American citizen. Perhaps our focus should be on why we’re allowing questionable people refuge in this country, instead of worrying about whether or not he should be denied the unalienable rights he is due as a citizen so there is no question of his guilt and that guilt was determined ‘by the book’. Many heinous people have had their rights upheld and have been held accountable, like Manson and Bundy. If you are willing to sacrifice his unalienable rights, you willingly give yours away. What’s to stop someone from framing you for a horrific crime, then inflaming public sentiment against you? Wouldn’t you want your rights upheld? No matter how obvious someone’s guilt, their rights are your rights. Protect them or lose them.

            Your discordance is quite interesting, Mr. Price.

            • 7d,

              Once again, I’m awed by your comment. You have a beautiful writing style – eloquent and wonderful flow. There is nothing to add to what you said – I agree completely.

              “Your discordance is quite interesting, Mr. Price.”

              I noticed this, also. It’s almost like he is two different people….

              • Brad says:

                Laura, I came to that same conclusion myself. He does seem like two different people. Multiple Personality Disorder??? Schizophrenic??? Just confused or is there actually two or more people making comments on the same name?

              • 7delta says:

                Thank you, Laura. I don’t think I’m the Lone Ranger in seeing the importance of upholding the law, even when our emotions are high. We have a good example in the recent tainted letter case where the first guy arrested has apparently been framed by someone else. The only way to get to the truth is to maintain the Rule of Law, even when we’re concerned about corruption coming into the judicial system. Our job, IMO, is to continue to demand it. Impartial justice is the necessary principle to protect the innocent and to provide valid justice to the guilty.

                I noticed this, also. It’s almost like he is two different people….

                That’s certainly a possibility. What I see is an inability to understand the role, to actually incorporate an idea or behavior internally so that the fine nuisances are believable. When this is absent, the words may be fairly close to being right, but they’re a ‘note’ off. It’s very difficult to do successfully. With Rob, his words seem to be caricatures that are derived from, and filtered through, his actual thoughts and beliefs, which are not concordant with the reality he intends to imitate. So he says what he ‘thinks’ would be a widely held position among a particular demographic, but in reality, he’s projecting his beliefs about that demographic. It’s possible to disagree with people who hold similar views as your own and there is no doubt about the legitimacy of either person’s position, but it’s not easy to pretend to be one of the guys when your perception is skewed by predetermined judgments and your filters are not attuned to the nuances. This is why Russia immersed their spies to this country for years before they were sent here in American culture, in fabricated American towns, with American media and American entertainment. Believability.

                At any rate, he’s more than a note off usually. But I see what you mean. He’s kind of all over the place. My usual response to his posts are “over the top much?”

                • Brad, 7d,

                  A falseness, a hollowness to his words – they just don’t ‘ring true.’ His comments never come off as sincere because they aren’t – he doesn’t believe what he is saying.

                  “….his words seem to be caricatures that are derived from, and filtered through, his actual thoughts and beliefs, which are not concordant with the reality he intends to imitate. So he says what he ‘thinks’ would be a widely held position among a particular demographic, but in reality, he’s projecting his beliefs about that demographic.”

                  Exactly! Very well written and clear explanation, 7d.

                  • Jerry says:

                    He reads from a teleprompter, just like G W did.

                    These guys do not have any original thoughts, they and their intellects are owned.

                    Their masters are not the “voters”.

                  • Brad says:

                    Who knows, we may be his latest research project. I believe Thom has posted who and what he is before (I believe a Ph.D in some sort of research group), and that profile doesn’t jive with the part that he is attempting to play here. But, that being said, I always try to give a person the chance to either prove or disprove themselves without prejudgment or bias. At least that is what I attempt to do. The rest is up to them.

                    • Yes, I remember that comment.

                    • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                      Price is a Poser and a POS may him no never mind anymore!

                    • Rob Price says:

                      It’s people like you who have given this country a black eye to the rest of the world. one opinion and sorely misplaced at that. Guys like you are the very reason this country is in the shape it is in. Quit being part of the problem and start contributing to the solution to the problem!

                    • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                      No Rob people like you are why the country is on a downward slope to hell, No morals or principles, anything goes, nobody is at fault for anything they do, everybody is owed something, nothing is wrong its just a life style, there is no God, God is a four letter word, the ten commandments are bad, that sir is why this country is in the shape it is and no toher reason!!!! God has and is turning his back on this country because it has become unholy! We dont respect peoples rights, we do respect law breakiong criminals right ( who arent supposed to have any till they repay theri debt to society) we kill babies by the 100 of thousands and claim it for woemens heatlh, because the whores are too stupid to use birth control, yet you want to ban guns because a crazy asshole kill some kids, how come we arent banning abortion clinics??? Pr cars for the thousands of children killed by them a year, there is no defining reason for any of the crap that comes down the pike its just all emotionalism, and thats what has gotten us where we are!! I really dont care what you think you over educated dumbass, all the book knowledge has pushed the common sense out of your head. I have a sister that spent most of her life in college filling her head with kowledge she never used for anything, she lives off the rest of the family because she cant get a job, and now shes 63, and she claims to be smart. No freaking common sense at all.You remind me of her, I feel sorry for you in a sense , but not sorry enough to tell yopu to f__k yourself! I have no compasion for assholes that have helped to screw this country up by pushing, God, the constitution and common sense out of our society. Mans wisdom is stupidity to God, because man has no wisdom, those that think they do are just sadly mistaken! Our better yet fooled by their own VANITY! And life is too short to waste my time with them!

                    • Thom says:

                      Yeah, Fuck Yeah!! Its all MoogleY’s fault ‘NOT” you dumbass piece of shit. Why? Because he may not be as well written as some? Well butthead that puts me to blame as well but then on the other hand I don’t believe a damn word you say. Elite” is just another word for “shithead”, you would do well to remember that seeing as how you seem to consider yourself as being a member of that “illustrious” few. Theres not a decent, working class, tax paying citizen in the U.S. that doesn’t know who owns the “REAL” blame.

                      A shower, a white shirt and tie, along with a big toothy grin doesn’t work anymore Matter of fact they, (whites shirts), have some of the most devious of people hiding behind them. Are you one of them? A finger pointing, self centered, asshole who is quick to judge and quicker yet to place the blame on others? Sounds to me like you are. As a Marine i have earned the use of the F-Bomb, so trying to undermine my statement by pointing out my blunt comments will do you no good.
                      Molon Labe dickhead. “Fuck Yeah”

                    • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                      Lmfao well said Thom 8) not only was it funny as crap, but also intelligent ( that means smart Rob) and full of common sense( cant explain that one to u Rob u have no idea what that is) my hat is off to you!

            • Rob Price says:

              I wasn’t advocating lawlessness. I was only trying to make a parallel point of argument. Any time the law is usurped, you will have anarchy and unrest in the streets. Egypt is a good example.
              The problem with playing “devil’s advocate” in today’s society is people tend to take it serious.

              • 7delta says:

                Rob said: The only true justice is “an eye for an eye”, and if you don’t believe that, well, then America has fallen farther than I ever imagined!

                That doesn’t sound like a devil’s advocate to me, Rob. It sounds like a proposed statement of belief.

                • Rob Price says:

                  Not two different people, just one who looks at both sides before making any judgement. A well rounded education in Criminology and Political Science has allowed for more leniency towards the “less” informed.

                  • Brad says:

                    I hope the “less informed” comment wasn’t directed at 7delta, because that would be seriously misdirected. There aren’t many that spend the time performing their due diligence like he does.

                    I have seen you write some comments that I was in full agreement with, and then you come back with something that seems as though you have switched to the polar opposite argument. Quite honestly it leaves me a little confused as to where you stand.

                    • Rob Price says:

                      My comment was meant for no one person in particular, and if my comments seem to ebb and flow in different directions, it’s because this site has lost all semblance of its intended purpose and people have taken off on tangents that have no bearing on the original subject. I spent over 22 years in the Army under several different Commander in Chiefs, and to say that the current one is a true leader is a true travesty. My educational and public service background(both military and civilian) have given me insights into both realms that are to say the least, unique. I do not agree with the lefts assault on the 2nd Amendment, but, with that being said, I don’t always agree with the other side’s argument either! No matter the situation, a gun never solves anything. You can conquer a political faction with force, but in the end, all you do is make an underground enemy who is even more determined in their beliefs. The assault on the 2nd Amendment will never be settled for one simple reason-neither side is willing to admit that the other side has valid points and neither side is willing to move to the center of the argument.

                    • Brad says:

                      Rob, I’ll agree with most of what you said there. I do not believe everything the left stands for is anathema to the right, but since they are so diametrically opposed on the vast majority of issues, neither side wants to give any credit to the other for fear of “appearing” to agree on other issues as well.

                      Although I am decidedly right leaning, there are beliefs on the extreme right that I do not ascribe to. But the vast majority of the lefts ideology leaves me sick to my stomach, both literally and figuratively. I do not know how any “free” thinking individual with even a modicum of intelligence can say the things and act the way that they do. Their thought process (if you can call it that), leaves me confused and in utter shock that they could actually believe what they just said. In truth, I believe that being liberal is a mental disorder, and I am not trying to be funny here, I believe that there is a fundamental disconnect in their ability to think and reason. They are the most narcissistic people I have ever encountered, and most of them have no ability to compromise on anything at all. Their idea of compromise is the other side giving in to their demands. They live in constant fear, not only of others, but of what they themselves are capable of as well, which I believe is the basis for their fear of others.

                      I applaud your military service and thank you, and I thank you for your support of the second amendment. But I have to disagree with the statement that “a gun never solves anything”. Sometimes you are left with no other choice but to use deadly force. Is it the ideal resolution? No, but sometimes people are just plain “evil”. Here is where the statement “They just needed killin.”, comes to mind. I hope and pray that I never, ever have to use deadly force on another human being, but if I am forced to protect myself, my family or even a strangers life, I will not hesitate.

                      Maybe that is what the left fears the most, that someone may defend themselves against them with deadly force. The vast majority of violent rhetoric that I hear is coming from the left. They are the ones that are assaulting their detractors. They are the ones making threats. They are the ones rioting and causing mayhem. They are the ones looting. They are the ones that are actually using physical force against their opponents. If we have the ability to stop them “dead” in their tracks, they don’t like that. They want anarchy, and we stand in the way. The dark always hates the light. These are the truly Godless people that have no morals, honor, or integrity and they don’t like having their sins exposed, especially to themselves. Sodom and Gomorrah come to mind. And the end result will be the same.

                    • Rob Price says:

                      My comment about “a gun never solves anything” is true. In all the wars ever fought, some in the name of freedom, some in the name of Christianity, some in the name of ethnic cleansing, the only people who ever win, even a little bit, are the kings, dictators, presidents, and religious zealots. The poor man fighting the wars never wins, even if he happens to survive. He comes back to a ravaged home, country, and family. He lives with his own personal demons of his deeds on the battlefield done in the name of “Freedom”, “God”, or “Purity”. You see, no one ever truly wins a war. America for example, we are still paying to this day, for dropping the A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We are still paying for Viet Nam. And we are still paying for Iraq, and will continue to pay for Afghanistan for the next 40 years, if all the projections are true. So, you see, no one ever really wins at war. It is just another fallacy created by Governments to garner money and support for their next “great crusade”.

                    • Paul Smith says:

                      “My comment about “a gun never solves anything” is true.”
                      ———–
                      No, it is not true. While I agree with most of what you say, a gun often prevents violent and often deadly encounters such as rape and if for no other reason than that I will continue to support our right to keep and bear arms.

                    • Rob Price says:

                      A gun may prevent a rape or murder, but to the person taking even a perp’s life, the memory of that event will dominate their life forever. I too, do wholeheartedly support the 2nd Amendment, but that doesn’t mean I believe in the use of all deadly force in all circunstance’s.

                    • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                      You only use deadly force if you absolutely have to Rob, nobody here with any sense will dispute that. But that has not been your underlying theme from he beginning, it was that gun owners are responsible for things that have happened among other post. Our point is and always has been that we have the right to be able to make that choice when and if the time comes, by being armed as we wish to be, not as the government says or dictates we can or cannot. you remind of politicians that after seeing that their constetuants are unhappy with something they said or did change their tune and try to act like thats the way they always thought or spoke, funny stuff.

                    • Paul Smith says:

                      Deadly force is appropriate in EVERY case of self defense. The only variable is whether or not you APPLY deadly force.

                    • Rob Price says:

                      I never said that Deadly force “wasn’t” appropriate, I said that the consequences of using deadly force by the victim will have life changing and long lasting devastating effects on the victim their family, on the perpetrator’s family, criminal or not, his/her family just lost a loved one. That was the point I was making.

                    • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                      So does Murder, Rape, Carjacking, Identity theft, Bank Robbery all done by criminals, not law abiding citizens. you have no point everything anybody does has an affect on them and others. Getting married has a long term affect on alot of people, should we ban marraige?? you have no point to make, its just horse manure gibberish

                    • Rob Price says:

                      The taking of any human life by anyone is something that is never forgotten. In the course of a violent crime, or during war, this one action by a human being against another human being creates devastating trauma(PTSD), life-long memories of the event that may fade, but they never go away. All persons involved in any violent action(rape, murder, car wreck, war, abuse) suffer lifelong effects. I know this personally as a vet who suffers from PTSD. I have taken steps to deal with mine, but many can’t afford this, or aren’t in the position to get the help needed to deal with it.
                      Any true soldier will tell you that no one wants to go to war or kill another human-being, but soldier’s are sent by commanders, who are given this task by the Washington potentates who are sitting on their laurels in Washington, sending our next generation of leaders and businessmen to do their bidding. If we could send, Obama, Reid, Pelosi and many other leftist neophytes to Afghanistan to fight, maybe we could solve some of the problems in Washington.

                    • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                      Hey Rob u do realise that hitler was trying to take over all of europe and africa?? The japanese were trying to take over the rest of the world, now where did our politiains come off creating that for their next crusade, did they plant Hitler, or tojo?? Man you liberals kill me. No matter what goes on or comes down its always America’s fault and we bring it all about. If asteroids fell out of the sky and destroyed a country, liberals would blame America, no wait George Bush first then America.Granted there are many corrupt Politicians present administration included, but not all are and Many less years ago as to now. People had more morals and principles years ago, that just isnt so anymore.

                    • Rob Price says:

                      #1) Hitler was trying to take over the world with a genetically engineered race of blue eyed, blond haired army to dominate all of society. Ethnic cleansing of the jews was a world-wide campaign.
                      #2) I did not place America in the front of world dominators-my comment was based on history’s wars past and present and all of the world’s society’s attempt at dominating another in the name of some ideology they believed.

                    • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                      Rob your talking out both sides of your face, thats called being two faced, it isnt kosher, no more comments to you , Its waste of good time.

                    • goyaathle says:

                      Hey Rob, why don’t u tell that to all the Jews who were about to be gassed by the Germans when they were saved by US soldiers. The only thing I will agree with you about was VietNam. I went there thinking I was going to save the Vietnamese from the communist only to find that they didn’t care who was in charge as long as they got to grow their rice. Once I met the Mountain People it was a whole new ballgame. Quit trying to put everyone in the same box.

                    • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                      Rob lives inside a box he calls his mind and thinks everybody else should, damn if we all did just think how crowded it would be in there with his other 2 personalities. 8)

                    • Rob Price says:

                      Brad-you make a good point. Religious beliefs and convictions are good ideals only when both sides are of a like mind set. When the “heathen” comes knocking at my door, i don’t think they are going to consider my beliefs. Same go for me. If I try to push my beliefs on someone that has a different religious mind set, that doesn’t work. Right or wrong doesn’t matter in most instances, in most cases of one society warring against another it is due to economic, social, or just pain old “they have it, we want it” thinking. The common man/woman/soldier usually never knows the real reason they are sent in the name of their leaders. Americans rarely if ever know the unbridled truth as to why we enter into a conflict. Facades and lies from our “leaders”, in the name of “SECRECY” hide the real reasons for involvement in any conflict.The “American Revolution” wasn’t started for the sake of “freedom” alone from England. It started over “Greed” and “Taxes”, freedom and the Constitution as it was originally drawn up(not the one now) from England was only part of America’s separation from them.

                    • Thom says:

                      ROB>> Should I be surprised that you left out the fact, “FACT” and a very important FACT, that the British Queen ordered the disarming of the colonist for no better reason than to make it easier and safer to collect taxes levied on the people by her fat and ugly self. You should try harder to remember that the next time you feel a need to explain the reasons for the “Revolutionary War”. Its not like its a minor point that doesn’t really count. Being a self proclaimed warrior yourself it seems as if that would be one of the first points you would make????

                    • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                      Im sorry but your both wrong, whether you believe in God or not, hes still there and so is Satan. Satan is running the world bringing it to where he wants it, and the stupid imbecile man is, hes running headlong into it with open arms, well most men, some of us know that God IS on the throme and no matter what Satan does or brings about in the end God will win. We bicker over what this side thinks or that side thinks, when in reality, it all boils down to whatever God has Mens souls, Satan wants, whatever is good on this earth Satan is trying his darndest to squash. And For the last 60 years hes been doing a pretty good job of doing just that in this country, the country that has been the leader in holding back tyrants and dictators for centuries.You guys think the answer is in men and if they could only get together, never gonna happen because man is inherently evil, and without God in hos life just gets more evil. As son as we took prayer and God out of schools this country started spiraling out of country faster and faster, they more we do away with god and his presence in this country the further toward the edge we get.Just look around you at what has been happening thru the years and how it correlates to things that are done in this country to do away with, the ten commandments, the bible, scripture, the mention of God, anything to do with getting rid or suppressing christianity. You cannot say to me with a straight face that killing babies by the 100 of thousands is not evil, yet the same people that think there is nothing wrong with that feel sooo bad about a few children being shot, its absurdity. or the very same people support pedaphilia, NAMBLA, we have lost or minds in this country and in this world. Why do you think Rome fell , because they were trying their damndest to kill off the christians and the Lord was not gonna allow that to happen. The bible says woah to the nation that turns it back on isreal and that the nation that blesses isreal will be blessed in return. Look out how thats working for us now that we are turning our backs to them more and more everyday. You can kick and scream that it isnt so and think in your mind well thats just not fair, hey he made us and he can do whatever he pleases if we go against his will. He gave us free will to do whats right or to be idiots and not, its our choice. The point is this is not a battle between left and right, this isd a battle between Satan and God, between evil and good. Good is slowly losing ground because evil will always fight dirty, they will lie, cheat , and steal. It will do whatever it has to do to win, because it has no morals or principles, But in the end God will overcome Satan , its in the scripture, all that is taking place now is there in black and white, god has said that man could turn it around if he only repent and turn to him, but like I said man is inherently evil and he is also a proud being. And pride always goeth before the fall. I dont need God why do I need God , how do I no he even existed or exist, I dont believe in him because I choose not to, because I dont need anybody but me. Who is he to tell me what I can or cant do.Thats pride right there.!! Im so smart Im my own God, I dont need anyone!! more pride!! You people that this is not playing a part ion all this and you will be going over the edge with the rest of us. There are 2 religions in the world that have a major part in it right now, thats islam ( which is the worshipping of Satan, just look at what they believe), and Christianity ( im not talking about Catholicism ,methodism, or any other religion by name) the worshipping of Jesus christ as the son of God and our Saviour. SAtan doesnt care about, buddhism, or harry krishna or any of those because those are religion worshipping false Gods or his demons, they are not a threat. Why do you think he is working so hard to extinguish Christianity. Because its the only real threat to what he wants, whioch is total degradation of man into total evilness and sin. You have to be blind , deaf, dumd, or full of pride not to see it. This country was founded on christianity by christians period, all of them said time and time again( go look it up) that when ther people of this nation no longer trust in God or adhere to his principles and morals that it would fall. Look around you.A people cannot govern themselves without Godly morals and principles, because man is inherently evil and will corrupt it. ( George Washington, might not be word for word but thats the jist of it). So you people keep on thinking this is about left or right and cant we all just come together and work it out oil does not mix with vinegar, evil does not mix with good never has never will! The guy in office is a muslim sympathiser if he isnt a die hard muslim, his personal jihad is to tear this country down around our ears, just read his books. Read things he has said before he set about to get elected to the senate, its not hard to figure out. Hes got nuslims in his cabinet and his satff in the whtehouse. Pure evil is running this country now, if we dont take a stand were going down.

                    • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                      hes working both sides of the fence Brad just ignore him

            • Rick says:

              Do you, or anyone, know what happens when naturalized citizens violate their oath? I would suppose revocation of citizenship is an option or even required under certain violations. What if the citizenship was gained only for the opportunity of committing terrorist acts against our citizenry and country and the oath offered was a lie and former allegiance was maintained to anywhere but the United States of America? Wouldn’t waging jihad against the US be considered treason and citizenship be forfeited and you go to jail for a very long time? For whatever reason, if a person loses their citizenship through denaturalization, the immigrant is deemed to have never been a citizen. If that were the case here, what rights would remain for him? He’s lucky Holder chose, so far, not to apply the use of the indefinite detention provision of the NDAA to be used against him. That would be a dangerous precedent if they’re still considering him a US citizen.

              Naturalization Oath of Allegiance to the United States of America

              “I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the armed forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.”

    • Thom says:

      @Mark>Have you ever heard of “DEATH BY FIRING SQUAD” ?? asshole

      • Mark says:

        Another high brow comment – thanks Thom – I get it now!

        • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

          Anything anybody else has said in here is supremely more intelligent than anything u have said Mark, your ignorance and stupidity overfloweth!

          • Robert Price says:

            There is a book out now that I just bought and read. It is called, “the Nation’s best Defense: A prepared and armed Citizen” . It was written by a 33 year police veteran. It brings clarity and focus into the subject of this forum. If you have a chance to by it-do so and read it and really think about what it suggests. it is a real eye opener into the thoughts of “most” Americans and Law Enforcement professionals. Maybe it will begin to open the eyes of some of our more “over zealous” @nd Amendment supporters.

            On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 2:13 PM, The D.C. Clothesline wrote:

            > ** > GreatGoogleyMoogleY commented: “Anything anybody else has said in here > is supremely more intelligent than anything u have said Mark, your > ignorance and stupidity overfloweth!” >

            • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

              SORRY BUT JUST BECAUSE SOMEBODY IS A POLICE OFFICER DOESNT MEAN THEY HAVE A REAL GRASP ON ANYTHING OR ARE INTELLIGENT, I MYSELF KNOW QUITE A FEW SOME ARE SMART AND SOME HAVE NO CLUE. i WILL READ IT BUT IF ITS FROM A PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL VEIWPOINT IM SURE IT WILL BE THEY USUAL BS. As I have stated before I am pushing 60 and I have seen the reason why our country is going to hell in a handbasket though the years. And from where i sit its all come mainly from progressive thinking bringing about rules and regulations that have destroyed our original principles, morals and degraded religion. I dont call that regressive, the first civilization of man earth was destroyed due to this type of thinking destroying there culture. And then early man from our past dug their way out of this stupidity only to have progressives bury us back in it! And you people call it progress lmao.

                • robert says:

                  TO BE OR NOT TO BE FREE—HERE IS THE ANSWER
                  It is my believe that Obama and the liberals are going to continue their quest to take over the government and trash the constitution. If we are going to keep our rights, we are going to have to fight from them. What our military and law enforcement do will determine the outcome. PLEASE FORWARD TO ALL

                  ATTENTION ALL MILITARY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL
                  Our current federal government is trying to destroy our loved way of life enjoying the freedoms that our constitution provides us. The freedoms that 100s of thousands of our service men and women have died for in the past and present wars in order to preserve freedom for the next generations.

                  This question is for all military and law enforcement agency personnel:

                  If god-loving, freedom-loving American citizens are forced into protecting their constitution rights by the final recourse of bearing arms against the traitors in our government, where are you as an individual man or woman of the military or law enforcement going to stand?

                  Will you guard the current corrupt government officials?
                  OR
                  will you stand with the common citizens fighting to keep our constitutional rights which is why you actually wear the uniform now?

                  Remember, you pledged a sacred oath to protect the constitution from foreign and domestic enemies—not to protect an individual or a political party. God bless every man and women serving in uniform. I trust that your guns will be pointed in the direction to uphold our constitutional rights, not the impeding socialistic government officials. Without our dedicated military, Americans would have no freedoms. Without our military and law enforcement, Obama and his Cronies will not have the power to turn our free country into a totalitarian state with him as the dictator.

            • Thom says:

              You read it Robert, I’ll pass. By the way Robert you use the word “most” very loosely. Sounds a lot like obama’s lies. I haven’t said this for awhile now but here goes again. obama is a sweatturd. And to be honest I think all liberals , much like you. are just as bad, or maybe even worse.The difference between obama and you is that you are a home grown sweatturd.

              • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                Your too much too kind Thom, Liberals are what they are two faced , hypocrits, who lie through their teeth every chance they get and beleive their own lies, to advance whatever agenda they deem neccessary at that moment. In short they are ASSHOLES who have no clue as to why they are ASSHOLES !

              • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                Our FF’s fought a war to get away from ASSHOLES who tried to push their agenda’s on us and tell us what we could or couldnt do, now they have sprung up from within and in uncle muhammeds case from kenya to try and do the same crap again! Time to throw their asses out again my freinds, times a wasting. If you dont like america the way it was founded and meant to be then get your ASSHOLE self out and quit trying to push ur freaking rubish on us the patriots! Go to Russia, or China, or Venusaila or Cuba, or one of the other communist socialist countiies u think are so great. Or howzabout France now theres a country all u ASSHOLES would like to live in, so just go!!

    • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

      Im sorry Mark but once again your a total moron, your crying about somebody saying the asshole muslim pigs that killed all those innocent people with bombs, should be shot in the head. Hey did you notice that muslims think justice should coem from shrap[nel, bullets, and cutting off of heads, not to mention burning people alive and skinninng them alive. You are a typical ass backwarks progressive idiot, why dont you stfu and and quit showing your frekaing ignorance. If I was a s stupid as you I would hide in a closet and never come out. Wait maybe thats your problem youv’e been living in a closet too damn l;ong and have lost touch with all sense of reality. Nirvan does not exist on eartha dn it never will!!!

  2. Pingback: Soviet Marxist Bolshevik |

  3. Skin Allergy says:

    Howdy, just wanted to inform you how much I enjoy your site!
    Most of the dry cough sites I have visited don’t have as much helpful content as you. I’m sure folks
    here will agree with me on this. Please continue with what you’re doing!

    • robert says:

      TO BE OR NOT TO BE FREE—HERE IS THE ANSWER
      It is my believe that Obama and the liberals are going to continue their quest to take over the government and trash the constitution. If we are going to keep our rights, we are going to have to fight from them. What our military and law enforcement do will determine the outcome. PLEASE FORWARD TO ALL

      ATTENTION ALL MILITARY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL
      Our current federal government is trying to destroy our loved way of life enjoying the freedoms that our constitution provides us. The freedoms that 100s of thousands of our service men and women have died for in the past and present wars in order to preserve freedom for the next generations.

      This question is for all military and law enforcement agency personnel:

      If god-loving, freedom-loving American citizens are forced into protecting their constitution rights by the final recourse of bearing arms against the traitors in our government, where are you as an individual man or woman of the military or law enforcement going to stand?

      Will you guard the current corrupt government officials?
      OR
      will you stand with the common citizens fighting to keep our constitutional rights which is why you actually wear the uniform now?

      Remember, you pledged a sacred oath to protect the constitution from foreign and domestic enemies—not to protect an individual or a political party. God bless every man and women serving in uniform. I trust that your guns will be pointed in the direction to uphold our constitutional rights, not the impeding socialistic government officials. Without our dedicated military, Americans would have no freedoms. Without our military and law enforcement, Obama and his Cronies will not have the power to turn our free country into a totalitarian state with him as the dictator.

  4. Thom says:

    http://youtu.be/U5ut6yPrObw (restoring the rule of law. TRUE STORY)

  5. Pingback: The Second Amendment

  6. mike says:

    LONG LIVE THE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC!!!! MALON LABE!!!!

  7. Narrow your search down to three weight loss pills for men that sound the best and I can assure you after
    extensive research some of them are not tested for safety or effectiveness.
    Another common use of the same green coffee supplement,
    and a handful of the ones that are available in the
    market. The search for effective weight loss pills for men,
    first you have to bear in mind that taking Zotrim
    won’t be enough – you furthermore may need to adjust these numbers as you go along.

  8. I found a new news where explains like getting free microsoft points os xbox live I leave the article

  9. So many spam comments: disgusting but here’s a real one these guy are giving away Free Microsoft Points for anyeone. OfficialMsPoints.com

  10. Pingback: If They Come for Your Guns, Do You Have a Responsibility to Fight? | The Federal Observer

  11. Pingback: If They Come for Your Guns, Do You Have a Responsibility to Fight? | The D.C. Clothesline | stepman2001

  12. 7delta says:

    Moved to the bottom of the comments to reduce the narrowing.

    Rob said: if my comments seem to ebb and flow in different directions, it’s because this site has lost all semblance of its intended purpose and people have taken off on tangents that have no bearing on the original subject.

    Does the ebb and flow of conversation alter your principles or position on issues?

    I do not agree with the lefts assault on the 2nd Amendment, but, with that being said, I don’t always agree with the other side’s argument either!

    Can you be specific? What arguments from both sides do you agree and disagree with?

    No matter the situation, a gun never solves anything. .

    Can you offer us specific examples where anyone proposes the use of firearms to solve problems when other safe alternatives are available?

    The assault on the 2nd Amendment will never be settled for one simple reason-neither side is willing to admit that the other side has valid points and neither side is willing to move to the center of the argument.

    Can you provide us with examples of the valid points from both sides of the argument and explain what denotes a center position? Do you believe unalienable rights can be altered even with the Constitutionally prescribed amendment process? Where do our unalienable rights originate?

    I’m certainly willing to hear your side. I don’t discount that there are valid solutions to the violence problems we’re facing today. I believe there are solutions that do not infringe on anyone’s rights, but uphold them, as well as hold perpetrators responsible for their disregard of other’s rights.

    • Rob Price says:

      Gun registration, as it is proposed by the Obama Administration is wrong and goes against the 2nd Amendment. Limiting “assault” weapons, created solely for the use of military purposes, full-automatic weapons or semi-automatic weapons with 20+ round magazines has to be on the table. These weapons were created solely for the purpose of killing human beings. No responsible, ethical hunter goes into the field with an AK47 to hunt deer or elk. I live in a western State and hunt deer, elk, bear and various other game every year and have many guns, some that would no doubt be on the list of guns I propose banning for for everyday gun owners. And yes I would give up those specific guns if they were decided to be illegal for me to own. Does that infringe on my Second Amendment rights? I truly do not believe so. Gun ownership in not open for debate under the 2nd Amendment-it is guaranteed! Tougher background checks on all gun purchases has to be part of the fix. If you have nothing to hide, then you should have nothing to worry about. Handgun registration is a foregone conclusion. Most, if not all States have it now in some form or another. I would say make no exemptions on background checks for cops, Fed-law enforcement, or anyone else assigned the task of protecting others. They should be scrutinized even more than the average citizen. With 330 million people in this country and at least 1/3rd of those owning guns legally, not to mention all the stolen, illegally gained or bought weapons on the street, do you really think that the Feds will ever really be able to control gun ownership in this country? I don’t believe that confiscation will ever happen, it is nearly impossible for ANY agency to police all the firearms in this country. Tougher laws towards gun crimes with mandatory sentences for first timers is a start. American taxpayers are going to have to pony up more taxes for prison space, but, to me that is a price i’m willing to pay to keep my second Amendment rights intact. Federal law has to coincide with States for tougher prison sentences if this is going to work. This debate will rage on forever without any real conclusion. But, one thing I believe is that ALL legal gun owners and Second Amendment supporters have to stick together, no matter what differences they may have, because if we can not come together as a gruop, then we will lose this battle that the Obama regime has started.

      • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

        Wow you sure have done a 180 from your original post there Robby baby, I dont know if its BS or the truth, Im leaning toward BS

      • “Gun registration, as it is proposed by the Obama Administration is wrong and goes against the 2nd Amendment. Limiting “assault” weapons, created solely for the use of military purposes, full-automatic weapons or semi-automatic weapons with 20+ round magazines has to be on the table. These weapons were created solely for the purpose of killing human beings. No responsible, ethical hunter goes into the field with an AK47 to hunt deer or elk.”

        Unbelievable! This statement shows you have absolutely NO CLUE as to what the 2nd Amendment means.

        AK47? Really? You should do a little research before opening your mouth and showing your ignorance.

      • 7delta says:

        Rob said: Limiting “assault” weapons, created solely for the use of military purposes, full-automatic weapons or semi-automatic weapons with 20+ round magazines has to be on the table.

        The average ‘assault’ weapon isn’t any more of an assault weapon than a .22 rifle. In fact, that’s all an AR is, a slightly more powerful .22. And I mean slightly, like 1/2000th more powerful. The AR design is cosmetic, not functional as far as the power of the rifle is concerned. The AK is no different. Most hunting rifles are far more powerful. Rifles are used in murders less frequently than hands and feet. They are not the weapon of choice for criminals. How would eliminating or further restricting them make anyone safer?

        Automatic guns have been restricted since the 1920s or 30’s. They can be obtained only with background checks and special permits. And a lot of money. They’re very limited and federally controlled and documented.

        These weapons were created solely for the purpose of killing human beings.

        All weapons were created for utilitarian use–hunting, sport and defense. Bows and arrows, clubs, canons, guns, swords, lances, bayonets, etc. All have or have had military use. We can add airplanes, armored vehicles, Jeeps, ships, etc. too. Use and intent seems more definitive than origin. The hand that wields it makes that decision.

        Does that infringe on my Second Amendment rights? I truly do not believe so.

        I disagree. So does the Constitution and SCOTUS. The Constitution protects the rights of the people and the militia to have comparable weaponry to the military. Who is the militia? The people. There was nothing sinister about this, nor does it mean that the military and the people’s militia have the same exact function. The argument about citizens having nukes is a red herring. The militia was supposed to function as homeland security against insurrection, invasion and civil unrest…as well as a deterrent to wannabe tyrants. The armed public has never been in opposition to the military, but as an on-the-ground complement to upholding the Rule of the Law. Congress and the president can muster the militia, but the command always remains with the state to frustrate federal misuse. The National Guard does not replace the militia and the Guard was never supposed to be deployed outside the U.S. Military Reserve units can be called up to active service.

        Tougher background checks on all gun purchases has to be part of the fix. If you have nothing to hide, then you should have nothing to worry about. Handgun registration is a foregone conclusion.

        Criminals do what criminals do, but one of the things they don’t do is submit to background checks. As far mental health issues, there is a system in place for that now. Enforce it, with professional leeway. If professionals are not given some leeway to make determinations about whether their patient has an inclination toward violence, then people will stop seeking mental health services for fear of being labeled in the system, whether they want to own a gun or not. A one-size fits all mandate will not work. Some people will refuse treatment and others will be denied their unalienable right to self-defense when they are not violent. We would do better to demand close scrutiny of the overuse of psychotropic drugs, which have serious side effects that may lead to violence to self or others and already carry suicide black box warnings. These drugs alter brain chemistry. They should not be handed out like candy and their use is commonly shared by most of the mass shooters. Enforce reasonable current laws. You can’t ignore current law, then complain they don’t work, so you need more stringent laws–think the whole immigration issue as another example. Or, at least, you can’t do it with any semblance of legitimacy.

        do you really think that the Feds will ever really be able to control gun ownership in this country? I don’t believe that confiscation will ever happen, it is nearly impossible for ANY agency to police all the firearms in this country

        I think it would be difficult, if you mean a door-to-door confiscation, but it’s not nearly as hard to legislate and regulate them into oblivion. It just takes longer and it takes a campaign of constant demonization and mischaracterization of firearms and firearm owners to change public opinion…or, at least, to claim a change in public opinion. I think it was Eric Holder who said to get rid of guns, they would have to employ the same tactics they did with smoking to get the public to go along with it. But you say, smoking is bad for you. Maybe, but it doesn’t matter in theory when your goal is elimination. It’s the dishonesty and manipulative nature of the tactic that matters.

        American taxpayers are going to have to pony up more taxes for prison space, but, to me that is a price i’m willing to pay to keep my second Amendment rights intact.

        Instead of building more prisons, why don’t we build people of better character? Human relativism is a farce, a political tool of control. When people can no longer recognize right from wrong, government must step in to save everyone from themselves or from the boogeyman of their own creation. Evil thrives when good men do nothing, especially when man can no longer recognize or call evil evil. We lift people up by giving them the personal tools of discerning good and bad thoughts and behaviors, teaching self-discipline and delayed gratification. We consign people to serfdom when we redefine right and wrong, then excuse the perpetrator’s behavior and blame and restrict innocent people for the criminal’s bad life choices. Let’s teach good life choices and work to reduce the number of prisons needed.

        Federal law has to coincide with States for tougher prison sentences if this is going to work.

        That would be in direct conflict with the Constitution and the system of dual sovereignty of the state and the central government. It would take an amendment to do that and I would not recommend it. The federal government is prohibited from infringing on state and individual sovereignty. That’s what the Bill of Rights is all about. It has no authority to do so. It does it, but it has no Constitutional authority to do it. That overreach is why we’re in the mess we’re in now. By allowing it, we have said a select group of people, drawn from the same general population we live in and certainly no smarter or more ethical, know better how to manage our life, liberty, property and pursuit of happiness than we do, but then, we have done as I described above about buying the defective ideology that there is no right or wrong and that government ought to fix it when we’re faced with the unintended (or intended) consequences.

        But, one thing I believe is that ALL legal gun owners and Second Amendment supporters have to stick together, no matter what differences they may have, because if we can not come together as a group, then we will lose this battle that the Obama regime has started.

        I agree that all people who love life, liberty and pursuit of happiness will have to stick together, whether they own a gun or not. This isn’t really about guns. Gun owners have compromised repeatedly, as have we on all liberties under the auspices of public safety. How much more compromise can we permit and still retain any semblance of preserving, protecting and defending the Constitution? We’ve already overshot that by quite a distance. Without the Constitution, we have no security, no safety, no voice, no liberty, no right to life, no right to any unalienable rights secured by the principles and moral imperatives that form the core values of America. Where do we draw the line?

        So, no, this debate isn’t about guns. That’s just the trappings…this time. It’s about something far more important than ARs or AKs or handguns or large capacity magazines. It’s about us. All of us. Who are we? Do we believe what we say we do? Are we a people of principles and morals? Do we live those principles and require them of our representatives? Are we beings of higher intelligence and moral capacities? Are we spiritual beings or are we nothing special in a materialistic world where there is nothing higher than simply being on the top rung of multiple species of instinct-driven animals? Are we capable of critical thinking? Right now, we’re looking like a herd of dumb lambs who not only willingly go to slaughter, but we’re building the pen and sharpening the knife for our lives as we know it to be severed from us forever.

        I think we’re better than that. No…I know we’re better. We are, for the most part, at our core, a principled and moral people. We’ve been mislead, lied to and duped into being silent and to go along to get along. We’ve been lead to believe that compromise is good, reaching across the aisle is noble. There is nothing inherently noble about compromise. Never compromise on the solid principles we have learned to be self-evident truth throughout man’s history. If we do, we lose the battle.

        • goyaathle says:

          This has to be the best letter I have seen on this site or any I have seen anywhere else so far. I wish you would publish this letter in every newspaper in the country. Thank you for making since. I am a VietNam combat Vet and a ex kalafournacation Correctional Officer. In the past I have been on both ends of a gun. If my fellow gun owners don’t join me and do something soon we will might as well take our guns and put them in the Recycle can as we will be unable to buy ammunition. The Libs here in Kal have pretty much convinced the brain dead that if you own a gun you are a monster and a serial killer of children.

    • Rob Price says:

      I did a tour in Iraq and 2 in Afghanistan. I have a son over there now. Our presence there will solve absolutely nothing in the end. Those people are so far behind the rest of the world in education, religious ideals, and governmental leadership, that after we leave that country, it will return to business as usual. America needs to quit trying to be the world’s policeman and start solving our own problems here at home. More and more of our jobs are being lost to overseas companies daily. The current regime is turning this country in to a welfare state with every brush of Obama’s pen. The mental health crisis in this country is still looked at as something to be kept in the closet-this is a major part of the gun violence problem. I don’t have a cure for this problem, but i do know that if we are going to curb all of these school and mall shootings, mental health has to be on the top of our priority list. Guns may be used in these shootings, but they aren’t the problem-the people who have slipped through the mental health cracks are the problem Stop forking out money to lobby against the 2nd Amendment and put it towards more mental health screenings and treatment for those who are at the highest risk of doing some violent crime against innocents-but, who am I? Just another American citizen spouting off.

      • 7delta says:

        Don’t look now, Rob, but you’re making good sense here.

        • Rob Price says:

          You know 7delta that does happen on occasion-I don’t have any real answers, and I really don’t know anyone that truly does. I just know that SOMETHING is going to have to change or more innocents are going to die needlessly, and I for one have seen far too much of that in the name of “righteousness”.

          • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

            Actually Rob nobody has claimed that anybody has died in the name of righteousness except you and some muslims, they also didn’t die because of law abiding citizens so we are right back where we started in this debate with your kind. Your kind being a complete and total imbecile!

        • Rob Price says:

          I don’t know your background but to me it seems you have a pretty clear picture of the issues.
          The thing that bothers me the most about this site and many others like it is that a majority of the comments being posted are from people that have never had a gun pointed at them or ever fired a shot at another person, be it in self-defense or an armed conflict. To me this fact alone makes me wonder if these sites are really getting an accurate accounting of all the groups in America.
          Do the previous facts mentioned give me or anyone else with a similar background any more a better sense of understanding of the issue at heart here? I truly don’t know, but it definitely puts a different spin on my personal feelings towards “what should be legal”, and “what is necessary” to get a particular job done.

          • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

            The issue at hand is not emotions Rob ole buddy the issue at hand is rights!! That no government has a right to infringe on. And how the hell do you know who has or hasnt had a gun pointed at them , or fired at them, or shot and killed anybody else. Im sorry but you are so full of yourself and shit that its not even funny!! Typical Liberal , I know better than anybody else, because I is sooo smart!! MMM ok , you ever hear of pride goeth before the fall there pardner?? The whole point is that if you dont wanna carry a gun or use it because it bothers you then freaking don’t, but dont tell me whether i can or cant because you think you know so much freaking more than me. I find that freaking hilarious that you are such a pompous ass, you remind me of another pompous ass that resides in the whitehouse., and aint talking about Moochelle she’s just got a fat one.

            • Rob Price says:

              Go back and re-read my post-as usual you misinterpreted my words and only read what your sorry ignorant ass wanted to read

    • Rob Price says:

      You asked me if i thought our “unalienable rights” could be changed by the amendment process. If you mean, “…endowed with certain unalienable rights by our creator…among these are life liberty and the pursuit of happiness…” . Life can certainly be changed or taken away by anyone at any time. Liberty, isn’t this part of the discussion of this site. It too can be taken away. And the “pursuit of happiness”, well that too can be changed or taken away. These things may have been given “by the creator”, but we live in man’s world, and he doesn’t attain to the same heights as God does. Only God has all the answers, and i’m sure he’s sitting up in Heaven on his golden throne looking down at man and just shaking his head wondering what we will do next.

      • We do live in man’s world, but we are a nation of laws, not a nation of men. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness CAN be taken away. When that happens, the takers are held accountable, they must face consequences.
        ——-
        “Liberty isn’t this part of the discussion of this site.”

        WTF? Rob Price go home, you’re drunk.

        The New Federalist Party http://www.thenewfederalistparty.org/

      • 7delta says:

        I guess the question, then, is one of value. Is your life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness worth the risk of defending it?

        I think we are probably probably proof of God’s sense of humor. Fortunately, He still loves us.

        • 7delta says:

          Oops. Too many ‘probablies’.

        • Rob Price says:

          7delta-You could ask what “liberty” means to 100 people and get 100 different answers. The question I always ask myself is, ” How free are we really?”, or ” How free can we really be as a society or even as a world?”. No matter how much “Liberty” or “freedom” we think we have, we will always have to answer to some sort of structured leadership. The power imposed on us by that leadership is up to us. With that being said, corruption always raises its ugly head. The term “Absolute power corrupts absolutely” comes to mind. Man, from the very beginning has been fighting for power. From Cain and Able, Adam and Eve, Caesar, Ghengis Khan, Hitler and to today’s Muslim’s exstremist’s. Someone or something will always have a negative effect to the values we try to uphold. Battling these negative influence’s to our country, the Constitution, our way of life will always be ongoing. But this is also true of the Chinese Communist , the North Koreans, the Afghani’s, the Russians and many others who feel their beliefs are the only “True’ course of life. We, as American’s can not continue to try to impart are belief system on people or countries that really don’t give a “crap” about what we want or believe. With this next comment I’m sure to feel the wrath of the die-hard “rightest’s’ but so be it. America has got to start worrying about her own and their needs first, then enter into the world’s other conflict’s if the need arises. Millions of our own on or at the poverty level, millions without medical insurance, mass shootings and bombings. When do we start to look inward first?

  13. 7delta says:

    Rob said: The taking of any human life by anyone is something that is never forgotten. In the course of a violent crime, or during war, this one action by a human being against another human being creates devastating trauma(PTSD), life-long memories of the event that may fade, but they never go away.

    I made a similar point earlier in this discussion. No one sane wants to kill someone else. The vast majority of law abiding gun owners fall into this category as well. They recognize the seriousness of lethal defense, but they are willing to take this burden upon themselves to keep self, family and country safe, when called upon. Most pray that never happens.

    Any true soldier will tell you that no one wants to go to war or kill another human-being,

    I agree with that, as well. And Rob, thank you for your service. It does not go unnoticed or unappreciated.

    Because, as you pointed out, man is as he is. Sometimes, we have no choice but to defend ourselves. That is righteous, but you’re also right about political ‘righteous’ wars. How many really are? There are very few instances when I believe we should involve ourselves in war. The only justification is when aggression is brought upon us. However, in certain rare circumstances I would be in favor of protecting innocents who are being murdered, but if I did, I would do it in such a definitive way the war would be over in 48 hours and I would go home. No rebuilding. No winning hearts and minds. And I would be dang sure I had the right target. No PC wars. Fight to win or don’t go. We haven’t fought a war to win since WWII.

    but soldier’s are sent by commanders, who are given this task by the Washington potentates who are sitting on their laurels in Washington, sending our next generation of leaders and businessmen to do their bidding. If we could send, Obama, Reid, Pelosi and many other leftist neophytes to Afghanistan to fight, maybe we could solve some of the problems in Washington.

    I have often said that if we practiced the same policy of the days of old when the king and his sons rode out at the head of the army, wars would become so rare, they would nearly be extinct. Never declare war unless you are so persuaded of its rightness that you are willing to die for those principles. War shouldn’t be clean and fought by commanders in Florida issuing orders to the battlefield in a faraway country, nor by politicians at fund raisers. Ride out and risk coming back on your shield, if you believe the war is justified. No one is too special to risk death for what they say they believe in.

    But the fact remains that there will always be aggressors who want what you have and murderers who value nothing about life and rapists who are so consumed by hate of women they will commit acts of violence. We do live in a fallen world where evil exists. All we can do is choose goodness and light and defend it against darkness when called upon.

    A sad state of affairs? Yes, but it’s also a joyful state of life when your goal is to seek and spread peace and good and to know that when you have no choice but to defend, you have done no wrong. Nature and Nature’s God gave us with the unalienable right to defend ourselves against aggressive evil. Nay, we have the duty to defend our own lives and the lives of the defenseless. No one has the right to force submission of our God-given free will upon us, nor the right to take our lives in pursuit of their own selfish agenda. We have the duty to defeat any evil that comes against us to take our lives, liberty, property and pursuit of happiness. We may feel sorrow for the wasted lives of lost enemies and the loss of what could have been, but we should feel no sorrow for doing what we had to do. The thwarting of evil is cause to rejoice. That brings peace. All we have to do is be sure we can discern between true evil and evil’s lies.

    You may still see the horrors of war, Rob, when you close your eyes, but you kept your oath and did what you were tasked to do. Even if that task may have possibly been commissioned wrongly by superiors, you own no blame, if you didn’t violate your oath or violate the common principles of legitimate warfare in defense of your own life and the lives of your fellow soldiers. You survived for a reason. Maybe you’re working that out now. We all have to work out what we’re meant to do in life. I ponder that a lot. Maybe you should expound upon the clarity of your convictions and work to see that you pass your knowledge and hard-earned wisdom on. The founders would agree with you that we should be friends to all and enemies of few. But when those enemies enter your door to do violence, you have the right and duty to defend yourself and your loved ones.

  14. Thom says:

    Rob Price: Yeah, Fuck Yeah!! You say its all MoogleY’s fault? ‘NOT” you dumbass piece of shit. Why is he to blame? Because he may not be as well written as some? Because he just wants to be left alone? Well butthead that puts me to blame as well but then on the other hand I don’t believe a damn word you say. “ELITE” is just another word for “SHITHEAD”, you would do well to remember that seeing as how you seem to consider yourself as being a member of that “illustrious” few. There’s not a decent, working class, tax paying citizen in the U.S. that doesn’t know who owns the “REAL” blame.

    A shower, a white shirt and tie, along with a big toothy grin doesn’t work anymore. Matter of fact they, (whites shirts), have some of the most devious of people hiding behind them. Are you one of them? A finger pointing, self centered, asshole who is quick to judge and quicker yet to place the blame on others? Sounds to me like you are. As a Marine i have dibs on the use of the F-Bomb, so trying to undermine my statement by pointing out my blunt comments will do you no good.
    Deer Hunting or Catfishing, whatever, does not have a damn thing to do with why we will fight for our guns. The real reason is because of people like you and obama and Holder, etc,etc!!!
    Molon Labe dickheads. “Fuck Yeah”

  15. D.M. Zuniga says:

    I will respond only to Dean Garrison’s original article, and to the latest response by “Le”, who claims (s)he is “willing to take my uniform off and put on another that supports the 2nd Constitution [sic] if need be.”

    Dean, your article suggests that it is time for everyone to kill those who come for their firearms, and that the Second Amendment is in dire peril. I think we should do our duty over our servants, to assure that they enforce the law, before blasting away at perpetrators in government.

    We The People have never — not once in 220 years — moved to enforce the U.S. Constitution in the same way we enforce all other laws: with due process of law, including seizure of assets and incarceration in prison when appropriate. I say that it’s time we do that to every perpetrator in the U.S. Congress, of high crimes (felonies) found in their respective State Penal Codes.

    That’s what the AmericaAgain! Indictment Engine(TM) is designed to do. The principle is simple; it comes from James Madison’s lifelong writings, and the tactical idea comes from Alexander Hamilton’s 28th Federalist. See AmericaAgainNow (dot com) for more.

    “Le” says that the rule of law is essential to all nations. This is true; but no nation on earth today operates under true rule of law. Nations operate under various oligarchies and juntas — or occasionally under dictators.

    First, “Le”: America is not a “nation”, despite that word appearing in Francis Bellamy’s “Pledge of Allegiance” — Bellamy was an avowed fascist; look it up. We are a REPUBLIC of sovereign States under a Constitution by which We The People severely limited our central servant’s duties/powers.

    But for 150 years, our servants have egregiously violated the highest law, as Tom DiLorenzo catalogues in his latest book, Organized Crime: The Unvarnished Truth About Government. Yet all these years, We The People — apex sovereigns over all governments in America — have never once superintended our States to do their duty of LAW ENFORCEMENT.

    Second, “Le”, in the Constitution (Article I, Section 8, Clauses 12-16) you will find the entire lawful U.S. military described, and its tasks. No full-time ground forces are authorized in our system of government, other than Citizen Militia, to “execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions”. In other words, Lincoln should never have created a permanent U.S. Army; it has always been illegal.

    The same could be said for EVERY foreign military adventure in our history. Read the classic book ‘War is a Racket’, by USMC Major General Smedley Butler. Or read ‘The New American Militarism: How Americans are Seduced by War’, by former West Point instructor and decorated Vietnam vet Andrew Bacevich; or ‘Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change From Hawaii to Iraq’ by Stephen Kinzer.

    Americans have forgotten — or never knew — the norms and nobility of our founders, because government schools have trained us to be unthinking drones for industry, at home and abroad. Then, industry skims the drones’ payroll accounts and sends government its cut. Mussolini defined this as fascism. It’s time to stop talking about things that will never happen (“They’ll take all our firearms!”) and start doing our duty — putting criminals behind bars.

    Forget the penny-ante criminals; I’m talking about putting the fear of God into those 535 politicians who claim to ‘represent’ us, as they openly, serially, and arrogantly violate the highest law in our civilization, making us accept counterfeit ‘money’, and work five months out of the year, to serve them and those who own them.

    So you see this isn’t about “keeping our guns” at all. Forget the 2nd Amendment for a second; according to America’s highest law, every able-bodied citizen has not only a ‘right’ but a DUTY to bear arms when necessary for the three tasks stipulated in Article I, Section 8, Clause 15.

    Thus, all of the heated bloviation above — months of vituperation, recrimination, and childish caricature — misses the whole point. This is precisely what our enemies (those billionaires who own and control presidents and members of Congress, like so many game pieces) want to see.

    American, repent before a holy God. Remember why, and in Whose Name, this republic was founded. Remember that in all matters in which the federal servant is violating the U.S. Constitution, your STATE is a HIGHER AUTHORITY in the law than the lawless federal servant(s) who are violating the Constitution.

    Now, we have work to do. I suggest we do it. Go to AmericaAgainNow (dot com) to find out how.

  16. D.M. Zuniga says:

    (Let me try again; I do not see my comment posted here on May 1, 2013.)

    I will respond only to Dean Garrison’s original article, and to the latest response by “Le”, who claims (s)he is “willing to take my uniform off and put on another that supports the 2nd Constitution [sic] if need be.”

    Dean, your article suggests that it is time for everyone to kill those who come for their firearms, and that the Second Amendment is in dire peril. I think we should do our duty over our servants, to assure that they enforce the law, before blasting away at perpetrators in government.

    We The People have never — not once in 220 years — moved to enforce the U.S. Constitution in the same way we enforce all other laws: with due process of law, including seizure of assets and incarceration in prison when appropriate. I say that it’s time we do that to every perpetrator in the U.S. Congress, of high crimes (felonies) found in their respective State Penal Codes.
    That’s what the AmericaAgain! Indictment Engine(TM) is designed to do. The principle is simple; it comes from James Madison’s lifelong writings, and the tactical idea comes from Alexander Hamilton’s 28th Federalist. See AmericaAgainNow (dot com) for more.

    “Le” says that the rule of law is essential to all nations. This is true; but no nation on earth today operates under true rule of law. Nations operate under various oligarchies and juntas — or occasionally under dictators.

    First, “Le”: America is not a “nation”, despite that word appearing in Francis Bellamy’s “Pledge of Allegiance” — Bellamy was an avowed fascist; look it up. We are a REPUBLIC of sovereign States under a Constitution by which We The People severely limited our central servant’s duties/powers.

    But for 150 years, our servants have egregiously violated the highest law, as Tom DiLorenzo catalogues in his latest book, ‘Organized Crime: The Unvarnished Truth About Government’. Yet all these years, We The People — apex sovereigns over all governments in America — have never once superintended our States to do their duty of LAW ENFORCEMENT.

    Second, “Le”, in the Constitution (Article I, Section 8, Clauses 12-16) you will find the entire lawful U.S. military described, and its tasks. No full-time ground forces are authorized in our system of government, other than Citizen Militia, to “execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions”. In other words, Lincoln should never have created a permanent U.S. Army; it has always been illegal.

    The same could be said for EVERY foreign military adventure in our history. Read the classic book ‘War is a Racket’, by USMC Major General Smedley Butler. Or read ‘The New American Militarism: How Americans are Seduced by War’, by former West Point instructor and decorated Vietnam vet Andrew Bacevich; or ‘Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change From Hawaii to Iraq’ by Stephen Kinzer.

    Americans have forgotten — or never knew — the norms and nobility of our founders, because government schools have trained us to be unthinking drones for industry, at home and abroad. Then, industry skims the drones’ payroll accounts and sends government its cut. Mussolini defined this as fascism. It’s time to stop talking about things that will never happen (“They’ll take all our firearms!”) and start doing our duty — putting criminals behind bars.

    Forget the penny-ante criminals; I’m talking about putting the fear of God into those 535 politicians who claim to ‘represent’ us, as they openly, serially, and arrogantly violate the highest law in our civilization, making us accept counterfeit ‘money’, and work five months out of the year, to serve them and those who own them.

    So you see this isn’t about “keeping our guns” at all. Forget the 2nd Amendment for a second; according to America’s highest law, every able-bodied citizen has not only a ‘right’ but a DUTY to bear arms when necessary for the three tasks stipulated in Article I, Section 8, Clause 15.

    Thus, all of the heated bloviation above — months of vituperation, recrimination, and childish caricature — misses the whole point. This is precisely what our enemies (those billionaires who own and control presidents and members of Congress, like so many game pieces) want to see.

    American, repent before a holy God. Remember why, and in Whose Name, this republic was founded. Remember that in all matters in which the federal servant is violating the U.S. Constitution, your STATE is a HIGHER AUTHORITY in the law than the lawless federal servant(s) who are violating the Constitution.

    Now, we have work to do. I suggest we do it. Go to AmericaAgainNow (dot com) to find out how.

  17. Thom says:

    Hey Brad. I have posted a couple comments but maybe because of the colorful language in them they got the boot? Anyway, It kinda looks like America is beginning to wake up, what’d you think? The next couple years are going to be interesting. Did you watch obama’s last press conference? What a sorry excuse for a president!!

    • Brad says:

      Hi Thom. I know it is best to stay informed, but I can’t stand to watch Obama stand there and read his script. Rarely does any truth pass his lips and then it is usually by accident. I prefer to keep the food I just ate in my system, and he just makes me want to vomit.

      Hopefully America is waking up. It’s about time, we have almost waited too long, and it is going to take a massive effort and a lot of pain (both economically and personal sacrifice), to turn this sinking ship around. God save us all!

      • 7delta says:

        I didn’t watch it either. Speeches and responses are completely predictable….from the whole bunch. They’re the Sergeant Shultz Administration.

        • Brad says:

          Amen 7delta, if I believed in fairy tales, I’d watch Disney cartoons. At least they would be more entertaining and closer to the truth.

          • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

            The disney cartoons from the 50’s and 60’s are totally different than now, then they were pro american, not politically correct, and anti facism and communism, they made fun of muslims and other pagan religions. They did not however make fun of Christianity. They also taught morals and principles, not like now. In point the little mermaid, lied to her father went behind her fathers back, and chased after an older man. Real fine upstanding moral character there. I rememebr shows like make room for daddy, or fathers knows best, holsom upstanding, shows nothing compared to the filth the call entertainment now. Also most og your sitcoms and night time soaps, have political propoganda and agendas being pushed through them nightly. Its sickening what the media has become, puppet s for the anti- american crowd,

          • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

            Years of clinton spewing lies, then Bush is called a liar because he went with intel furnished by more than one source, then years of uncle muhammed spewing lie after lie, pretty much everytime he opens his mouth. On top of that he’s covering up for the muslims every chance he gets, dont tell me hes not a muslim. His way of Jihad is to bring us down from the inside, and help his teammates every time hes able. Teh man has commited treasonous act after treasonous act, 50 yrs ago the media would be calling for his head on a silver platter, now they adore him and cover for him and his cronies. It sickens me, and here you have people who are still arguing with us about gun control, and havent got a clue as to the rest of whats going on!!

          • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

            We also now are seeing the syrians using the wmd’s that Sadam shipped to them to get them out of his country so the inspectors would not find them. Trouble is he took too long to allow them and got deposed by us invading. Two of his own generals said he shipped them to Syria prior to the invasion, the press never reported that and now hes trying to act like they did not use them because , it would show that Sadam did in fact ship them there. Oh what a world we live in!, deceipt, deception and pure evil abounds.
            And still his minions adore adn praise him, while holdng out their hands for more freebies paid for by us.

          • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

            And we sit and dispute over political correctness for fear of offending somebody that we should not even be concerned if we offend them because they want bring our freedoms and our country down around our ears, and are so far succeeding. We should shouting from the roof tops that an ACE is an ACE and a SPADE is a SPADE, and that we are sick and tired of it and we are not gonna take it anymore so you either stop or we are going to war, and MEAN IT!!! If we all called our congressmen and senators , not just some all of us, and told them alt out start doing your job or we are going to march on your ass, I bet theyd start doing there job. Or we march on their asses. We sit here and talk about the right of self defense, hell that is self defense.

          • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

            Im sorry but I had to get that out there! Its stewing and brewing.
            Those assholes in Washington work for us, THEY WORK FOR US, we foot the bill, its on our dime. Yet they sit on their hands and dont do squat. And when they do finally do something it usually detrimental to us and they make themselves exempt from the crap they lay on us. Does that sound like somebody thats working for us???

  18. Thom says:

    ROB>> Should I be surprised that you left out the fact, “FACT” and a very important FACT, that the British Queen ordered the disarming of the colonist for no better reason than to make it easier and safer to collect taxes levied on the people by her fat and ugly self. You should try harder to remember that the next time you feel a need to explain the reasons for the “Revolutionary War”. Its not like its a minor point that doesn’t really count. Being a self proclaimed warrior yourself it seems as if that would be one of the first points you would make????

    • Rob Price says:

      This “fact” wasn’t omitted. It was only after the huge tax increases and subsequent unrest, that the Queen went after the colonist’s guns.

      • 7delta says:

        that the Queen went after the colonist’s guns

        King. The king. King George. Y’all seem to be thinking of the current gender on the throne.

      • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

        Ya think Rob?? And did they let her have them, thats a big resounding Hell NO!!! And because of that you have the freedom to spew your crap on this blog!! If you were in the military Im a monkeys uncle, and if you were u were like many i was around that didnt wanna be there and blamed their government for sending them there, and when they got back they protested about it. And wasnt proud of it, is that the kind of military man you were there Rob?

    • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

      Robs nothing that he claims hes changes his veiw point too many times, and everytime he still manages to get some of his crap in there, just in a different form. Hes playing some of these people in here like a fine violin, but I KNOW HES JUST FULL OF S__T

  19. Zelda says:

    Hey, I think your site might be having browser compatibility issues.
    When I look at your blog in Firefox, it looks fine but when opening in Internet Explorer,
    it has some overlapping. I just wanted to
    give you a quick heads up! Other then that, excellent blog!

  20. D.M. Zuniga says:

    Laura,

    I checked out your New Federalist Party site, and everything I read there sounds excellent. Of course, there was no platform yet so it’s hard to know where your new party idea would fit in today’s political food chain.

    You should have named it the ‘True Federalist Party’, since from the little information you have published so far, you are aligned with the original governing ideals of federalism rather than the bogus Federalist party, successor to the Loyalists and precursor to the Whigs (and later GOP).

    I applaud your efforts, but for reasons that I explain in my book This Bloodless Liberty, America’s two-party arrangement is unassailable by any third party — and not for lack of great ideas or principles. Since the end of the War to Enslave the States in 1865, the mercantilists (“the 1%”) who own America’s politicians have had a terribly effective strategy: divide the country into equal, offsetting halves. The two teams drain one another’s energy and keep one another from having the time to think rationally about the root problems.

    If the shrewd puppeteers allow a third party (or more) to reach critical mass, then coalitions can be formed to tip the scale towards real reform in one direction for a protracted period. If big government loses momentum, the careers of many in the bureaucrat class (almost 20 million strong; the size of some countries’ populations) will be endangered.

    Your New Federalist Party language thus far sounds much like the constitutional and fiscal planks of the Constitution Party (originally the U.S. Taxpayer Party) over 20 years ago. They never gained even 1% of the national vote, but perhaps by taking the liberals’ position on social issues, you will attract many in the mushy middle, that would never have voted Constitution Party.

    One way or the other, your party’s positions sound vastly superior to those of either of the 800-pound gorillas that own the electoral politics industry, and I wish you the very best. There’s a first time for everything.

    • DMZ,

      Thank you for your reply, I do appreciate your encouraging words. Our platform is complete except for our final article. When we have finished the final edits on that article we will release a shortened version of every article. The complete platform will be voted on during our convention. As for whether we will be successful or not remains to be seen. I believe we will or I wouldn’t have become involved and helped to shape the party.

      I have to correct your mis-characterization (stole your word 😉 ) of our position on social issues. Our position is not liberal, it is based on the Constitution. All of our positions on all of the issues are Constitutional. If it’s not an enumerated and limited power granted to the federal government by the Constitution, it belongs to the states and the people.

      • D.M. Zuniga says:

        Laura, I should have put it differently. I should say that your position as repeatedly stated on this thread (which may not be the NFP platform position, I grant in advance) on the key social issues of our day, and your rejecting the demonstrable historic fact that Christianity (as opposed to no belief about God, or a different concept of God) formed the foundation of American law, government, and social norms, will be more attractive to the large ‘moderate’ demographic, than the GOP platform has been.

        The limited information on your new site is truly refreshing; if I believed that elections made any difference at all at this point in our history, I’d vote for every New Federalist Party (NFP) candidate that qualified on any ticket.

        Tactically and legally enforcing the Constitution is the mission of AmericaAgain! Trust; politically restoring the limits stipulated by that supreme Law of the Land appears to be the mission of the NFP. Thus, although we may both have started off with harsh words for one another, we are allies in restoring the rule of law. If you will re-read any of our material (or my statements), you may find that you mistook our statements *historically framing* the constitutional law battle in its ethical context, for theocratic action planks of our mission.

        You stayed with our interchange, not giving quarter on your principles yet returning to the irenic spirit I witnessed in your other exchanges here. It does you credit.

        • D.M. Zuniga says:

          Erratum: instead of saying, “as opposed to no belief about God, or a different concept of God”, I should have said, “as opposed to maintaining that there is no God, or a different concept of God”.

          Laura, I’m sure you’ve also calculated that your New Federalist Party could be the perfect new camp for the disgruntled Ron Paul Revolution. Dr. Paul is a deeply principled man; he has always remained a strict constitutionalist, to the chagrin of Liberals and Conservatives.

          It’s such a shame that the abysmal citizen conditioning offered in the schools over at least five generations, leads the original definitions of ‘Liberal’ and ‘Conservative’ to be reversed, with none the wiser.

  21. Starting a new comment thread.

    7d & DMZ,

    7d, thank you for your wonderful reply to my comment, I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. It is the well-thought out, well-written comment I’ve come to expect from you. I’ve just started the Federalist Papers, but I will look for Laws of Nature as you suggested. Will you recommend some good sites?

    I’m not sure you and DMZ understand my point. Were our Founding Fathers religious (the majority being Christian)? Yes. Did they create a document that endorsed a specific religion? No. Did they believe we are all equal and endowed by our Creator with unalienable rights? Yes. Did they specify which religious God our Creator is? Other than Nature’s God, no they did not. Did Nature exist before Christianity? Yes. Did the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God exist before Christianity? Yes, it did. Did morality and justice exist before Christianity? It most certainly did.

    1st Amendment:

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…”

    Your comment, 7d:

    “It binds the central government from interfering in religion and ‘the free exercise thereof’ and from establishing a state religion. It did not prohibit the government or citizens from their free exercise thereof, nor prohibit the government from participating in religious exercises, nor restrict them from encouraging people to participate in their chosen beliefs. If someone didn’t have a faith position…fine. Government could not force them to have one, support one or participate in one.”

    Question for you: ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion’ what does ‘establishment’ mean? I read it as the government shall not make a law that respects one religion over another nor make any laws that establish a national religion. The government simply has no power to make laws based on the teachings of any specific religion or to force people to follow or support any religion. The government cannot exercise religion or participate in religious exercises – it is not a person. It can only provide a level playing ground and protect our freedoms – ensuring that we all are equal under the law. It is prohibited from supporting, respecting, or elevating one religion over another.

    I am making a distinction between the beliefs and actions of individuals vs. the actions of our government. When a person is acting in the capacity of an elected official, he is first – upholding and defending the Constitution and 2nd – representing his constituents, not himself. His personal religious beliefs should not enter into his decision. When an elected official is acting as an individual, he can base his decisions on whatever he would like.

    “During the construction of Washington, DC, church services were held in the Capitol Building, the War Department and the Treasury. Nine different denominations, if I remember correctly. And if I’m not mistaken, church services continued to be held in the Capitol until the 1950′s.”

    I knew that they did this, I have no objections at all. I also know that separation of church and state is not in the Constitution. Whenever someone brings that up, I correct them – tell them they have misunderstood ‘freedom of religion.’ I would not care if public/government buildings had the Ten Commandments, crosses, menorahs, Buddhas, or other representations of other religions. Treat all religions the same, don’t elevate one religion over another. Don’t promote or share the teachings of one religion and not allow the same for another religion. Our government CANNOT do this without violating our Constitution.

    No one is born a Christian, but we are all born with our unalienable rights – recognized and protected by the Constitution. When our Founding Fathers created our Constitutional Republic, they did not intend for it to be a Christian nation, despite their own beliefs. They did intend it to be a moral and just nation of laws, a nation that acknowledges a higher power, a divine being – our Creator. Each of us born equal and endowed with unalienable rights, one of those rights being the freedom to choose for ourselves who our Creator is. The Founding Fathers did not specify who our Creator is, despite their beliefs. They left it up to the people to believe in the Creator of their choice – or no Creator at all. The freedom to believe our Creator is the God of the New Testament or the Old Testament; the God of Hinduism or Buddhism; no God or even the God of Islam (though some don’t consider this a legitimate religion).

    I am committed to my belief that our government and our laws must be neutral on the topic of religion and protect our right to be free to believe what we choose.

    • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

      Im sooy but you out of your mind they knew and stated vohemntly God the Father was and never for an instant did they ever say whoever your God is, they always spoke of God and qouted scripture form the Bible, not the Quran, not any book but the Bible. George Washington himself in a speech when he left office that a country governed by its people could not and would stand if Biblical Principles and trust in God ( the one in the Bible the only one, the one they prayed to constantly and openly, the heavenly Father) were taken out of theri lives and they did not stand on these and put them to use. Man you cant have Biblical principles with out the God that gave them to us. It wasnt mans idea, man is inherently evil, thats why people who don’t believe in God the Father of the Bible, Lie, cheat, steal, covet, greed drives them, and denounce God and that is the worst sin of all. Our Founding Fathers di everything thru prayer or with prayer because they knew without prayer to God, not allah,not harry krishna and not Bhudda ( if that were the case muhammed writings and bhuddas sayiings would be all over everything instead of the Heavenly Fathers)that our country would not be blessed and fall into hard times, look where we are now. The people of this country better open there eyes and repent before its too late, cuz judgement will come if they keep refusing to acknowledge who gave them this land and this country and blessed it for years.

      • D.M. Zuniga says:

        Oh “Great GooglyMoogly”, who is this Harry Krishna of whom you speak? Distant relative of Moe Hammett, perchance?

        • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

          So out of all that I put out there the only thing you got out of that was who is harry krishna?? Some false prophet of some false religion somewhere and I have no idea who he is a distant relative of, and dont care. Since he or it is of no consequence to me, muhammed is however since he was the prophet that started the Satanic religion of Islam, that is out to detroy everybody but muslims, and Christians especially. My point however was our fore fathers were not talikng about whatever God you want to pray to, or believe in they were very precise and exact about who they were referring to and why. And if you saked that question because I maybe did not spell harry krishna the way it is spelled its because, one I dont care and 2 because i dint want to waste my time looking it up since it is irrelevant, and 3 did I mention I dont care.

      • GGM,

        I know you disagree with my opinion that religion must be kept out of government and our laws. I don’t believe you are understanding the difference between the personal beliefs of the Founding Fathers and their creation of a government that did not endorse a specific religion. So, I ask you to show me where in the Declaration, or the Constitution, Christianity and the Bible are named. If, as you say ‘My point however was our fore fathers were not talikng about whatever God you want to pray to, or believe in they were very precise and exact about who they were referring to and why’ why then is Christ, Christianity, and the Bible not mentioned in the DoI or Const. Why did they specifically say “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…?” Could it be that even though they were Christians they didn’t want to mix government and laws with religion – having experienced that in Great Britain? Could it be that they wanted to prohibit government from endorsing a specific religion while, at the same time, protect our Right to worship as we please? Or, could it be that our Founding Fathers truly believed in liberty and freedom and the individual’s right to choose for himself and not be forced to participate in or support something in which he didn’t believe?

        • Thom says:

          Bottom line: If you want to be free to follow any religion of your choice you damn well better be ready to fight for the right to do so. You people are way off course here. Its all about guns, without guns you are going to lose your freedom or you’re gonna die. Chances are even with a gun you’ er going to die, but that, in my book, is way better than being a boot licker

          Lets think about it for a moment. We all know the reason Christ died on the cross. My question is why, what good did it do? Wouldn’t he have accomplished more if he had laughed in their face before he slew them all with one slight motion of his hand? According to all t I have ever been ask to believe, my guess is he could have done it single handedly. I don’t know about you but, I mean, that would have impressed me lot more than watching him die on the cross!

          Don’t get me wrong. I believe in God. I just don’t think he spend enough time thinking it out. I know I would sacrifice myself before nailing my son to a cross. WTF I have a lot of questions if I ever make it to the Pearly Gates. Just like here, I have a lot of questions if I ever make it to the Whitehouse. Which very soon could become known as the Muslim House.

          I have a feeling inside that’s telling me its almost too late for talk. Everyone is waiting around for someone else to pop obama when we all know he deserves no less. S>O>B> And if someone does do him how many of you would be there to defend the patriot that loved his country more than he loved himself?

          • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

            Thom Jesus was God in the Flesh so in essence he had himself nailed to the cross for us, blood had to be spilled to cover the sin. Only innocent unblemished blood can do that and only god himself has that, so he came down from heaven was born of a virgin so mans original sin had no bearing on him , taught us and explain it all to us then climbed up on the cross and let us kill him for us. Now thats undying love. Yet the same people he climbed up there for will stomp and spit on his name , and reject that love. Thats kind like a soldier goes to war to protect the country for of civilians that live there, he comes home broken and wounded and the same people he went to protect spit on him and curse him. Terrible scenerio’s but none the less, true.

        • D.M. Zuniga says:

          Laura,

          Okay, so you reeled me into this one, just for a bit — to *agree* with you, in every particular. This latest post of yours is cogently worded; historically accurate.

          Perhaps you’ll revisit my earlier posts and your puke-stocking responses suggesting that AmericaAgain! seeks to establish a religious system in America. I don’t give a frog’s quivering thigh what revisionists say, or how forcefully they say it: history leaves a record, and America’s roots are perspicuous. Sed distinguo: establishing that truth for the record does not equate to coercing anyone’s present-day or future beliefs!

          Consider the engine of invention, initiative, and liberty that America has been in the world — and our unique Constitution, earth’s oldest extant governing document. AmericaAgain! does not wave a nationalist flag and hoot “U-S-A!!! U-S-A!!! in the Philistine manner of today’s government-schooled, assembly-line hordes. We do, however, state on the record that none of these uniquely valuable aspects of American civilization could have been, had not Christianity shaped America, root and branch, for ten generations before the 20th century.

          You suggest that my language-torturing brother (sister?) GooglyBooglyWoogly should make distinctions. I suggest you do the same, with respect to AmericaAgain! — for we hold these four consonant principles, three of which align perfectly with your stated positions:

          1) Every American must be free to worship the God of the universe, or any deity imaginable, or plastic lawn chairs, or worship whatever they choose, or not to worship if they so choose;

          2) Our servant governments must take no side for or against said religious belief systems, unless such a system incites killing or harming others — and if so, the civil magistrate has the duty to enforce laws against such criminal actions or plans (per our Constitution, the Citizen Militia is the ‘armed forces’ authorized to do so);

          3) From first European settlement until the dawn of the 20th century, America’s unique civilization and rule of law was, demonstrably and categorically, the product of Christian faith and values;

          4) Ideas have consequences evident in every culture and economy on earth; no other belief system ever produced world-changing popular sovereignty, individual responsibility*, missionary benevolence, and indomitable optimism as has America.
          — — —
          *In politically incorrect olden days, we called this the Protestant Work Ethic.

          • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

            Sorry to pop your bubble there Laura but I have nothing to do with AmericaAgain nor support it, and your ove edumicated response is pretty much gobbledygoop ( THAT MEANS MAKES NO SENSE AND ITS RIGHT). Not trying to be ugly or anything but your out of your mind if you think the founding fathers had no intention of God of the Bible and his morals and principles were not to be p[art of this government or society. They stated it over and over and said explicitly without it the government would fail over and over , And since we’ve been kicking god down the road look where we are at. I mean all you have to do to see thats its true is look at when we started kicking God out of everything and that the more we did the worse off we’ve become. Deny the facts its your priviledge you have free will, cause God gave it to you hehe.

            • Thom says:

              It may not mean a damn to you MoogleY, but I lean toward your side of the argument. Even though I still have a lot of questions. Being the lazy researcher I am, the answers will have to wait until I reach the Pearly Gates. I did, however , take the questionaire seriously and as no surprise to me, I learned a great deal.

              As an added note I would think that, considering what I have read, being a member of the church was not exactly a walk in the park.

              • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                Your right Thom it would seem it was a hard road to hoe, and if one looks around these days its becoming a hard roe to hoe today and will just get more difficult. The evil of this world is trying its damndest (ooops theres another red line, omg another one, omg another one all is lost im doomed forever, dont let zagumba see this or he might whip me with a wet noodle!)) to crush Christianity, one can see this by just looking around at the headlines. lets see,” pentagon to courtmartial people who share the gospel” ( dont knwo if that ones true yet?) but its just an example, “kid suspended from school for praying in hallway” that one was true. The liberals wanting to do away with everything to od with God or christianity. people who live in the dark (sin) do not want the light ( Gods word) around because it makes them see themselves for what they are, and they dont like it.

          • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

            Sorry Laure was not meant for you typed the name by accident, it was forZagumba or whatever his name is.

            • D.M. Zuniga says:

              “GreatAnonymousMoogleyWimp”,

              It’s Zuniga. Come on, you can spell a word correctly; you’ve already gotten about 40% of your written words right, big girl! Good!

              Now, Nancy: look at the word…sound it out…now, type one letter at a time. See? a whole sentence, and every word spelled correctly! Just copy the other people here; come on, Nancy, I *know* you can do this!

              — o:o — o:o —

              To all,

              For a Christian, Nancy* is the most foul-mouthed sister** I’ve encountered online in a great while. Her** positions are excellent, but her** style is that of a piss-stained groundling with an axe to grind against the world. She** preaches Jesus Christ, while carrying on just as offensively to everyone, as the Liberal guttersnipes online. Her** pugilistic ignoramus act certainly doesn’t bring honor to the cause of Christ. Her** petulant responses about anyone exhibiting cogent human thought, or proper spelling and punctuation, reminds me of what we see in Middle School Valley-Girl cliques, or urban gangs. So I picture her** as a 13-year-old Black girl with time on her hands, angry at everyone…but claiming faith in Jesus.

              The fact that she** doesn’t use her** real name demonstrates cowardliness, bad intentions, or bad faith — none of which is a Christian virtue. So to any atheist or Muslim reading her** jibes and rants, she** is a perfect example of what THEY think Americans are really like. Unfortunately, this is becoming the norm on too many blogs and social networks today.

              Nancy* has at one time or another excoriated everyone else on this thread. While claiming to be an apologist for Jesus, she** has done great harm to the gospel, at least as I understand Philippians 4:8.

              This is not to detract from, or disagree with, her** statements about America’s Christian foundation. I only take issue with her** idiotic pugilism, that has become so common online, detracting from constructive discourse and solving problems.

              — o:o — o:o —

              *Nancy is a real name; I prefer to call her that, rather than the Rumplestiltskinish moniker she hides behind.

              ** She may be a ‘he’, but there’s no telling.

              • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                Perhaps you’ll revisit my earlier posts and your puke-stocking responses suggesting that AmericaAgain! seeks to establish a religious system in America. I don’t give a frog’s quivering thigh what revisionists say, or how forcefully they say it: history leaves a record, and America’s roots are perspicuous. Sed distinguo: establishing that truth for the record does not equate to coercing anyone’s present-day or future beliefs!

                Ok perfect example of a blowhard at work!

              • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                Listen ya mean well and all but your not gonna get anything accomplished that way, for one reason is you just dont have the time, the country is going down too fast. For all your well meaning intellectual thoughts, only thing thats gonna do it is boots on the ground and soon, other wise all is lost America will be fundamentally change forever thanks to uncle muhammed, the liberal morons who support him, his administration of corrupt atheist officials.and all the foreign interest groups and or people that back him( Soros), we can sit here and fight over whos got the right answer all day and night long.and it will still come down to this, God is the only answer, he is the only answer, and he will always be the answer. And for your information when I was born my Dad took one look at my ugly face and cried out GreatGoogleyMoogleY!! I dont think Im great, Im not special, its an exclamation of suprise introduced by the one and only Frank Zappa, But then being the all knowing iintellectual u are u knew that….. right?

          • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

            To be honest I do agree with alot of that but geez, its so much fun yanking ur chain

        • le says:

          They were here because they wanted religious freedom. This means that England and other countries they came from had state religions – which means the religion of the country was the one taxes etc were paid to. They came here in protest to that so many were protestants that came and for the above reason. So what they mean is that they wanted freedom from state religion. They wanted to be able to worship in thier own church without obligation to another church they did not believe in. Most were God-fearing people. Look and study the early history of our country and the colony government that was laid out. I can look back at the writing from my direct relatives and be able to tell why they were here. What many people don’t want to recognize is that they held services inside the capital building in the early days. They were not against the Christian religion – far from it.

          • le,

            I will repeat again my point. I am not disputing the fact that our Founding Fathers were religious, many Christian. I am saying the document they authored and government they established, recognizes and protects our freedom to worship as we please. Our laws cannot be based on the teachings or texts of a specific religion, doing that violates the Constitution. Would you want laws based on the teachings of Islam? Wicca? Buddhism? Hinduism?

            • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

              Hey Zagumba you are an idiot and you will never get what your after at your site, because those of us that believe in the America our fore fathers invisioned and put into place that was based on the worship of the God of the Bible will never go along with it, To state that Christians would fundamentally change America is just pure stupidity since thats what America was founded on, but then atheist and immoral people just cant Stand God or his people, and little tib bit of info for you. A system like ours will not work with out Godly morals and principles, George Washington said it, Ben Frankiln said it, So many others that were behind the founding of this country said it, and now look where we are due to kicking god and prayer out of schools and teaching evolution which itself is just a theory and has to this point absolutely no proof to back it up, Just more theories. Talk about voodoo and magic. we keep tryign to kick God and his morals and principle out of every facet of the country and our childrens lives on a daily basis and what has it gotten us crazed young individuals with no rudder and no outlook killing blantantly, And a country gone mad with what it now calls acceptable and not acceptable, political correctness, theres nothing correct about it, you cannot call an ace a heart because it aint. Every thing arounbd us has become based on filth or degredation, movies, music, tv, you name it and we subject our children to it, we teach them that homosexuality is AOK, that anything ur heart desires is ok , if it feels good do it, then when they grow up all screwed up in the head we wonder why oh why.
              We’ll those of us that are christians don’t wonder just the ones that live within their own minds, thinking themsleves their on God with no need of the real God. Thats the need right there because as Gearge Washington said” A people who govern themselves with out holding on to Gods principles and morals cannot survive,because man is inherently evil and will corrupt” thats says it all. Cuz bubba thats where we are at now.

              • D.M. Zuniga says:

                Don’t panic, Nancy. AmericaAgain! will require fewer than 1% of Americans over age 18, to operate as it needs to. We don’t expect petulant whiners to take up their citizen duty in America, so you’re free to keep hiding behind a pseudonym, faking ‘Christianity’ while very likely being a false-flag atheist, just here to make Christians appear as blithering idiots.

                You are all trash-talk and no action, Nancy.

                • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                  well then your in luck because theres alot ( omg a redline, i musta fergot ta put that there dang blamed ole apostrophe in) of idiots and morons in this country that you can draw from

                • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                  Yep thats me all trash talk and no action damn you’ve got me pegged. Dyam ur good ( omg another redline man im screwed) ur soo good u wanna know how good u are??……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….Your the intellectual smarter than the average bear u finger it out

            • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

              The country wasnt base on the teachings of islam, or buddhism so thats not really relevant, it is however relevant to today since thats what the immediate regime and forces at work are pushing , and in order to do that they first have to wipe christianity from our doors, which they are now in the process of doing, so my question is this like before , You gonna worship Satan or God??? But you are gonna end up worshipping one of them, because refusing God IS worshipping Satan! An a societies actions relate to what they believe or cont believe. Listen once again I never said that the founding fathers wanted governemnt to force how people worship, never siad that they wanted the church to run the government, they didnt . But they did want Godly prinicple and morals to be integral with both. Now zagumba states I believe that the morals and principles of God are the same as morals and principles of nature, um ok thats why without Gods morals and principles, man inherently becomes evil and corrupt. dont think so zagumba. You think all the corrupt evil people we have running this country now are christians???? Mans nature is evil, thats a fact, greed , envy, deceitfulness, hate, thats our nature, so when you leave God out of it thats where ya end up, look around!

            • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

              So Im done with this for now because its going nowhere. No hard feelings I respect you all and your opinions, its just that most of you are wrong lol 8).
              Well I dont respect Mark , but the rest of you are ok I guess. Everybody have a good weekend,and pray( to the Lord God, not allah, nor to urself) for our lost country because boy does it need it. We are at the door of something we all dont want, So again I will ask you would you rather worship God or Satan, because we all are gonna have to make a choice , there is no fence riding on this, God himself said so. And I mean God, not obama, obama is not God I know some think he is, but he aint, if anything hes Satan, or the embodiment of what Satan stands for. Thats why he is pushing so hard to erase everything to do with Christianity. to be lead or ruled by people who arent christian is pretty much the same as being ruled by islam or Satan

              • D.M. Zuniga says:

                Well, I’m glad you think I’m “okay”, Nancy. But you obviously are not; you’re an illiterate atheist poseur, trying to make Christians appear as idiots.

                You’re right; all your incoherent ranting is going nowhere; it hasn’t worked. Go back to stealing other girls’ Nike shoes, or whatever you do on weekends.

                • Brad says:

                  Zuniga… (no offense meant to Moogley) You are obviously an intelligent and educated individual, with a gift in linguistic prose. That being said, one would think that discernment would be a companion gift.

                  Although you may wish to say the things that you have said here (of which there is now “unofficially” a permanent record of), you are one of the creators of AmericaAgain!, do you really want this to come back and haunt you later? If this organization accomplishes your stated goals, do you not think that the “media” will thoroughly vet you? Taking the bait of a blogger and attacking back???

                  I understand your passion, and I pretty much agree with the vast majority of your stated goals, but you do your cause a disservice and bring discredit upon yourself when you defend yourself in such a manner, even though you have every right to. Think long tern, and for the reputation of your organization.

                  • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                    none taken, but he is a pompous ass.

                  • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                    I dont think hes gonna have to worry about that tho Brad, and it wasnt bait I spoke my thoughts, stated some facts, and he didnt like em and came at me. Truth hurts sometimes. He doesnt bother me tho I think hes kinda funny in a weird twisted sort of way

                  • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                    You call his passion he called mine ranting, Im just as damn passionate as the next guy, ask my wife.

                    • Brad says:

                      lol, Moogley. You’ve got a way with words!

                    • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                      I type and post wahts on my , mind how i feel and waht i know to be the facts, I dont type then reread, then reread again, then analyze it and redo it and make corrections before posting. Because frankly Scarlet my Dear, i dont give a Damn! Plus i dont wanna be a pompous ass!

                  • D.M. Zuniga says:

                    Brad, that is sage counsel. Honestly, I know better than to spend time on fora; that anonymous, irksome poster got my goat — but of course that’s no excuse for stooping to the same level. Thanks for that.

                    • Thom says:

                      D.M.Zuniza or is it zagunba? Damn I’m so confused^&*6@#!!! But you say something ‘ that there was no need for you to st00p to MoogleY’s level? Well– you might be well educated and well written but your also a fuc*in SNOB. And that puts you way below MoogleY already. What you NEED to do is pick yourself UP and start behaving like a man. You have lost all of your credibility here , time to move on.

                    • Brad says:

                      You’re welcome, I believe in your cause and wouldn’t want to see it hindered by a momentary lapse in judgement. I have done the same thing before and although it felt great to eviscerate the toad that dared to mess with me, upon reflection I regretted my actions.

                    • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                      LOL at this
                      “Brad, that is sage counsel. Honestly, I know better than to spend time on fora; that anonymous, irksome poster got my goat — but of course that’s no excuse for stooping to the same level. Thanks for that.”
                      You started it when you jumped on Laura, man i dont see any diffierence in you and a liberal, do something then turn around and act like you were the victim, she didnt agree with you so you jumped on her, I didnt agree with you jumping on her so you junped on me. Damn gotta love the pompous ass mentality. Which I will reiterate ( WOW a big word and no red line, thats really shwell, oops theres one omg) uncle muhammed is a pompous ass too, he also thinks he is high and mighty and better than all us lowly hordes. Yeah i wanna go from the frying pan into the fire.) for all of us lowly hordes out there that means from one pompous ass to another pompous ass, some change that would be!

                • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                  Listen nothing ive said about christianity or the bilble or What our forefathers have done or said isnt true, ok so i take it back your not ok, If your going to sit there and act like what Ive said is ranting or not true, then I believe your the atheist poser because its all facts and documented. And if you were a real Christian you would know that. So I pretty much dont care what ya think or say there pard! ( omg red lines jumpin jimminy what will I do) And sonny theres nothing illiterate about me, so you just keep trying to pat urself on the back and think your all that and a bag of fries, cuz u aint! ( oh noes more red lines) If you really think knowing and spewing big words makes you smart then you are a dumbass. Pardon my french! I know some big words too, supercallifragilisticexpialidosous
                  oh crap I got a redline sheet! Like I said before it doesnt make u right, it just makes you a pompous ass!

          • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

            The main thing you have to do is look at the statements the founding fathers themselves made 100’s of time pertaining to this very subject, I mean comon they couldnt have said it any clearer, the only way you couldnt undertand it would be if your only language was Swahili. Im sorry but trying to make something out of nothing just dont work. Unless your God and even he used dust to make man and a rib from man to make woman.( I know the feminist hate that part).

        • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

          I am not mistaken at all I know exactly what they wanted they themselves said it over and over and made it quite clear. They did not want government controlling the church, nor the church controlling the government ( the church as an entity like the Roman Catholic Church which held all of europe under it s control) But thats what they came here to escape in the beginning, they did not however not want religion ( worship of God and adhering to his laws and principles) to not be a part of the practice of this government or its leaders. Im sorry but one would have to be totally blind m=not to see it, I mean the stated it themselves with their own mouths over and over and over. The only way one could not see that is if they choose not to willingly

    • D.M. Zuniga says:

      Laura,

      I’ll let “7delta” engage that new topic if (s)he likes; I had no intention of delving into that subject, as I said before. The record that Christianity animated, motivated, and informed the settlers of this civilization so as to shape our society in almost every particular, is a perspicuous, voluminous record. It begins with the very first foray of Europeans onto these shores, and did not abate until the middle of the 20th century.

      As a practical matter, however, it makes no difference! Being on the same side of the Constitution — as I have demonstrated that we are — we would be fools to waste one another’s energy, time, and good will in fruitless disputation. Those who seek an omnicompetent nanny state (and a feckless nest of their own in it) must love to see us strict constitutionalists go at one another’s throats, and I suggest we deny them the pleasure. I really do like your party’s direction, and wish you all success — though, as I said earlier, I would vote Constitution Party if it remains in play at such time as I ever return to the ‘voter’ sheepfold. Presently, I consider voting to be an exercise in futility.

      “7delta”,

      Speaking of going at one another’s throats, let me raise something for your consideration. The blogosphere is as interesting, diverse, and occasionally revolting a social venue as any ale house, whore house, ship’s crew quarters, college classroom, boardroom, or cowpoke’s camp in history. But in any of those venues and periods, the participants, soon or late, knew the name and face of their fellow travelers.

      Norms of human society include basic norms; unwritten laws. One of these is that a person who seeks to remain anonymous even in protracted social intercourse is either: a) in fear of life or limb for speaking, or b) harbors less-than-honorable intentions or options. The higher the stakes or more vital the issue in dispute or discussion, the more this tenet comes into play.

      As a *reductio ad absurdum* in the context of my note to Laura, what do you think the chances of victory would be for a political candidate who remains anonymous? Or how many patients would an anonymous surgeon attract to his practice? Would you retain an attorney who never used his real name or allowed you to see his face?

      The other thing is mere awkwardness; I had assumed you are a ‘he’, but Laura is reminding me of my collegiate days, when I knew many women who were as adept as any man at spirited, erudite debate. “7delta”, if you’re a woman, I’m sorry for having said “he” in referring to you.

      The virtual community can easily *refuse* community, even if a particular anonymous participant is irenic, erudite, and not (truly) rude as so many can be, online.

      I’m not really nagging at you in particular, “7delta”; the common practice has always been a burr under my saddle. It has produced a more barbaric atmosphere in social media, even than the practice of using a false name and/or photo — which is another vice altogether.

      • D.M. Zuniga says:

        Exhibit A is Shaniquah Nancy Jones (aka “Great GooglyBooglyMoogly”).

        • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

          Lmao at the zagumba, (hey look theres a red line under ur name)but guess what I dont care because im not trying to impress anyone with my intellectual prowess because it doesnt matter to me and its irrelevant in the bigger scheme of things, If I have a typo and dont correst it, its because I dont give a flying S__T, because Im not on here to try and impress anybody or make people think im something im not, because Im a pencil necked geek who sits in front of a computer all day. And for ur information im not rtying to be a bl;ogger I have more important things to deal with like life. I am however concerned about my country and the assholes in that are screwing it up( like you) so I voice my opinion that is based in fact not devil worship BS, or mans intellect which is as the bible says(stupidity). I lean on what God says not man, because as i have pointed out many time so far, man is inherently evil and Stupid. And I believe that u might very well be an engineer, because u are pompous moronic asshole like most I have met. I have a sister that has spent most of her life in college, the more book knowledge she acquired the more common sense she lost , as been my experience with most overmaedumicated( hey theres another red line omg!!!) dumbasses. You see the problem is as person acquires more nowledge think start thinking that they are superior to other, when in fact its just the other way around, because with that vanity and self worship comes stupidity and lack of common sense.They cant be told anything and they cant be taught anything because they know-it-all and how dare a lesser intelectual tell them anything. Hey heres a news flash for you most of the really intelligent people of this country that invented and produced stuff werent intellectuals, if any. That ought to tell you something. And news flash there zamunga what distinguishes us from beast is a soul, any man with an education can be a beast or act like one, you just proved my point that intellectuals think they are better than others. Intellectuals are people who spend there time perfecting communication, without ever actually doing a damn thing. So in the famous words of Tim Allen ” Grunt , Grunt” And thanks for the support Thom! u da man, zagumbas da smartypants. And I spelled your name wrong intentionally because you spelled mine worng being a smart ass first, another point of so called intelectuals they can dish it out but they cant take it!!! Hey doesnt obama think hes an intellectual?? And doesnt he think he smarter than everybody else?? Guess if your as smart as you tell yourself zagumba u can figure out where im going with that!

      • 7delta says:

        Sorry, D.M. just saw this comment. I’ve not been checking the thread unless I get a notification that comments have been posted, which, it seems, I don’t always get.

        S.M. Zuniga said: As a *reductio ad absurdum* in the context of my note to Laura, what do you think the chances of victory would be for a political candidate who remains anonymous? Or how many patients would an anonymous surgeon attract to his practice? Would you retain an attorney who never used his real name or allowed you to see his face?

        The chances are slim, but I wasn’t aware that I’m running for office, offering discount surgery or soliciting to defend anyone in a court of law. LOL. No one would want me to do any of those things, so you’re safe from my malpractice.

        You haven’t offended me in the least. Never crossed my mind.

        I’m not really nagging at you in particular, “7delta”; the common practice has always been a burr under my saddle. It has produced a more barbaric atmosphere in social media, even than the practice of using a false name and/or photo — which is another vice altogether.

        True enough that Internet anonymity can result in despicable behavior, but I do make an effort to be civil when I post anywhere, which is rare. However, even if I gave you my name, rank and serial number or showed you a picture of my official Klingon phaser, you still wouldn’t know if I’m being truthful or not, as you noted in your statement about false names and photos. The NSA could figure my origins out, if they were so inclined, but I doubt I rise to the level of their interest…unless writing about morals, principles and documented history is now a national security threat. Come to think of it, that’s kinda iffy now, isn’t it? At any rate, I let my words speak for themselves. I do not fear for my life or limb, nor are my intentions dishonorable, though some may find them disagreeable. I am, however, aware of what the ‘other’ side does to people they disagree with, even if it requires creative tales of fictional foibles. I’m not interested in their distractions…or them, for that matter. I’ve studied them enough to know all I need to know. They are free, for the time being anyway, to do as they please. I don’t bother them and don’t intend to invite them to annoy me.You’ll have to judge whether you think my words are sincere and contain any value or if you believe my intentions are dishonorable. Other than what I have posted, there is nothing I can do to persuade you one way or another.

        Remember, anonymity served Madison, Jay and Hamilton in the Federalist Papers. Their words were what mattered, without the influence of attaching personality. Same for Samuel Adams, George Clinton and the other authors of the Anti-Federalist Papers, including a female writer, whose name escapes me at the moment. There was a time when anonymous authorship was a honored tradition. Let the words and ideas, the tone and presentation stand on its own. And I don’t think poorly of them at all for doing so. But maybe that’s just me.

  22. GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

    One of the main reasons our country is where its at is because we have so many fence riders, one election they vote for a liberal then the liberal agenda sallies forth, then the next time they vote for a republican and you never get back what has already been lost in politics, and so on and so on, pick a fricken side and fight, because the fence riders are going down with us too. They won’t be immune to the fall and decline of this country. Your either for God or your for Satan because thats the battle that raging in this country, Ill say it again just look around you, If christianity was not such a threat to evil , it would not be working so hard to rub it out.

    • Thom says:

      MoogleY> Great job and in laymans language too. Theres a hell of a lot of words being tossed around by “intellects” when it could all be summed up with just a few. First; live your life as a decent human being. Respect the rights and beliefs of others. Be kind to the creatures and love mother Earth.
      Keep your eyes open, an ear to the ground and above all else keep your powder dry!

      • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

        Eggsactly The so called intellects always sit around thinking about things, but with out the doers putting it to task , nothing would get done. Ill give you an example of it in my line of work, You have an enhineer that draws up a plan, you look at the plan being one that is always hands on and realize it wont, work you call the engineer to tell him it will not work he argues your stupid hes the engineer ypu dont know aht your talking about, yopu try to explain whats its gonna take to get whats needed done, he screams and hollers about how ignorant you are, he comes to the job to take control of the situation, he then realizes hes not as smart as he thought, and what he designed no way in hell will work, he then saus do it your way and leaves with his tail tucked , but with no apology. Typical over educated I know more than everybody else dumbass.

      • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

        Yes Thom thats the problem with intellectuals they tend to throw big words arouund to try and inpress one another instead of just laying it out there for everyone else to understand, I understand it because i do have a command of the english language but im not out to impress anybody with it. Im just trying to get a point across. Alot of people just scratch and shake their head over some of this gobblety goop they type, and get nothing out of it. hey its stupid to use a pragraph to explain something that can be done with 3 words just to try and impress people.

  23. Thom says:

    Heres something for you historians to play with. By researching these answers I found out that the Pilgrims did not sail to America to escape taxes, they came to America to practice their religion freely and unlike the Church of England, it was not controlled by the government. No one here corrected me when I stated ” to avoid taxes”. I had fun with this little questionaire, hope you do also.

    1. Why did the Pilgrims and Puritans come to America?
    _____________________________________________________________
    2. What was the name of the church that England created when they broke away from
    the Roman Catholic Church?
    _____________________________________________________________
    3. What did Separatists want to do?
    _____________________________________________________________
    4. Who was the leader of the Separatists?
    _____________________________________________________________
    5. Who agreed to give the Separatists money for their voyage?
    _____________________________________________________________
    6. What was the name of the ship that the Pilgrims sailed to America on?
    _____________________________________________________________
    7. Where were the Pilgrims supposed to have landed?
    _____________________________________________________________
    8. Why did the Pilgrims not land where they were supposed to?
    ____________________________________________________________
    9. Where did the Pilgrims land? ________________________________________
    10. What was the name of the plan of government the Pilgrims formed before leaving
    the ship?
    _____________________________________________________________
    11. What two things did the men agree to do under this form of government?
    _____________________________________________________________
    _____________________________________________________________
    12. True of False: Women were allowed to participate in government decisions.
    13. What two Native Americans helped the Pilgrims with planting crops and trapping
    animals?
    _____________________________________________________________
    14. Why did the Puritans want to leave the Church of England?
    _____________________________________________________________
    15. What is a reform? _________________________________________________
    16. True or False: The Puritans did not want to separate entirely from the Church of
    England, they wanted to make reforms.
    17. Who did the Puritans receive a charter from?
    _____________________________________________________________
    18. Who was the leader of the Puritans? __________________________________
    19. What was the name of the colony established by the Puritans?
    _____________________________________________________________
    20. Describe the government set up by the Puritans.

  24. Mark says:

    Sarah Palin says: “I want [my son] Trig to grow up in a country that is exceptional”
    If she means exceptionally violent, with an exceptional murder rate then she has her wish.

    Wayne L P says: “How many Bostonians wished they had a gun two weeks ago?”
    I bet law enforcement and others would have been just thrilled if every household had frightened citizens panicking and taking pot shots at shadows.

    Wayne L P says “Lying in wait is a terrorist, a deranged school shooter, a kidnapper, a rapist, a murderer — waiting and planning and plotting — in every community across this country. Lying in wait right now. No amount of political schemes, congressional legislation, presidential commissions, or media roundtables will ever change that inevitable reality.”
    You guys were telling me how safe and secure you all are because of your guns. WLP is trying to scare Americans into buying (more) guns, it’s like an advert to keep his manufacturers bankrolled. They must be worried with the reduction of US involvement in wars that the profits will dip, probably have to rely on North Korea, Syria or maybe Iran to kick off properly.

    Actually, political schemes and legislation in other parts of the world reduce violent crime, rapes and murders without the need for arming citizens.

    In Laura’s Federal manifesto it calls for action to reduce the deficit (Must have taken hours to come up with that one!), here’s a suggestion. If in 2012 the dynamic cost of a homicide in the US was
    estimated to be over US$3.2 million dollars. At these levels, the total economic effect of homicide alone in the US in 2012 was around US$48.5 billion. 70% of these homicides were committed with guns. That’ll help with the deficit. (Not sure what the cost of suicide is but means matter and the gun is a successful means, more savings there too)

    • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

      Dang Your still here?

    • goyaathle says:

      Mark I am going to try one more time and then just ignore you. You are a tick, you like to get under peoples skin and the only way to get rid of you would be. Light a fire under your butt and when you stick your head out we crush it with a thumbnail. You slander me and every other gun owner when you imply that just because we own a gun we will one day go nuts (postal) and start killing people. I have never had even a speeding ticket even though my speedometer says my car can go one hundred and twenty mph. No where in my area is any place that I can drive my car legally at that speed so I have no idea if it will go that fast. I received my first gun when I was eight and still have most of the guns I grew up with. Not one of my guns has ever shot a person
      and since my return from VietNam none have shot an animal. The only guns that I have ever used to shoot anyone was the ones that were issued to me by the Government. The way to stop gun violence as you call it would be go to all the prisons and release all the non violent criminals, bad check writers, druggies etc. with ankle monitors. Then if someone uses a gun in a crime, they go straight to jail, do not pass go and do not receive two hundred dollars and they never get out.
      On death row two appeals, then taken out back dig a hole bullet in the back of the head and send the bill to the family. I know that would work. I worked in a prison for a number of years and the inmates I worked with considered prison as their home and the street was their vacation. When you look at the murder rate of Chicago, Los Angeles and Washington DC and compare their strict gun laws to the State of Vermont which has limited gun laws and almost no murders.
      I would think you would see that strict gun laws only effect people who obey the law. When I worked in the prison inmates had no access to guns but it did nothing to stop murder, assaults and suicides.

      • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

        well said

      • I like your think’n there, fellow patriot. Don’t waste your time with these, anti-American, anti-liberty, anti-freedom, socialist, communist, marxist, islamist, “ticks”. Those “ticks” are just hopeless. Utterly hopeless “lemmings”. They will suffer horribly when our whole society collapses because of thier hatred for America, and for thier blind, insane support for a marxist-islamo regime that is purposely destroying the economy, and for anybody that challenges their radical “utopian” society. Molon Labe.

    • Mark, go home you’re drunk.

  25. GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

    Hey zamunga i got your intellect hanging, by the way we see what an intellect you are when somebody doesnt agree with you and points out the facts dont we. Some people just cant handle the truth. Hey the truth shall set you free, you just have to accept before it can. Gods word is absolute thats it, nothing else matters. and ur calling me an atheist, better look in the mirror there honey child.

  26. Thom says:

    Sorry for the double post but I hate it when the comment turns into a string of spaghetti.
    D>M> ZUNIZA>>
    D.M.Zuniza or is it zagunba? Damn I’m so confused^&*6@#!!! But you say something ‘ that there was no need for you to st00p to MoogleY’s level? Well– you might be well educated and well written but your also a fuc*in SNOB. And that puts you way below MoogleY already. What you NEED to do is pick yourself UP and start behaving like a man. You have lost all of your credibility here , time to move on.

  27. 7delta says:

    Due to illness in my family, I’ve gotten behind on the comments. If I’m a day late or a dollar short and this has already been stated by someone else, I apologize. I wish I could say I will be brief, but we all know that would be a tall tale. LOL.

    Laura, I understand what you’re saying and I don’t disagree. I think we may be splitting the finer hairs of the debate. Just as recap: Natural Law is derived from Christian thought. It forms the basis of our governing philosophy and is directly reflected in the Bill of Rights, which, among other things, prohibits Congress from making any laws that establish a state religion or interferes in the public expression of faith. The Constitution is the framework of how that government will work, whether someone believes its structure is Roman inspired or Jethrian–maybe both. Either way, it’s the scaffold on which the structure is built.

    If it were true that the founding generation, and subsequent government officials, up until the 1960’s, and beyond to a degree, considered it a violation of the 1st Amendment for it to openly participate in religious activities, the 1st Congress would not have printed Bibles, or had a Congressional chaplain or allowed church services on government property, or declared days of fasting and prayer or Thanksgiving or recognized Easter or Christmas, etc. They saw no conflict.

    Government, in its natural state as established or evolved, is a reflection of the people’s mores and values, except, perhaps, in conquered states. Government is of, for and by the people under our Constitutional Republican system. Remember Adams said that the Constitution would only work for a moral and religious people. Most cultures, if not all, gain their morals and values from their relationship with their deity or their understanding of how nature works. The government is the reflection of the mores and values of the people. They are representatives of the people, whether elected or lineal. That holds true until those mores and values are not reflected by government either openly or clandestinely and the mores and values of the people are treated as irrelevant or inapplicable. When the morals and principles are subverted or superceded by another set of principles incompatible with the people’s or by misuse of the moral authority of a religion as force, the people are rendered powerless (disarmed physically and by removal of their moral authority) and government becomes oppressive. Tyranny, no what guise it takes, reigns, even if the regime pays lip service to the righteousness of their actions.

    The Constitution forbids government using religion as a tool of tyranny, just as it forbids government from using other forces to establish a totalitarian government, but it did not forbid government from reflecting the mores and values of the people. They simply cannot establish one denomination over another or one religious discipline over another by law. It was not only free to openly be religious, it was expected to reflect the founding principles of Christian thought without oppressing people who were not Christian or were atheists, which is, in itself, the Christian principle of acknowledging man’s free will. They could not regulate, infringe on or deny the practices of other faiths or lack thereof. The caveat there is only that those beliefs do not break our laws.

    None of this means our government isn’t secular or that our laws are “Christian” per se, but those laws of justice do reflect the prevailing ideology and philosophy on which this country was founded and that ideology and Natural Law philosophy are decidedly Christian. I agree with you that officially our government is not Christian, such as you would say of a Sharia compliant Islamic nation, even though this is a country of Christian predominance. There are countries with majority Muslims that may reflect Muslim thought, but are not particularly Sharia compliant, just as there are majority Christian countries that are not governed by religious leaders, even though their rule of law is based in the morals and values of their beliefs. Those principles are cultural, since culture reflects the predominant principles and moral standards of the people’s ideological or philosophical adherence and that source is usually based in a religious discipline. Religion is reflected culturally in its people or it’s not a belief system of any value. At the very least, religious beliefs must be compatible with government philosophy.

    And not all belief systems or religions are equal. Government cannot please or adhere to the tenets of all belief systems of the world and retain its character, no matter where that character originates, nor should it try. When it tries to accommodate beliefs by special dispensation that are in conflict with its character and the character of its people, it creates oppression of the majority by force of law. The minority religious character is welcome in our society as long as exists under the same principles and laws as everyone else. Awarding special or protected status to any group creates inequality. The people must reflect their values and the value of its beliefs in their government or there is chaos, oppression and will usually result in a lot of dead people. As has often been said, power can be corrupting. Absolute power is absolutely corrupting. A government that does not truly reflect the morals and principles of the people can maintain its power only through force.

    I agree with you that the founders did not establish a Christian country, per se, but they did establish a country rooted in Christian philosophy in line with the principles and morals of its people and they, as representatives of the people and as individuals who shared those principles, at least, in a generalized overview, they saw no conflict in their public expression of those beliefs through the government established by the people. Expressive reflection is not force by implication or law. Some now see this as endorsement. Endorsement, however, carries no legal force and is not prohibited by the Constitution. The people who ‘endorse’ this blended definition are either unwittingly interchanging the meanings of ‘endorse’ and ‘establish’ or they’re using a slight-of-hand trick.

    Heck, I know atheists who get this concept and prefer the original meaning since they can see how government trying to appease ideologies detrimental to the stability of freedom of religion is motoring us off the cliff into no one having any liberty of choice or expression. Religion is just one battlefield, but an important one. They felt freer when everyone was left alone to believe and practice their beliefs as they saw fit, without government interference. They don’t care if the government participates in religious events or observations, as long as everyone remains free to live their lives as they see fit within the law. They see organizations, such as the Freedom From Religion group, as cutting off their nose to spite their face.

    It’s a dangerous road we’re on. Truth does not limit or impose. As the old saying goes, the truth sets us free.

    • 7d,

      I hope the family illness is not serious and your family member recovers quickly.

      I’m going to agree that we agree on most things and disagree on a few and stop ‘splitting the finer hairs of the debate’ as you so perfectly phrased it.

      I would still like your recommendations of some websites where I can read about Natural Law.

      Respectfully,
      laura

      • 7delta says:

        Laura said: I hope the family illness is not serious and your family member recovers quickly.

        Thanks, Laura. I do too. We’re still in a bit of a holding pattern to find out what exactly is going on.

        I would still like your recommendations of some websites where I can read about Natural Law.

        I like to reference old books and documents, preferably written before 1850, earlier if obtainable. I do searches on Barnes and Noble, Amazon and The Gutenberg Project’s ebook sites mainly. There’s a wealth of information found in old books that have been digitally scanned. Some are easier to read than others, but after a while, I got used to the artifact found and can translate f’s to s with relative ease now. Once you get used to the different patterns of speech and the use of archaic words and terms, with their classic definitions, it gets easier. It won’t take you long to adapt and to realize how well educated these people were. Just compare the writings and speeches of that era with the catch phrases and elementary-level speeches of today’s politicians and ‘scholars’ and you’ll probably join me in despair for our educational system. Even the people who lacked a lot of formal education were better informed and educated than most of our educated population now. The biggest difference wasn’t just that they spoke or wrote on a higher level, which they did, but they had common sense and understood their government and its limitation. Some of the smartest people I’ve ever known had only high school diplomas, which during their lifetime, went only to the 11th grade, or less. But they were people-wise and world-wise. They could reason and could easily out think most of the professors and economic gurus today. It was a different time when culture valued those characteristics and you learned them at your elders’ knee before you learned to read and write.

        I think you can find those sites easily. I’d post links, but more than one link usually sends a post into moderation. However, if you have trouble finding them, I’ll be glad to post some one at a time. Fascinating reading. Just do a search for your topic of interest and set your price range as the lowest to highest or oldest to newest. Rephrase your search several different ways too. That will often bring up additional books. Be sure to open the link to read what it says about the book to see if it’s what you’re looking for and for any comments. Sometimes, people who have downloaded it will leave helpful comments. Also get a couple of good old dictionaries to help understand the classic definitions the founders used. Through this method, I have been able to get hundreds of old books and documents and have found titles mentioned by the founders and others that were pertinent to their writings.

        If you don’t have an e-reader, you can still download the software for your PC or Mac. You’ll have to establish an account with Amazon and B&N, which requires a credit or debit card, but nearly all of these books are free, so you get just a notation without charge on your account. Even if you find one you want with a small charge, check for it on another site. I’ve been able to find the book I wanted free either on the same site or on another one. For someone like you who loves history, you’ll feel like a kid in a candy store. So much to choose from. So little time.

        There are other free book sites online too. It won’t take long to find additional ones you may find interesting.

        There will be more on Natural Law or The Laws of Nature than you’ll know what to do with. Read a smattering of all authors who catch your attention. Everyone has a slightly different take or way of expressing their thoughts. Remember the Law of Nature is different than the Law of Nations, which is also an interesting subject to explore.

  28. D.M. Zuniga says:

    In the 9th chapter of Nehemiah, about 2,400 years ago, some repentant Israelite leaders put their situation this way — see below.

    Note the striking similarity to a productive American today who plays by the rules and works hard. After 400 years, first as colonists of England and Spain, and then as an independent people who too often forget God (our own past stupidities), here we go again:

    “Nevertheless they were disobedient, and rebelled against You, and cast your law behind their back, and killed your prophets that testified against them to turn them again to You, and they committed awful blasphemies.

    “Therefore You delivered them into the hand of their adversaries, who distressed them: and in the time of their trouble, when they cried to You, You heard from heaven; and according to your manifold mercies You gave them saviors who saved them out of the hand of their adversaries.

    “But after they had rest, they did evil again before You; therefore You left them in the hand of their enemies, so that they had the dominion over them. Yet when they returned, and cried to You, You heard from heaven. Many times did You deliver them according to your mercies, and testified against them, that You might bring them again to your law.

    “Yet they dealt proudly, and didn’t listen to your commandments, but sinned against your ordinances, (which if a man do, he shall have to live in them). They withdrew the shoulder, and hardened their neck, and would not hear.

    “Yet many years did You bear with them, and testified against them by your Spirit through your prophets: yet would they not give ear. Therefore, You gave them into the hand of the peoples of the lands.

    “Nevertheless in your manifold mercies, You did not make a full end of them, nor forsake them, for You are a gracious and merciful God.

    “Now therefore our God — the great, the mighty, and the awesome God, who keep covenant and loving kindness – do not let all the travail seem little to You that has come on us, on our [government representatives and servants] and on our fathers, and on all your people… to this day.

    “However, You are just in all that is come on us, for You have dealt truly but we have done wickedly. Neither have our [government representatives and servants] nor our fathers kept your law, nor listened to your commandments and your testimonies with which You did testify against them.

    “For they have not served You in [this country] and in your great goodness that You gave them, and in the large and fat land which you gave before them, neither did they turn from their wicked works.

    “Behold, we are servants this day. And as for the land that You gave to our fathers to eat the fruit of it and the good of it, behold, we are servants in it! It yields much increase to the [government representatives and servants] whom You have set over us because of our sins.
    They have power over our bodies, and over our livestock at their pleasure, and we are in great distress.”

    Nehemiah 9:26-37

  29. Pingback: Liberty | Pearltrees

  30. First of all I would like to say excellent blog! I had a quick question
    in which I’d like to ask if you don’t mind. I was interested to find out how you center yourself and clear your mind before writing.
    I have had a tough time clearing my mind in getting my ideas
    out there. I do take pleasure in writing however
    it just seems like the first 10 to 15 minutes are generally lost
    just trying to figure out how to begin. Any ideas or tips?
    Thank you!

  31. Hello i am kavin, its my first occasion to commenting anywhere, when
    i read this piece of writing i thought i could also create comment due to
    this good paragraph.

  32. Tara says:

    Wow – such a wealth of knowledge here. Thank you to all who contributed to all of this!

    God Bless

  33. Friends of mine, anyone want to help educate a dreadfully uninformed person on a different DCC article? This person’s lack of understanding and reading comprehension is making my head hurt.

    7delta: I would love to read this person’s reactions to one of YOUR brilliant comments; Thom; goyaathle; GGM; Brad? Anyone interested in spreading some truth. 🙂

    http://dcclothesline.com/2013/06/16/deja-vu-obama-aint-obama/?replytocom=16012#respond

    P.S. I haven’t ‘spoken’ with any of you in weeks, I miss reading your thoughts on what is going on in our Country and the rest of the world.

    • 7delta says:

      Laura said: Friends of mine, anyone want to help educate a dreadfully uninformed person on a different DCC article?

      LOL, Laura. I tried once to explain citizenship, etc. to the duo Strauss, more for entertainment than enlightenment, because I already knew who they are This person/ persons are well known in the Constitutional/conservative/civil liberty/anybody-who-questions-anything-about-obiwon communities. They must do daily searches to see if anybody talking about da Won’s legitimacy.

      I stopped having a discussion with them when it became apparent that there was no way to even make them think, but mainly I got bored with their ridiculous theories. They are a waste of time, which I suspect is part of their mission. Every time I debunked one of their theories or offered an alternate view that at least questioned the validity of their claim, they just pulled another ridiculous ‘proof’ out of their hat.

      According to the Straussduo, Alexander Hamilton was a naturalized citizen and despite this, was eligible to run for president–he was born in the West Indies on the Isle of Nevis–which, btw, was British territory and he, therefore, by being born (illegitimately, but claimed) to a Scots father was a British subject, just the same as pretty much everyone else in the colonies and in the same boat, under British Rule, as everyone else, and entered into the founding class of U.S. citizens in the same manner as everyone else, many of whom were born British subjects and many who were not. They also stated because some people somewhere put U.S. flags on old graves dating to before the Rev. War, these dead people were citizens of the U.S…a sovereign country that did not exist during that dead person’s lifetime; that James Buchanan was not born to a citizen father…an Irish immigrant father that became a citizen under the Treaty of Paris and is well documented as such; that the first Republican to run (before Abe) was born to a French father who was not a citizen, but that’s debatable and it’s even debatable whether the father was French or French Canadian. It’s possible the father, having lived in the U.S. for quite a long time, then subsequently died here, did naturalize or was naturalized by one of the several sweeping naturalizations done by Congress during his lifetime. I’m not paying to get records to find out. It’s more likely he was naturalized than not. And I don’t care. If the Strausses were right about their theory, we’d know it, because it would have always been common knowledge, we would multiple past presidents with such backgrounds and we wouldn’t be having any discussion about it at all. The Strausses just serve baloney.

      If it were me, I wouldn’t bother with them…unless you enjoy battling windmills, OR enjoy doing the research to debunk stupid claims, in case you run across them again. They are a springboard for educational endeavors, I’ll give you that. They may do more harm to their mission than they know by prompting people to research, but I imagine they think people are too lazy and will just believe them. Project much? LOL. However, truth is, they just make it up as they go along. I don’t know what they’re being paid, but it’s not enough to make a such fools of themselves and repeat it daily. They’re just distraction and disruption. Just remember that when you argue with idiots, they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. LOL. It’s not a defeat. It’s cutting bait when you realize the fish you hooked is a minnow. It’s still going to be a minnow no matter how much time you spend trying to reel it in. But then, you might enjoy the exercise. ;>)

      • It’s sooooo good to hear from you 7d, I hope you and family are well.

        I laughed when I read your comment. I HAVE learned from my previous battles with people who are unwilling to learn the truth and stubbornly stick to their false beliefs, that sometimes it is better to let it go. You and my other friends on this thread were very helpful in getting this lesson through my thick skull. I have realized this person is not even worth the time spent explaining because he/she will never believe anything but the lies they currently believe. The only positive about engaging in limited discussion with people such as these, is that others may read the comments and do their own research.

        “They must do daily searches to see if anybody talking about da Won’s legitimacy.”

        You really think they might do this?? That is just too funny, pitiful, and pathetic at the same time!

        “They’re just distraction and disruption. Just remember that when you argue with idiots, they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

        Absolutely!! 🙂

        I miss reading your brilliant, well thought out, well researched comments.

        Take care,
        laura

        • 7delta says:

          Laura said: I have realized this person is not even worth the time spent explaining because he/she will never believe anything but the lies they currently believe.

          I’m not sure even they believe their twaddle. Anybody that has to resort to claiming citizenship for people buried on the soil of a country that didn’t exist during their lifetimes is trying a tad too hard. Poor dead people. They don’t even get a say about their national loyalty in Strauss World. Kind of goes against the whole idea that the founders fought for, that people have the unalienable right to choose with whom they associate or what nation they cast their lot, but hey, this is Strauss World. LOL. I still haven’t stopped laughing about that ‘proof’.

          The only positive about engaging in limited discussion with people such as these, is that others may read the comments and do their own research.

          I agree. Sometimes it’s a good thing to offer an alternate view and resources so that readers can make up their own minds or do their own research. I do think Strauss World should be challenged. I just don’t want to make it my life’s work since it’s more akin to “As the Strauss World Turns” than a quest for the truth. And their theories are good for a laugh when things get dull.

          I’m a little ashamed of myself. I hate to attack or ridicule people personally….despite the temptation to go all Alinsky on them. It’s not my style, so please forgive me. I prefer to debate ideas and deal in documentation, but the Straussduo cracks me up. I cannot imagine what in the world prompts someone to deliberately throw so much spaghetti at the wall in hopes something–anything–will stick when they’re tossing nothing but dry pasta. There is no reason, I can see, other than to obfuscate. When do ridiculous lies help anyone? Apparently, Strauss and their comrades think they advancing some worthy cause, but what it is really? If someone will ask you to lie for them, they won’t hesitate to lie to you. Why do people not get this?

          You really think they might do this?? That is just too funny, pitiful, and pathetic at the same time!

          Yep. They’re like a Jack in the box. They pop up all over the place. The mere mention of document funny business and they’re on it like ducks on a junebug. Devoted to their own demise. I almost feel sorry for them. When TSHTF, they better hope they’re nearer to my location or to the location of others like me than to those they have served. I believe in the Rule of Law and protecting their rights, even if I don’t like them personally. Their current ‘friends’ don’t have any use for those silly, out-dated barriers to disposing of potential, disgruntled former supporters who aren’t pleased with the outcome. They won’t wait to see who is disgruntled or not. If their handlers believed in God, they’d send them to Him to sort out, but since they believe in only themselves, they’ll just eliminate possible threats. Just as a side note, their handlers don’t believe in the pie-in-the-sky ideology of social justice and harmonious redistribution of wealth either. All they need is for the Straussduo and their helpful friends to believe it’s real. I also don’t get why the Straussduo and their ilk don’t understand that either. I guess they think they’re special. History tells us otherwise.

          I miss reading your brilliant, well thought out, well researched comments.

          That’s a very nice to say. Thank you. I’ll be sure to inform those who must suffer my opinions on a daily basis that despite what they think, I’m brilliant. LOL. Seriously, thank you. My knowledge pales in the light of most of the posters here. What sometimes a few may lack in ways of expression, they make up for in spades in a passionate love of this country and liberty. You all amaze me. I’m grateful for each and every one of you.

          Keep Old Glory flying and your powder dry. This fight is just beginning.

          And Mark, if you’re reading…take care, bud. Most likely, you will find the fight first. No hard feelings. I want you to protect yourself and your family. I want you to be a witness. There is no easy way out. I feel a kinship with you, even though we are of very different beliefs. You will have a story to tell and you’re thoughtful and intelligent enough to tell it well. Pay heed to reality, not to the stories of others. Tell your own story.

        • 7delta says:

          I posted my comment, but it seems to have disappeared. If this posts twice…sorry.

          Laura said: I have realized this person is not even worth the time spent explaining because he/she will never believe anything but the lies they currently believe.

          I’m not sure even they believe their twaddle. Anybody that has to resort to claiming citizenship for people buried on the soil of a country that didn’t exist during their lifetimes is trying a tad too hard. Poor dead people. They don’t even get a say about their national loyalty in Strauss World. Kind of goes against the whole idea that the founders fought for, that people have the unalienable right to choose with whom they associate or what nation they cast their lot, but hey, this is Strauss World. LOL. I still haven’t stopped laughing about that ‘proof’.

          The only positive about engaging in limited discussion with people such as these, is that others may read the comments and do their own research.

          I agree. Sometimes it’s a good thing to offer an alternate view and resources so that readers can make up their own minds or do their own research. I do think Strauss World should be challenged. I just don’t want to make it my life’s work since it’s more akin to “As the Strauss World Turns” than a quest for the truth. And their theories are good for a laugh when things get dull.

          I’m a little ashamed of myself. I hate to attack or ridicule people personally….despite the temptation to go all Alinsky on them. It’s not my style, so please forgive me. I prefer to debate ideas and deal in documentation, but the Straussduo cracks me up. I cannot imagine what in the world prompts someone to deliberately throw so much spaghetti at the wall in hopes something–anything–will stick when they’re tossing nothing but dry pasta. There is no reason, I can see, other than to obfuscate. When do ridiculous lies help anyone? Apparently, Strauss and their comrades think they advancing some worthy cause, but what it is really? If someone will ask you to lie for them, they won’t hesitate to lie to you. Why do people not get this?

          You really think they might do this?? That is just too funny, pitiful, and pathetic at the same time!

          Yep. They’re like a Jack in the box. They pop up all over the place. The mere mention of document funny business and they’re on it like ducks on a junebug. Devoted to their own demise. I almost feel sorry for them. When TSHTF, they better hope they’re nearer to my location or to the location of others like me than to those they have served. I believe in the Rule of Law and protecting their rights, even if I don’t like them personally. Their current ‘friends’ don’t have any use for those silly, out-dated barriers to disposing of potential, disgruntled former supporters who aren’t pleased with the outcome. They won’t wait to see who is disgruntled or not. If their handlers believed in God, they’d send them to Him to sort out, but since they believe in only themselves, they’ll just eliminate possible threats. Just as a side note, their handlers don’t believe in the pie-in-the-sky ideology of social justice and harmonious redistribution of wealth either. All they need is for the Straussduo and their helpful friends to believe it’s real. I also don’t get why the Straussduo and their ilk don’t understand that either. I guess they think they’re special. History tells us otherwise.

          I miss reading your brilliant, well thought out, well researched comments.

          That’s a very nice to say. Thank you. I’ll be sure to inform those who must suffer my opinions on a daily basis that despite what they think, I’m brilliant. LOL. Seriously, thank you. My knowledge pales in the light of most of the posters here. What sometimes a few may lack in ways of expression, they make up for in spades in a passionate love of this country and liberty. You all amaze me. I’m grateful for each and every one of you.

          Keep Old Glory flying and your powder dry. This fight is just beginning.

          And Mark, if you’re reading…take care, bud. Most likely, you will find the fight first. No hard feelings. I want you to protect yourself and your family. I want you to be a witness. There is no easy way out. I feel a kinship with you, even though we are of very different beliefs. You will have a story to tell and you’re thoughtful and intelligent enough to tell it well. Pay heed to reality, not to the stories of others. Tell your own story.

          • 7delta says:

            Crap. It posted twice. Sorry.

            • Haha, that has happened to me before.

              “I’m a little ashamed of myself. I hate to attack or ridicule people personally….despite the temptation to go all Alinsky on them.”

              I don’t think you said anything that needs forgiveness. I dislike attacking, insulting, or ridiculing people, too. Sometimes I slip (more than I’d like to admit), but I realize that when I am trying to present facts of which a person is not aware, that information is always better received when I stay polite.

              “I believe in the Rule of Law and protecting their rights, even if I don’t like them personally.”

              I have three favorite quotes, this is one of them:

              “He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine

              This is from D.M. Zuniga’s comment to you:

              “Norms of human society include basic norms; unwritten laws. One of these is that a person who seeks to remain anonymous even in protracted social intercourse is either: a) in fear of life or limb for speaking, or b) harbors less-than-honorable intentions or options.”

              Being in fear or having less than honorable intentions are not the only reasons people choose a screen name instead of using their real name when commenting on articles. Sometimes people just don’t want their real name all over the net available to people who DO have less than honorable intentions. I have a couple of accounts where I use a screen name instead of my real name. Since we started The New Federalist Party, I always use my real name. I’m promoting a new political party, using my real name builds credibility. For others, there is NOTHING wrong or suspicious about using a screen name. Of course I am curious about the person using the screen name 7delta. You are very interesting. 🙂

              laura

              • Rob Price says:

                Just reading the comments of 7D and yourself, give a true meaning to the term, “Freedom of Speech”. I tend to type slower than my brain puts words in my mouth, so sometimes i have a hard time of truly expressing what I want to say, or don’t get my point across clear enough to be fully understood. The two groups that I am most closely aligned with, Oath keepers and the Constitutionalists are very conservative and believe that the Constitution and it’s Amendments are the rule of law and any detraction from it is a breach of this law. You both have shown great wisdom and character in your posts and have given this “redneck” army vet a much better sense of what being a Patriot and an American really means-Thank you both!

              • 7delta says:

                Laura said: “He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine

                Great quote. I don’t recall reading that before. Mr. Paine was a wise man…until later, when he went off the rails. Dr. Franklin tried to tell him, but to no avail. Still doesn’t diminish the truthfulness of Paine’s above statement. When we protect others’ rights, we protect our own.

                Of course I am curious about the person using the screen name 7delta. You are very interesting.

                Thank you, but I assure you I’m dull as tarnish, as ordinary as Adam’s house cat. I just read a lot, as do you. You and the other posters are far more interesting. I enjoy reading what others are thinking. It’s comforting to find so many people who are educating themselves, reviving long forgotten knowledge and instinctively know right from wrong. No matter what we’re told by the Mouths of Sauron, WE are the majority. If we weren’t, they wouldn’t have to tell us so often that they are.

                Thanks for understanding why I use a screen name.

                Good to hear from you again, Laura. Take care.

                • GreatGoogleyMoogleY says:

                  What screen name??? This is my real name, Im no movie star. Although Im good looking enough to be one and much smarter than most of them and Im very humble! 8)

                  • Lol. Hi GGM, it’s nice to hear from you. It is very obvious from your comments that you are extremely handsome and smart as the dickens! Not to mention humble! 🙂

                  • 7delta says:

                    GreatGoogleyMoogleY said; What screen name??? This is my real name, Im no movie star. Although Im good looking enough to be one and much smarter than most of them and Im very humble! 8)

                    LOL. I’ve been telling everybody that for years about you, Moog. Thanks for verifying it first hand.

                    Watch out for the fans. They can get rough.

  34. Mark says:

    In the spirit of full disclosure I declare that my pseudonym “mark” is to cover my Royal lineage from HRH King George III. (this is not the sequel to Hollywood blockbusters KG I or KG II).

    By using this cover I am able to speak freely without the accusation of being a skinny nosed interfering Limey…….. Oh wait a minute!

    • Mark, that is very funny. Should I be addressing you as your majesty, lol ??? 😉

    • 7delta says:

      Laura said: Should I be addressing you as your majesty, lol ??? 😉

      Mark, in all his royal dreams, would most likely be a Lord, or at best, His Highness. No majesty unless seated on the throne. I don’t think Her Majesty will share her…majesty. At least that’s my understanding. My family went native, literally and figuratively, so I’m not entirely sure. His Lordship can explain, I have no doubt.

      Still it’s impressive to have His Augustness, Mark of The Lineage, deign to join in conversation with the local serfs. Wonder if Mark of The Lineage is related to THE beast of the mark? Just askin’.

      And just kiddin’.

      Hang in there, Your Worshipfulness. The ordinary genre of the former colonists is ornery, but fair. Your Magnificence may covet our good will in the future. However, should events transpire that Your Sublimity (root word for limey) may find your kinsmen drawing their swords against your distant cousins again to force allegiance to the Overlords of Mammon, Your Superbness may be prompted to choose to whom or what you shall pledge your fealty. Those same Overlords reach far into our own fair land and seek to turn brother against brother, son against father, daughter against mother and familial ally into an enemy. We wrestle their deceit upon our own land, from the highest rocky peak to the most fertile valley, from the Lady’s Light to the Golden Gate. Hark! Those descended from the Nature of The Most High shall be awakened to the light and once illuminated, shall never dwell in darkness again. Our kinship has been wrought by the Law of Nature and no man shall put asunder what has been joined by Creation and by devout attendance to that law, nor shall the wiles of the blasphemousness heart entice the charitable man from adherence to the Law of Man’s Unalienable Right to Overt Orneriness Against Subservience to Lesser Overlords. Whether man may arm himself against the Despots with word, stick, stone or the most robust canon, the Law shall prevail, as in the beginning and until the end of all things forevermore, and shall remain welcoming to all who enter into its gates with the flower of freedom blooming in his breast. Should you pledge your fealty to the Nature of Your Wonderfulness’s creation and join your distant cousins throughout the World in the battle against the ageless lusts of debased men, Your Splendiferousness shall be received with the same celebratory feast as any son who has found his way home after the trials of wandering a desolate ideological wilderness, for we have all done so in one manner or another and shall again, as we continue life’s journey to seek truth and light. It is the proffered hand of a brother or sister taken that leads even the most committed sojourner back onto the lighted path. Come home to our lawful kinship, Your Stupendousness, for we are all princes and princesses of our own domain.

      And, for this noble right, I ask: What shall man give for his freedom? A bit of gold? A tare of wheat? An unmolested belief? Shall he forsake the comfort of his gilded prison for the sake of his brethren and their posterity? What man knows his brother’s nature, his talents and his cares, yet turns his back in order to secure his own comfort, to divest his conscience of nature’s rights by lending his creed to artful deceptions disguised as good and fair? What is a unexamined life worth? What man of worth, who freely abides by the just laws of nature and as inscribed by just men, requires an earthly master?

      May there be many proffered hands along your journey, Your Resplendence.

      *Source: Book of Delta, Reality of Man’s Nature: Chapter 7, verses 1-12.
      ;>)

      • Thom says:

        WOW!….HEY!!…. Do I get free air miles if I read the “Book of Delta”?

        • 7delta says:

          Thom asked: WOW!….HEY!!…. Do I get free air miles if I read the “Book of Delta”?

          Of course…but it might be a one-way trip. Let me check with Customer Service.

          • Mark says:

            Thom, you will be pleased to know the air miles can be used for a one way trip to London!

            • 7delta says:

              Mark said: Thom, you will be pleased to know the air miles can be used for a one way trip to London!

              Customer Service has informed me that we will soon be offering round trips to London and several other destinations in Great Britain as rescue missions. Please pack light on non-essentials to leave room for ammo.

              • Thom says:

                Its 11:00 PM here in AZ and I,m really tired and sleepy after a long hot day of fun in the desert , ” but you guys have got me smiling”. Thanks, I’ll past on the one way trip,……….. for now anyway.

  35. Way cool! Some extremely valid points! I appreciate you penning this write-up and also the rest of the website is also
    really good.

    • Rob Price says:

      WELCOME ABOARD! Just a friendly reminder, we only allow 100% redneck hardcore American patriots here! No lunatic liberals or “out-of-towners” with their alien thinking. LOL

  36. THE GREAT POWERFUL SPELL CASTER THAT
    STOP ME FOR HOMOSEXUAL.
    HE CAN ALSO BRING BACK YOUR EX GAY/LESBIAN.

    Hello To the general public in the word

    my name is Johnson tony from UNITED STATE.

    i was once a homosexual for like 5years i was thinking how to stop it

    but i couldn’t until i met Prophet Ahmed,he can stop you homosexual, he

    can also stop you from lesbian,ha can bring your ex gay/lesbian back to

    you, i explain every thing to him.
    he said he will help me out i was doubting him but i gave him a trier.
    he only ask of my name and my country before i know it 4day after i

    real stop homosexual.my lives became much better.in case you are in any

    situation you can contact
    prophet Ahmed at his email solutiontemple39@gmail.com or his personal

    cell +2347053375151
    Thank you for all your help prophet.

    • 7delta says:

      Laura, remember what I said about not attacking individuals, but debating ideologies and facts? Sadly, I think I’ve fallen from grace and can’t get up. I’m laughing too hard. Typos, misspellings and misuse of words, when read literally, are often funnier than any stand up comic could ever be. My own typos crack me up, so I’m an equal opportunity heckler. Spam containing any of these oddities is even more humorous.

      Okay, so it’s my twisted sense of humor, but still… I can’t resist. Or to quote Al Sharpton, “Resist we much.” I can’t do that either. Funny is funny.

      With malice toward none and in recognition of my own hilarious screw ups, let’s review the facts:

      Hello To the general public in the word

      In the word? Ah, a guided tour through the Land of Language, lead by one of its natives.

      my name is Johnson tony from UNITED STATE.

      Other than the transposition of what must have been meant as a first and last name, which happens to be the opposite of the stated screen name, and the single state united with itself, the use of Johnson as a name for a person revealing their sexual proclivities is a slang nuance only a Land of Language (LoL) native would gleefully embrace. In my research about this far off land, I found that the people of LoL are great people. Always joking around with words. It’s their national sport. The Word Series is a huge event each year. Fire-words exploding in the nighttime sky, wiener roasts, beef steak burgers (they avoid anything with the word ‘ham’ in it, since they are very serious about their sport and are not merely hamming it up), buttered buns, logorrheic races… It’s a big event.

      he said he will help me out i was doubting him but i gave him a trier

      Okay, just for geographical reference, the Land of Language is in, or near, Trier, Germany, which is located on the scenic banks of the Moselle. It is a United State, united by its love of glottogonic contests and festivals featuring a scrumptious array of local cuisine that would tempt even the most disciplined to over consumption.

      Giving someone a ‘trier’ is not like giving someone a raspberry or a noogie. Named in honor of the city where these ancient trials were first held, a trier is akin to challenging someone to a homonym contest. The issuance of trier challenges can become quite contentious, especially if the challenger is accusing another person of being heteronymous. Most, however, are friendly contests, especially during the activities surrounding the Word Series.

      you can contact prophet Ahmed

      Obviously, Ahmed is the prophet of Trier, the oldest city in Germany. Who knew? Since this prophet boldly challenges the ‘other’ Middle eastern prophet–who claims to be the only true one–for the vaulted position of prophet, or as in Ahmed’s case, perhaps profit, I’m sure Ahmed must have a good head on his shoulders.

      Just a wild guess, but I don’t think English is Mr. Johnson’s first language. German probably isn’t an option either. However, while researching this exotic festival in the LoL, I discovered that the prophet Ahmed’s aid is invaluable to the disadvantaged people of the Tangled Tongue sections in the fair City of Trier as they prepare each year for the annual Word Series. He gives of his time and talents in keeping with his firm belief that the Tangled Tongues shouldn’t have to feel like 2nd Class citizens just because they’re in the Metaphrast League. Bigoted locals often refer to them as The Mets. All the Metaphrasts demand is equal representation and playing time in the larger Paraphrastic League, commonly known as the Pirates, and in the Pirates’ sister winter league, the OK Spoonerists, or Spooners, in the Superlative Bowl. Shockingly, the Metaphrast are denied the right to choose and are confined to wedding their efforts only to the Word Series. Someone should peacefully assemble to bring attention to this horrific human rights violation…or throw Scrabble letters onto politicians in protest.

      And this–on Sunday too–from nothing more than a poor wanton soul held captive by Mrs. Malaprop. Forgive me, Mr. Webster, for I have misused your book.

      I’ve got to be more disciplined. ;>)

      Hope everyone has a good weekend and a great Independence Day celebration.

      • Rob Price says:

        7delta;

        That’s okay! I started reading this blog, checked my glasses-they were mine and then wondered of I was having a stroke or something! Makes me wonder if there really aren’t aliens infiltrating our world. LMAO!! To each his own I guess! Maybe an alien filter on the site should be instituted.

        • 7delta says:

          Rob said: Makes me wonder if there really aren’t aliens infiltrating our world.

          I think they’re from the Planet Spam. It’s an amalgamated world of planetary leftovers.

          Oh lord…stop me now. I’m on a roll. ROTFL. (I don’t think I’ll ever be able to use lol again without feeling like I’m refugee from the Land of Language.)

      • 7d,

        I had hysterics reading your comment! Forgive my woefully inadequate written appreciation for your excellent reply. Despite being a huge fan of Mr. Webster’s work, I simply don’t have the cleverness to artfully craft an appropriate thank you.

  37. I blog quite often and I genuinely appreciate your information.
    This great article has truly peaked my interest. I am going to book mark your blog and keep checking for new details about once a week.

    I subscribed to your RSS feed as well.

  38. Brianna says:

    You have put my thoughts into words, thank you. I would just like to say a special thanks because I have never felt oppressed by this government until now. When watching Obama’s speech about the let down of the Common Sense ridiculousness, he stated that 99% of Americans wanted this in place. I thought “wow. My family and I are this lonely 1% and we will have absolutely no say in what goes on.” But thanks to you and many others, I see the bluff that was and how slyly Obama made this large group of people feel so very small. I have lost faith in the federal government (thank The Lord for the Supreme Court though), but I still haven’t lost hope in the American people. Think of all the disasters that have happened and how the people have rallied together and went from 50 states to 1 country. My family and I hope to god that even the military will turn their back on DC if they need to, considering they are citizens themselves. Call me hopeful, but I really think if push comes to shove, The People will have the upper hand, with both strength in numbers, military, and even foreign aid. Even though the constitution runs this country, you can’t have the constitution without We the People. Americans were born to stand up when necessary, and I still hold the faith that when the time comes, we will. Arrest me if you will, I have the Constitution on my side.

  39. It’s really very complicated in this busy life to listen news on TV, thus I only use world wide web for that reason, and obtain the hottest news.

  40. go back says:

    These kind of feature’s consist of “Auto-trade”, that enables traders to make a similar buy and sell approximately five successive times along with the “Close” and also “Extend” go back that give traders the option in order to in close proximity an enterprise earlier to relieve losing or boost the expiration time period so that you can improve gain. In essence, everything you stay to gain, and drop, is obviously known, in addition to is not modified. The distinction having go back and also conventional selections once we are usually discussing the particular terminology “in this money” and also “out from the money” can be that there are not as much chance, potentially increased affiliate marketor payouts, and never all the distress typically associated with acquiring regular possibilities.

  41. It is really a great and helpful piece of info.

    I’m satisfied that you shared this useful info with us. Please keep us informed like this. Thank you for sharing.

  42. Hi there, i read your blog from time to time and i own a similar one
    and i was just wondering if you get a lot of spam responses?

    If so how do you prevent it, any plugin or
    anything you can suggest? I get so much lately it’s driving me crazy so any support is very much appreciated.

  43. Kendall says:

    I really like what you guys are up too. This sort of clever work and exposure!
    Keep up the superb works guys I’ve included you guys to our blogroll.

  44. サングラス オークリー

    • 7delta says:

      サングラス オークリー

      Japanese for Oakley Sunglasses? LOL. I guess I can see a connection to firearms, not to make a pun. Glare might throw off accuracy.

      Just made me laugh.

  45. Pingback: Sometimes Men Need To Stand Up Against The Bad Guys With Guns! | July4threvolution

  46. Janine says:

    It’s remarkable in favor of me to have a web site, which is valuable in support of my experience.

    thanks admin

  47. joy philip says:

    THE GREAT POWERFUL SPELL CASTER THAT
    BRING BACK MY EX BOYFRIEND.
    I just want to say thank you prophet ahmed for all you have done for me.
    He is back now. That very powerful spell caster STOP THE DIVORCE – and get my ex boyfriend back.
    My name is Joy Philip, from Canada. I never believed in love
    spells or magic until i met this spell caster once when i went for a business summit
    early this year. I meant a man who’s name is PROPHET AHMED
    he is really powerful and could help cast spells to bring back one’s gone,
    lost, misbehaving lover and magic money spell or spell for a good job or
    luck spell .I’m now happy & a living testimony cos the man i had wanted to
    marry left me 3 weeks before our wedding and my life was upside down because our
    relationship has been on for 3years. I really loved him, but his mother was
    against us and he had no good paying job. So when i met this spell caster,i
    told him what happened and explained the situation of things to him. At
    first i was undecided, skeptical and doubtful, but i just gave it a try.And
    in 7 days when i returned to Canada, my boyfriend(now husband) called me by
    himself and came to me apologizing that everything had been settled with his
    mother and family and he got a new job interview so we should get married. I
    didn’t believe it cos the spell caster only asked for my name and my
    boyfriends name and all i wanted him to do. Well we are happily married now
    and we are expecting our little kid, and my husband also got the new job and
    our lives became much better.in case you are in any situation you can contact
    prophet ahmed at his email solutiontemple399@gmail.com or his personal cell +2347053375151
    Thank you for all your help prophet i promise to share this Testimony to every body in the world wide.

  48. [クリスチャンルブタンブーツ] 通販 シューズ http://www.forshoppingbutterflyjp.biz/

  49. Dustin says:

    This site was… how do I say it? Relevant!! Finally I’ve found something
    which helped me. Thank you!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s