Free Republic 3rd Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $7,300
Woo hoo!! And the first 8% is in!! Thank you all very much!!

Posts by Hostage

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Massive Crowd of 7,000-8,000 Show Up For Bernie Sanders Q&A In Portland, Maine

    07/06/2015 9:37:39 PM PDT · 20 of 53
    Hostage to 2ndDivisionVet

    He’s taking in the Howard Dean liberal demographic. Hearing him leaves one uninspired; he’s an awful speaker who looks ready for assisted living.

    His issues are worn, dated, empty rhetoric or perverted. Tax and spend, minimum wage, homosexual normalization, etc.

    I think he drops out by early next year.

  • Chris Christie: ‘I don’t need to be lectured by Ted Cruz’ on GOP Attacks

    07/06/2015 1:08:22 PM PDT · 44 of 88
    Hostage to South40

    I call him Krispy Kreme, is that fair game?

  • Chris Christie: ‘I don’t need to be lectured by Ted Cruz’ on GOP Attacks

    07/06/2015 1:07:13 PM PDT · 41 of 88
    Hostage to VinL

    > “ But, the Cruz Campaign does flinch: “Governor Christie is a good man and we appreciate his taking the time to point out Senator Cruz’s unceasing efforts to help get more conservatives elected to Congress,” “

    Why do you call that a “flinch”? I don’t see this as a “flinch”, I see it as an opportunity to steer the narrative.

    Christie makes a statement about Cruz. Cruz campaign must/should respond.

    Christie says “Cruz yada yada yada blah blah blah, Cruz bad, Me good, so there it is.”

    Cruz Campaign responds: “ We thank Gov Christie for pointing out how GOOD Ted Cruz has been for conservatives.”

    It’s a game.

    The media is watching all the candidates and what they say and what they say about each other.

    So every press release is an opportunity for free campaign publicity.

    Christie says something and bam! there’s a free campaign sound bite offered for response. Christie talks about SCF this and Lamar that...Lamar who? SCF what? To respond to Krispy Kreme about SCF, Lamar would be stupid. Take the free sound bite offer and steer the narrative to something positive that Ted has done.

  • Landrigan: Leading NH conservatives flock to Ted Cruz campaign

    07/06/2015 12:42:55 PM PDT · 3 of 7
    Hostage to SoConPubbie

    Great news!

    Ted’s speeches and talks at NH Town Halls are awesome!

  • Ted Cruz: Some In GOP Are For 'Amnesty' Because It's Cheap Labor

    07/06/2015 12:27:16 PM PDT · 108 of 108
    Hostage to ConservingFreedom

    > “Got it.”

    No, you haven’t got anything except diversions to nursery rhymes.

    You certainly haven’t got any contribution to make to the forum on this subject.

  • Ted Cruz: Some In GOP Are For 'Amnesty' Because It's Cheap Labor

    07/06/2015 11:23:38 AM PDT · 105 of 108
    Hostage to ConservingFreedom

    Your questions were demands.

    Those that ask questions without intending to do the necessary work to answer their own questions are in effect making a demand on someone else’s time.

  • Ted Cruz: Some In GOP Are For 'Amnesty' Because It's Cheap Labor

    07/06/2015 11:14:10 AM PDT · 103 of 108
    Hostage to ConservingFreedom

    Your demands are in the thread for all to see.

  • Ted Cruz: Some In GOP Are For 'Amnesty' Because It's Cheap Labor

    07/06/2015 11:07:29 AM PDT · 101 of 108
    Hostage to ConservingFreedom

    No one asked you to have any particular sentiment towards Ted Cruz. You made demands on the thread and you were answered. You made further demands and you were told to satisfy your demands on your own. You launched ad hominem attacks and you were given phone numbers to Ted Cruz’ offices. You continued your ad hominem attacks and it was recommended that you take your attitude to the Huffington Post Blog where like-minded posters inhabit the comment space there.

    Now you are continuing your inanity and insults thereby revealing clearly that there is nothing of substance inside you.

  • Ted Cruz: Some In GOP Are For 'Amnesty' Because It's Cheap Labor

    07/06/2015 10:55:01 AM PDT · 99 of 108
    Hostage to ConservingFreedom

    Of course that would be your response. Because you have nothing of value to add or contribute, and because you won’t do the necessary work required, you resort to ad hominem attacks. That’s a liberal characteristic. You are better suited to join with the queers over at the Huffington Post Blog because you are of like mind to them.

  • What Would Jesus Say About Homosexual Sex?

    07/06/2015 10:50:10 AM PDT · 87 of 135
    Hostage to Jeff Chandler

    > “’Journey’ is one of those red flag words.”

    It can be but is not necessarily. It depends on the context and the spirit with which it is said. I use it frequently to describe how sinners come finally to the realization that Jesus is the Christ.

    > “When I hear ‘justice’, I know they mean Marxism.”

    No, ‘social justice’ is a euphemism for Marxism. What is more accurate to what you are likely saying is that in the context of ‘Christian perversion’ the word ‘justice’ is a short form of ‘social justice’.

    > “When I hear ‘journey’, I know they mean affirmation of sin.”

    If “they” refers to the NYC ‘Mega Church’ pastor Lentz, then you are correct. But in general, the word ‘journey’ in the context of a sinner seeking answers in a church refers to their prior experience. It is hoped that the Church will encourage people to grow closer to God as they continue their ‘journey’ forward. Affirmation of sin is not connoted by the word but by how the word is used.

  • What Would Jesus Say About Homosexual Sex?

    07/06/2015 10:34:14 AM PDT · 81 of 135
    Hostage to NYer; 5thGenTexan
    > "Since you do not explain how you fall under the exception, it is only possible to provide some qualification."

    You're evading. There is only one exception given in Matthew 19:9 and 5thGenTexan wrote that is the exception they fall under.

    Further, 5thGenTexan said nothing of remarriage so your ensuing 'lecture' is a diversion to cover the tracks of your first evasion. Only after you scribbled enough do you realize your logic breaks down as you admit that divorce "is not necessarily evil".

    As for your posting of this half-wit conceited priest, the Catholic Church is open for business in bribes. To be able to receive communion after a divorce. it is necessary to pay for the annulment service and to have a good story as to why the spouse duped and deceived you into marriage. This corruption in pay-to-play is widespread. And if one priest refrains, it's easy enough to eventually find one that will engage. It's all about money.

    The truth is that Catholics are sinners like all other Christians of other denominations but the difference is that so Catholics don't want to admit it in Church for fear of their Church. The resulting arrogance and hypocrisy creates confusion and enemies.

    Faithful Episcopalians shocked by their leadership are not flocking to the Catholic Church for answers, they are running to the Orthodox who have never changed their divine liturgy in more than 2000 years and who approach parishioners in humility while confessing sin in thought, word and deed.

    As opposed to haughty Catholic pride and ugly arrogance, here is a typical Orthodox prayer that conveys the constant theme that we are all sinners before God:

    A Prayer of St. John Chrysostom

    I believe, O Lord, and I confess that thou art truly the Christ, the Son of the living God, who didst come into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief. And I believe that this is truly thine own immaculate Body, and that this is truly thine own precious Blood. Wherefore I pray thee, have mercy upon me and forgive my transgressions both voluntary and involuntary, of word and of deed, of knowledge and of ignorance; and make me worthy to partake without condemnation of thine immaculate mysteries, unto remission of my sins and unto life everlasting. Amen.

  • Ted Cruz: Some In GOP Are For 'Amnesty' Because It's Cheap Labor

    07/06/2015 9:39:34 AM PDT · 97 of 108
    Hostage to ConservingFreedom

    > “Mind-reading? Don’t quit your day job.”

    You were told to research his subcommittee testimony, to call his offices. You won’t do the work. You reveal yourself to be a heckler rather than a serious contributor to the forum.

    Here are phone numbers for Ted Cruz’ offices:

    202-224-5922 Senate Office
    713-353-4330 Campaign Office

    This is all you are getting until you come back with a useful contribution to the forum.

  • Ted Cruz: Some In GOP Are For 'Amnesty' Because It's Cheap Labor

    07/06/2015 9:20:08 AM PDT · 95 of 108
    Hostage to ConservingFreedom
    > The cheap labor express is what H-1B is has currently about become under Obama and Bush before him -

    Big difference.

    > "and I find no record of Cruz saying he's change that."

    Despite your grammatical errors, I take you to mean that Ted Cruz will expand the H1B caps so that more 'cheap labor' will be admitted into the United States. That's laughable and absurd. It goes against every principle he stands for. In fact it's not even worthy of response. You have not found any record because you have not looked nor bothered to research his committee testimony nor called his offices.

    I told you to do these things before but you insist in not doing your homework. He will not repeat his position now to the "ConservingFreedom's" of the blogosphere because you represent 0.000000001% of the voters he is speaking to. He revealed his anti-cheap labor stance in this article in relation to amnesty which the vast majority of voters are concerned about. His time, words, conversations and discussions are reserved for voters that have higher priority issues like amnesty, judicial activism, healthcare. He has little or no time for forum kooks that are not genuinely interested in learning but rather in detracting.

  • What Would Jesus Say About Homosexual Sex?

    07/06/2015 8:53:09 AM PDT · 49 of 135
    Hostage to NYer

    > “So here it is. King Henry the VIII made his own church, ‘The Church of England’ so that he could get around what Jesus said; ‘What God has united, let no man divide” and kill two of his wives and remarry four more times. He modified his christianity to suite his sexual desires. He then went on to steal Catholic property, killed thousands and caused years of persecution and starvation of Catholics in England and Ireland.”

    Enough of this sanctimonious ‘holier than thou’ spew coming from some source calling itself ‘Traditional Catholic Priest’. Henry VIII was an egregious sinner surrounded by sinners. And this makes the Catholic Church clean and holy to throw this mud on Protestants?

    Let’s cut to the chase: Carota wants to pick a fight by throwing mud at Protestants. Does this Catholic labeled neanderthal not understand that Catholic Pedophelia has over centuries traumatized tens of thousands of children leaving them scarred for life, and worse separated them from God by confusing the image of Christ with Church Pedophiles? Does he not understand that tens of millions of people can’t stand to be associated with or have anything to do with the Catholic Church because of attitudes like his?

    Carota is the epitome of why Christians kill Christians. The Church has throughout the ages done wonderful and divine things for humanity but when it sleeps it allows the Carotas inside to spew their pride and conceit on others thereby engendering hate and violence. The Church leadership should take its Carotas like petulant children by the ears to a basin where their mouths are forced to taste bitter soap.

    Catholic Carotas likening Protestants to scum ... Pot calling Kettle

  • Call For An "Assembly Of The States" In May 2016

    07/06/2015 6:07:29 AM PDT · 33 of 37
    Hostage to Mobilemitter; Biggirl

    > “Having demonstrated no regard for our existing Constitution and no restraint in regards to States Rights, and assuming that the COS would seek amendments designed to further restrain or prevent such abuses, why would the Corruptocrats bother to acknowledge anything coming out of one?”

    An Amendment that permits 3/5’s of states to void, quash, repeal any federal ruling, statute, directive, order is controlled by states, not federal government. Similarly, an amendment that permits states to impose term limits on its members of Congress is controlled by the state, not the federal government; and so on. In short, amendments written so that states control the amendment need not depend on what the federal government chooses to do.

    > “There are no rules or processes defined for a COS ...”

    Yes there are. Look here:

    State legislators are not wild people who act as if they are drunks when they convene. They have procedures of order and they will direct their chosen delegates to the COS to follow procedures of order by prior agreement with other states participating.

    > “Meanwhile we must recognize that the tumor is a Congress that no longer represents the American people, is no longer willing to defend the Constitution and their duties as defined by it, and fails to address and correct a runaway Judicial branch.”

    Good that you are waking up. Your next step is to watch the Mark Levin video:

    After you have watched and understood the Mark Levin video, the next step is to find out who your state legislators are, call them, email them, fax them that you want them also to watch the above Mark Levin video and then to see them involved in an orderly COS that produces an amendment like the following:

    Section 1.
    A Senator in Congress shall be subject to recall by their respective state legislature or by voter referendum in their respective state.

    Section 2.
    Term limits for Senators in Congress shall be set by vote in their respective state legislatures but in no case shall be set less than twelve years nor more than eighteen years.

    Section 3.
    Upon a majority vote in three-fifths of state legislatures, specific federal statutes, federal court decisions and executive directives of any form shall be repealed and made void.

  • Pataki, Jindal address Trump's comments at New Hampshire picnic

    07/05/2015 9:49:49 PM PDT · 19 of 58
    Hostage to 2ndDivisionVet

    > “Jindal, however, said while it is not his job to police other candidates, he agrees with Pataki. “I don’t view people as members of ethnic groups or economic groups,” Jindal said. “This president has done too much to divide us, so obviously I disagree with his (Trump’s) comments. I think we need to look at people as individuals.””

    I’m disappointed that Jindal lumps these illegal foreign elements into the population of Americans that are matural born or are here legally.

    Trump did not single out an American ethnic group, he drew attention to facts concerning illegal MEXICANS causing mayhem on American soil.

  • A Letter to the Gay Community from a Loving Daughter (2nd mom doesn't replace dad I lost)

    07/05/2015 9:41:04 PM PDT · 36 of 36
    Hostage to mom of young patriots; AnAmericanMother; Ann Archy; NYer

    This thread contains a ‘creepy’ subject that I am sure all of us would rather avoid. Unfortunately I don’t think we can hide from it in these times. This era of open normalized perversion is I fear only beginning.

    We shouldn’t have to be facing this subject of same-sex anything or to be dealing with the heartbreaking accounts of innocent children immersed in perversion. But it’s the children of these perverted arrangements along with recent obscene rulings from our federal courts that makes us have to pay attention if we believe ourselves dignified enough to be concerned.

    We’ve exchanged some anecdotes and discussed the thread’s article. Maybe we’ve learned something. But perhaps even better we want to DO something, but how? Well, there is a way. Continue reading.

    What control do we have over how our society is organized and prioritized? Most schools, most media and governments will be uninterested in our concerns regarding the immorality of our time. The Episcopal Church just voted overwhelmingly to allow same-sex marriage. Schools, churches, news media, governments are seemingly lining up to be marched off a cliff. How can we stop it?

    I will give another shameless pump of my post “A PERMANENT ANSWER TO SUPREME COURT AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ABUSES”

    The followers of this method of fighting back are very versed on the subject and are known to most old time members of this forum including Jim Robinson who supports the movement. You will get to know them as you find them sprinkled recurringly throughout threads on the subject.

    There’a follow-on post with Ted Cruz as the focal point but the discussions are essentially the same but other important points are made:

    I know it’s a lot to read but I ask each of you to come up to speed on the subject. The good news is once you are aware of the issues, your participation will be minimal, easy and not burdensome at all. In fact, your participation will be local to where you live and require only an hour at most per week. Your goal is to make contact with your state legislators. Most people don’t even know who their state legislators are and that’s not their fault. It’s the result of of actions taken a century ago. But it’s amazing how close to you your state legislators can be. For example, if you email or call them, or fax them, it is not at all surprising that they call you back immediately and in some cases even invite themselves over to meet you or for you to go see them at their office or even in their backyard barbecue. And you will discover by reading all the links I’ve left above and below that your state legislators were left a blessing by our Founders that can light a way out of all the hideous mess we find ourselves today.

    If video is your best mode of acquiring an overview of a subject, then you should start with this Mark Levin video: (I highly recommend viewing this)

    But I encourage each of you to read through the links above, all the way through so that you can see clearly the issues that people bring up. I am asking you to get smart on the subject. As for my own post in the first link above, I made some minor errors but just plow past them if you see them because they are not material to developing an awareness of what the movement is.

    Lastly, for those that would like a legal and historical foundation document on the movement, here is a link to a manuscript written by a professor of constitutional law:

    Ask me any questions, I am available to help and would be joyed to know you are involving yourself. Thanks for your time and concerns.

  • Ted Cruz: Some In GOP Are For 'Amnesty' Because It's Cheap Labor

    07/05/2015 9:18:09 PM PDT · 88 of 108
    Hostage to American Constitutionalist

    > “Ted Cruz doesn’t have to disclose how he would defeat ISIS, it’s a matter of trust like Reagan had with his voters.
    Unlike Obama or Hillary , we know and trust like Reagan that Ted Cruz will do what is right for America and protect America”

    Yes, precisely.

  • Ted Cruz’s $51 Million Haul: TEA Party Favorite Has Big Bucks Behind Him …

    07/05/2015 7:32:56 PM PDT · 30 of 76
    Hostage to South40

    Trump will not be second to anyone. A person like him has to be the top guy or nothing.

    He’s running for president because he wants to leave a national and international legacy. This happens to people in his age group, they want somehow to ‘give back’ and leave a legacy.

    To my knowledge Trump has no think tanks. no foundations, no charities of note (I could be wrong here) which a person of his financial stature would normally be expected to have. He has a legacy of successful businesses but that’s not enough for him.

    The Article V movement is the movement to break up the Washington Cartel and strengthen states rights. In short it is the constitutionally authorized vehicle to turn back all the federal government abuses and judicial tyranny that has existed over the Progressive Era in the USA since 1913. Trump could mark his name on it.

  • Ted Cruz’s $51 Million Haul: TEA Party Favorite Has Big Bucks Behind Him …

    07/05/2015 7:25:25 PM PDT · 26 of 76
    Hostage to GIdget2004; TexasFreeper2009

    Hillary’s small contributors are of dubious origin. She has the democrat union party machine at her back. They can churn out more than 500,000 small donors of $60 to $80 with a couple of weeks worth of phone calls and emails. And they have the union hierarchy to make sure the donors donate.

    Ted’s in a field that is split 8 ways. For him to get more than $10 million from 175,000 donations (120,000 unique donors, $81 avg) is a huge success. Also his grassroots turnout has all the other candidates beat by a long shot. He will continue to grow his support base and eventually the rest of the field will fold in with his campaign. His fundraising is awesome at this stage where he started from near nothing whereas Hillary started with the democrat machine. Once Ted has sewn up the GOP field, he will put Hillary’s numbers to shame.

  • Ted Cruz’s $51 Million Haul: TEA Party Favorite Has Big Bucks Behind Him …

    07/05/2015 7:14:59 PM PDT · 22 of 76
    Hostage to CTyank; South40; 2ndDivisionVet; SoConPubbie; Publius; Jacquerie; betty boop; cotton1706

    > “Trump is clearing the way for Ted.”

    You know you got a hold of something right there.

    Trump is not going to be president but he’s got a lot of fight in him against the left in this country and that is exciting to watch.

    I can’t imagine where Trump would fit in with a Ted Cruz White House and I don’t think he could ever be a second to anything.

    But one idea where Trump could leave his mark on history is if he would lead financially, operationally and organizationally a grassroots ground army for the Article V movement. The movement is presently in the capable hands of the COS Project with notables like Mark Levin. But operationally it needs financing and it needs management of the ground game where for example the ground operatives would have a coordinated plan to canvas and communicate with key state legislators.

    I really think a person like Trump could get it done. He’s worth over 9 billion. He doesn’t need to stay with his businesses and he has an ability to organize people and get them to give 100%.

  • Ted Cruz: Some In GOP Are For 'Amnesty' Because It's Cheap Labor

    07/05/2015 6:06:38 PM PDT · 79 of 108
    Hostage to ConservingFreedom

    no you’re wrong.

    I’m going let you in on a little secret that I know of personally.

    All of the major research labs, companies, think tank facilities and universities always have slots open ALWAYS for the right caliber individual and .....

    and ....

    it has nothing to do with cheap labor.

    And those jobs pay top dollar and are ALWAYS available to the right person. Unemployment could be 33% and these slots would still be open because ....

    There are a breed of people that are genetically endowed to solve problems that in turn lead to innovation that in turn lead to new industries being formed or expanded.

    Your little Breibart-Facebook-Zuckerberg support for Senator Jeff is not associated with the talent that pays top dollar. It is associated with the cheap labor express.

    I personally know here in Seattle at Microsoft Research more than 20 individuals from Russia, the former Eastern Soviet bloc countries, from China and India, from Australia, New Zealand, England, Germany and Hungary who are top researchers alongside their American counterparts and who travel and work back and forth with the University of Washington, Berkeley, Stanford and many government research labs. They are not part of your little protest against the Cheap Labor lobby. They are the caliber of individuals that Ted Cruz wants companies and universities to have access to.

    The link I posted stated that the slots available pay very well and that is the truth. And they will pay well and be available regardless of unemployment and without regard to country of origin including American born talent.

    The best talent goes to the big leagues period no matter where that talent comes from. It’s obvious you have no experience in the big leagues of science and engineering.

  • Ted Cruz: Some In GOP Are For 'Amnesty' Because It's Cheap Labor

    07/05/2015 5:07:32 PM PDT · 76 of 108
    Hostage to ConservingFreedom

    Yes, Cruz has stated on numerous occasions in Congressional committees and in public of his plans for H1B which does not include issuing to companies who seek cheap labor.

    The types of H1Bs that Cruz is seeking to issue are for companies that pay well with outstanding benefits, not cheap labor. The catch is the jobs are for seriously smart people, meaning geniuses.

    Here’s one article where that’s evident:

    Cruz has said numerous times he will not allow abuses of the system for cheap labor. And now he’s making it known that amnesty backers are interested in cheap labor. Cruz is not in anyway associated with the ‘Cheap Labor Express’. That you would think he is says more about you than him.

    As for you, you will need to do your own homework. There are many things you can do to be of value to the forum. You can call Senator Cruz’ Senate offices or his presidential campaign offices. They will be happy to tell you where he stands on H1B and cheap labor abuses.

    You can listen to the many recorded town halls where Ted has appeared and explained his views on immigration, cheap labor and H1B.

    There are many more things you can do. But you have to do it, Don’t ask. I’ve given you one reference and there are many many more. Do the work yourself.

  • What citizens can do to resist the ruling class’s redefinitions of moral and cultural norms

    07/05/2015 4:02:31 PM PDT · 5 of 48
    Hostage to LibWhacker

    Codevilla is a very serious and important writer. I am going to read this one thoroughly. Thanks for posting.

  • Ted Cruz: Some In GOP Are For 'Amnesty' Because It's Cheap Labor

    07/05/2015 4:01:20 PM PDT · 67 of 108
    Hostage to ConservingFreedom

    That’s not a point. That’s an embarrassing display of ignorance.

    Ted Cruz has also stated that ISIS will be defeated when he is President but he has not disclosed how.

    By your logic, his reticence in disclosing necessary troop strength, movements of armor, bomber deployments, drone schedules, specific strategies and backup plans is proof that he is not up to the job.

  • Call For An "Assembly Of The States" In May 2016

    07/05/2015 3:51:57 PM PDT · 7 of 37
    Hostage to Publius

    > “I’m not sure how to classify it.”

    Classify it as a waste of time and a waste of someone’s money.

  • Ted Cruz: Some In GOP Are For 'Amnesty' Because It's Cheap Labor

    07/05/2015 3:46:55 PM PDT · 63 of 108
    Hostage to ConservingFreedom

    What’s your point?

    Oh, excuse me you don’t have one.

  • Do We the People Need an Article V Convention of the States in the Aftermath of <i>Obergefell</i>?

    07/05/2015 3:08:54 PM PDT · 185 of 192
    Hostage to Publius

    There is interpretation of documents and then there is reality.

    According to your summation of Jacquerie’s view above, Congress should have called a COS more than a century ago.

    The reality is they didn’t.

    The reality going forward is they’re not going to.

    This is all about appearances. State legislators are hearing from their constituents that something must be done about the out of control federal judiciary. Liberals are pleased; Conservatives are pissed. Congress is impotent. That leaves only the states to do something and they have only Article V which they started decades long ago but never completed. So it’s still a ‘new thing’, a novelty with no impacting history.

    Most Americans want a divorce from their abusive federal government. Right now states are like a group of prospective divorce lawyers. They better know what they are doing.

  • Do We the People Need an Article V Convention of the States in the Aftermath of <i>Obergefell</i>?

    07/05/2015 2:54:16 PM PDT · 184 of 192
    Hostage to Jacquerie

    The Constitution is very clear “Congress shall call a Convention”.

    If Congress does not do that, then states will have to go to court.

    But this discussion is not realistic.

    All of the proposed amendments by at least 34 states WILL HAVE THE SAME CORE LANGUAGE, so there will be no failure to call a convention by Congress or ordered by a Court. A failure to do so WILL NOT HAPPEN.

  • Ted Cruz: Some In GOP Are For 'Amnesty' Because It's Cheap Labor

    07/05/2015 2:37:06 PM PDT · 50 of 108
    Hostage to lentulusgracchus

    No. You got that backwards:

  • Do We the People Need an Article V Convention of the States in the Aftermath of <i>Obergefell</i>?

    07/05/2015 2:33:06 PM PDT · 181 of 192
    Hostage to Publius

    Yeah, saw that before.

    Phyllis is a Beltway insider and like all Beltway insiders she feels threatened by state legislators getting in the driver’s seat. It’s a foreign concept to her. It’s out of her comfort zone.

    She may be coming around by now or she’ll have to eventually.

    Today’s Article V movement is fairly new by a few years but it is not reacting to anything new. It’s reacting to things evolving since 1913 which we can call the dawn of the Progressive Era.

    I would take an iPad or tablet to that diner where those little ladies are seated and I would excuse myself for interrupting, introduce myself and politely ask if they would watch the following Mark Levin video at time 28:10 to 33:45:

    Of course they should listen to the whole thing but for the 5 minute clip above I might even offer to buy their meal if they would listen!

  • Ted Cruz: Some In GOP Are For 'Amnesty' Because It's Cheap Labor

    07/05/2015 2:06:26 PM PDT · 42 of 108
    Hostage to Isara

    I know. That poster and a few others jump on any thread with title words ‘ Cruz’ and ‘Immigration’ etc. and proceed to post the same garbage.

  • Do We the People Need an Article V Convention of the States in the Aftermath of <i>Obergefell</i>?

    07/05/2015 2:00:54 PM PDT · 179 of 192
    Hostage to Publius

    Not quite. Congress could be taken to court and force to call the convention if the court’s interpretation went against them, but then they could appeal, Then is gets tied up for a long time. Maybe the Feds would want it that way.

    It would boil down to public sentiment. If there were not a single topic, rather a plethora of amendments, especially from the left that even though having no chance of progressing would create a negative reaction via media reports so that the public would develop a negative view of such a convention ***overall***, then the Article V movement loses.

    The public would be left with a memory of chaos and some really crazy amendments.

    This is why it’s important to forge ahead with a single topic, one amendment only, convention with the pre-selected amendment making lots of sense and resonating greatly with public opinion.

  • Ted Cruz: Some In GOP Are For 'Amnesty' Because It's Cheap Labor

    07/05/2015 1:50:05 PM PDT · 20 of 108
    Hostage to CodeToad

    You don’t understand Ted’s approach to H1B.

    And the topic has been addressed countless times on FR so it’s not a sincere question from you, rather it’s just another heckling jibe on your part to get undeserved attention.

    Here’s the reason we need it:

  • Ted Cruz: Some In GOP Are For 'Amnesty' Because It's Cheap Labor

    07/05/2015 1:46:38 PM PDT · 15 of 108
    Hostage to paintriot

    On deportations he holds off because he says first secure the border. This is smart because it avoids letting his opposition get a sound bite that he will deport them all and then they will say that’s impossible. I am confident he will take the Eisenhower approach.

    On amnesty and illegals, he is 100% opposed. He favors only ‘legal’ immigration.

  • Do We the People Need an Article V Convention of the States in the Aftermath of <i>Obergefell</i>?

    07/05/2015 1:35:56 PM PDT · 177 of 192
    Hostage to Jacquerie

    “No federal court or Scotus has legitimate purview over either a state or congressionally initiated Article V process.”

    Ok so what?

    They go against your statement above, what you going to do? You going to shoot them?

  • Do We the People Need an Article V Convention of the States in the Aftermath of <i>Obergefell</i>?

    07/05/2015 1:17:50 PM PDT · 175 of 192
    Hostage to Jacquerie

    He will not refute your post 145, I’m pretty sure of that.

    Saying that Congress MUST call a convention upon application of 34 states is a great point that is well-supported. But ‘saying’ it does not make it so.

    As a lawyer he is merely drawing attention to the fact that Congress may object that the core language of the applications is not uniform. ‘Saying’ that Congress cannot do that does not make it so. Every good fighter does not go into the ring expecting that his opponent adversary will hit above the belt at all times. Every good lawyer does not prepare a brief that expects the arguments of the adversary to be truthful and candid.

    What you have to show (which you can’t; sorry) is that Congress won’t be able to throw a monkey wrench into the fight without matters ending up in Court.

    Say Natelson agrees with you and applications on whatever are filed by 34 states. Suppose Congress says these are not all on the same subject (that’s very probable you know). Regardless of what you ‘say’ or what you point out that the Constitution says, just think now what? Congress just went against you and declared no convention will be called because the amendments are not uniform.

    What are you going to do about it? You going to go shoot at them?

    No, you are going to watch courts get involved and that means serious time gets wasted.

    What did Obama do when the House would not vote for the Gang of 8 immigration reform? He went around them with Executive Amnesty.

    But but but Obama can’t do that! The Constitution says yada yada! Well, he just did it. What you going to do about it? So the States took him to court and got a temporary stop on him. It’s now in court.

    That’s where you’ll end up; in court.

    Natelson’s plan is to sail through court by eliminating any points of objection or debate. That’s standard lawyering. He’s right. Where’s he wrong is in framing the issue from the federal side of the coin rather than the state side of the same coin.

  • Do We the People Need an Article V Convention of the States in the Aftermath of <i>Obergefell</i>?

    07/05/2015 12:42:11 PM PDT · 173 of 192
    Hostage to Publius; Repeal The 17th; Jacquerie; xzins; betty boop; Jim Robinson; 5thGenTexan; 1010RD; ...
    It is a legal foundation and sourced document that historically and authoritatively answers many of the processes, definitions of terms, meanings/intents of terms/processes as well as questions and concerns brought up on FR and other discussion groups for the past several years. It may be used as a reference document to put to rest all of the nonsense that arises in thread discussions of Article V.

    Here's one example taken from page 29:

    § 3.3. Why the Founders Adopted the Proposal Convention in Article V.

    An early draft of the Constitution permitted amendments to be proposed and adopted only by interstate convention. Then the Framers added provisions allowing Congress to propose amendments and requiring state ratification. Congress received the power to propose because the Framers believed that Congress’s position would enable it readily to see defects in the system.

    However, some delegates—notably George Mason of Virginia—pointed out that Congress might become abusive or exceed its powers. It might therefore refuse to adopt a necessary or desirable amendment, particularly one designed to curb its own authority. Accordingly, the Framers added the convention for proposing amendments as a vehicle for the states to present corrective amendments for ratification while bypassing Congress.40

    The superscript "40" above is an important element of the manuscript because it grounds the sources of the summary above to historical records, case law or other publications that are also sourced. Therefore, the manuscript becomes a document that grounds discussions in historical precedent.

    After skimming over the document I am not seeing sentiment wildly different than my own but the legwork for referencing and sourcing saves countless hours of research. Also the organization and 'mind's eye' of the author makes it valuable to have as a reference.

    I am not surprised at the focus on a single topic convention but I am not persuaded to that which the COS group has stipulated to be curbing the overreach and jurisdiction of federal government power even though it seems logical, necessary and 'natural' that this topic should be the order of the day. I think we need to peel the onion layers back a little more to the crux issue which is States Rights and Control of States Rights. The difference in framing may be subtle but of enormous consequence.

    We have to use psychology here. Framing the single topic as curbing federal overreach, jurisdiction we 'invite' the neighborhood and the legal community of courts to participate in an unremitting debate that saps energy of the originators and risks a 'fizzling out'. Changing the terms of the single topic to States Rights and Control of States Rights we focus on amending the Constitution in a way that we retain title to the amendment.

    In lay terms, an example that most can understand is one where a Peeping Tom neighbor is constructing a monstrous elevation addition to his property that is completely out of character with the original neighborhood and that has structures that look right into the rooms of our homes invading our privacy forcing us to shutter our windows or place curtains all of which rob us of much needed sunlight.

    The first reaction would be for neighbors to take it up with City Hall and petition for a work stoppage and redesign of the Peeping Tom home but the building codes may very well be ambiguous as to a legal basis to stop the Peeping Tom neighbor not to mention that neighbors (think MSM) in other enclaves might possibly skew council discussion that such blanket interpretations of codes would lead to whatever monsters in the attic they saw fit to dream up. In any event prepare for a long drawn out a fight over public opinion and a litigating war of attrition.

    A better approach would be for a property owner to fall back on existing code that allows for a property owner to plant a hedge of Leyland Cypress trees (they grow fast and tall) to block the Peeping Tom from his privacy encroachment. Now the property owner is solving his problem on his turf in a way that he controls. That's the way we need to be ... in the beginning. We must control the argument from the vantage point that "it's not about them, it's about us and our comfort level". The neighborhood enclaves (MSM, public) will not object to our approach and the onus is put on the Peeping Tom (Federal Government) to figure a legal way around our hedge which he won't be able to do as long as we are in control.

    These matters of how we frame the issue are important. Professor Natelson and others of the COS Project need only a little adjustment of view and the COS template will be much stronger tactically. Battles fought defensively rather than offensively sway public opinion greater to support a cause.

    The second point where we must use psychology is to limit the single topic to one and only one amendment at the beginning. This is a single shot opportunity. We miss and we lose the war. We hit and we get to shoot again. The one amendment can have several sections closely related to each other. For example, related sections of "term limits, state/voter recall, state quash" would be related to States Rights and Control of States Rights whereas amendments to repeal the 17th, to balance the budget, to curb abuses of the Commerce Clause would be waiting in the wings, why?

    This is a 'new thing'. If we hit the target and life is better as a result, then we are trusted to bring in other amendments. We build trust with one great and symbolic amendment, then we have a track record that gives us license to bring in more amendments.

    Will an amendment focused on States Rights and Control of States Rights weaken the federal government? Yes, it will. With the proposal of this one amendment I will point my finger direct at the 'Washington Cartel' and tell them straight to their faces that the Progressive Era in the history of the United States is on its way out; it's going to be over. The question is not what makes the Federal Government stronger, the question is what makes the United States of America stronger.

  • Dark Money group threatens Dems on opposing Iran nuclear deal (the Chicago way!)

    07/05/2015 6:52:55 AM PDT · 5 of 9
    Hostage to cotton1706

    Hidden in the message is that Boehner and McConnell are already on board with it.

  • Looking forward to getting Windows 10 the day it ships? Yeah, about that... (MS rollout plan)

    07/04/2015 12:31:00 PM PDT · 25 of 31
    Hostage to UB355

    Thanks bit does not answer the administrator roadblocks I was inquiring about.

  • Looking forward to getting Windows 10 the day it ships? Yeah, about that... (MS rollout plan)

    07/04/2015 7:58:03 AM PDT · 13 of 31
    Hostage to x_plus_one

    Interesting. Where can people find out more info about this?

  • A Conservative Firebrand From The Start, Ted Cruz Always Had A Plan

    07/03/2015 3:08:55 PM PDT · 7 of 16
    Hostage to VinL

    This is pretty fair coming from NPR. The writer threw in a negative from the Dreamer community but Ted doesn’t need them to win. Most Hispanics who can vote legally will likely split for Ted and that’s all he should need.

  • Senator Ted Cruz to visit Woodstock

    07/03/2015 9:24:48 AM PDT · 4 of 9
    Hostage to SoConPubbie

    God bless Ted Cruz!

  • A Letter to the Gay Community from a Loving Daughter (2nd mom doesn't replace dad I lost)

    07/03/2015 9:06:14 AM PDT · 33 of 36
    Hostage to Ann Archy

    It’s like San Francisco. It’s in Seattle where the current mayor is homosexual. But it’s not Sodom and Gomorrah where I live. Of about 500 families in the neighborhood there are I would guess about 10 to 15 same-sex families.

  • A Letter to the Gay Community from a Loving Daughter (2nd mom doesn't replace dad I lost)

    07/03/2015 9:03:32 AM PDT · 32 of 36
    Hostage to mom of young patriots

    Oh I am fairly thorough when it comes to people that are professional. The person I consult with is a Waldorf school teacher with a professional degree in child development. Waldorf schools are free of all the homosexual normalization.

    She’s given me wonderful advice over the years on how to raise an only child in a single parent household and handle the grief of a lost parent. She is from a traditional family and has her own traditional family. She is not one to follow fads or political correctness. She dispenses great advice for child development, making it easy for me to see what life is like from the eyes of the child which is crucial. As for sexually related matters I will ask her how best to approach it.

    My son goes into a Christian curriculum next year, free from Common Core, free from ‘Social Justice’ indoctrination and homosexual normalization. I’m determined that he have access to a classical rigorous curriculum. I’ve seen the young people turned out by the academy, they are so far ahead academically, socially, spiritually that it would be an abuse on my part to deny my son the opportunity to go there. And they will challenge him greatly and make him work really hard. Just the way I want it.

  • A Letter to the Gay Community from a Loving Daughter (2nd mom doesn't replace dad I lost)

    07/03/2015 7:48:17 AM PDT · 29 of 36
    Hostage to Ann Archy

    Thank you. I’ll add that this is not a big part of our daily routine. Most children my son plays with are from traditional households.

    The way it happened to us can happen to anyone. Kids play on a playground at a park or school. Then they ask parents for a playdate arrangement. Parents introduce themselves and exchange phone numbers and a playdate is set.

    In my case the first brush was with a mother who seemed in all respects like a normal person. It was later that I found out the mother was one of 2 mothers. So you can see how this can happen to anyone.

    Should I have drawn a line as soon as I found out there was a same-sex couple behind the child? Should I have refused my child to have further contact with the child from the same-sex couple?

    In my case I am a tough old bird and don’t back down for long if ever. I saw a child from a same-sex household and allowed that child into our life for playdates because I thought that child did not deserve to suffer being ostracized because of the ‘parents’ and also I saw it as an opportunity to study the situation. I look at every challenge, dilemma or difficult question put in front of me as having a reason set by God’s hand.

    I had two specific (and only two) anomalous experiences with two different kids from same-sex households. I describe these experiences as ‘anomalous’ because I have never had such experiences with kids from traditional households. And the number of contacts with this latter group are much more numerous.

    First Experience:
    It was an early release day at school. Kids were riding bikes on the blacktop. One of the same-sex kids (forgive me for calling them that) with name Henry was talking to my son Josh and another friend of my son Connor. The three were talking about friendship. All three had bikes in the background while they were talking. My son was saying that Connor was his best friend. Henry was saying he could be a best friend too. Josh and Connor took off on their bikes. Henry stayed behind and came over to me standing straight about afoot and half in front of me and said “I would really like to have a brother like Josh”. Then he dropped his head right onto my abdominal area with a thud while keeping his arms and hands straight down. I patted him on the back and said “don’t worry Henry, Josh and I think you’re a great friend, now go grab your bike and get over their with your friends.”

    Second Experience:
    It was Saturday at a soccer game. It was looking like rain. The soccer field was on the edge of a forest. It started to rain about 15 minutes into the game. Parents were putting jackets or towels over their sons, gathering things to take for cover in case the rain continued. All the kids and families were on the side of the field opposite the side next to the forest. The rain stopped after about 10 minutes. But during the rain one of the same-sex household kids named Miles was on the side of the field at the edge of the forest alone and apart from the kids and families on the other side. The rain was light to medium, there was no thunder, no lightning. it was warm, there was no cause for concern. But Miles started to become very agitated with a look on his face of fear. He had one of his mothers there that day who was on the other side of the field. Miles turned his back on the field and started running back and forth wailing with his hands moving up and down. He then ran into the forest crying and wailing. I’ve never seen anything like it. I saw his mother come running and I remarked “maybe he was overwhelmed by something?”. She ran into the forest and retrieved him putting a jacket over his shoulders while attempting to console him “everything will be Ok”.

    Now we should not draw too much from these very limited experiences but such experiences could and should be cataloged for example on a website support group with rules that the experiences were somehow unusual, why they are thought to be unusual as opposed to traditional family experiences. Then after hundreds of such experiences are cataloged a pattern may emerge that describes irregular behavior of children of same-sex households.

    The article posted to this thread is confirmed by my limited experience. Kids can be very confused, very, by a same-sex household arrangement. I believe they can be so socially bent by this confusion that it can cause them to cry out for help to the outside. At the same time they are so confused because they love their parent-partner and don’t want to see anyone hurt by their cries. This must be so heartbreaking, so shattering for them. I think as a society we need to monitor this situation. How to deal with it long term I don’t know. I imagine the kids themselves when they grow older will have to form a group that gets a handle on how to reform the situation.

    Here’s a social question dialog that may accompany this issue (these are possible questions that we may hear or see):

    “Do you approve of same-sex households with children?”

    “Do you believe homosexual people should be able to adopt, raise, have children?”

    “Children in heterosexual households can be abused and neglected. Should Child Protective Services be allowed to place such children into homes of same-sex couples?”

    I have only had very limited observation on a few children from a few same-sex couples. So my experience, my observations do not make for a strong study. In order to get a strong study performed would require consent from hundreds of households from both same-sex and traditional households. In today’s politically correct environment I think such a study would be impossible or it may be so biased in design that it would never carry any socially scientific weight (value). That’s why I say it’s up to the kids when they grow up to form a study group of their experiences, perhaps under the guidance of an objective experienced social science group or group of MDs. My only involvement might be to help fund scholarships for children of same-sex households so that they will be equipped scientifically to study the social aspects of their experience.

    Liberal arguments will attempt to downplay the confusion caused to children of same-sex households. They will claim that traditional households also cause problems to children in a variety of ways and that claims made that somehow children of same-sex households are developmentally impaired is either urban legend or that the difference in outcomes from traditional households is not statistically significant.

    I would retort that the value of a human crop is found in its health, its sense of well-being, its spiritual awareness and morality, its ability to produce a new generation that is similar or improved, and so on. The question is whether the same-sex phenomenon adds value to the crop. A better question is are the children raised by the same-sex phenomenon adding value to the crop? Boiling it down to specifics, the value would be ascertained in such questions as do such children when they grow up, do they feel comfortable starting a traditional family? Are men and women who were raised in same-sex households, are they able to touch the opposite sex and have relations without shame? Are they able to create children that are free of such shame? What is the role and impact of grandparents in these situations? Many questions here and my sense is I don’t see an argument in favor of same-sex households with children.

  • Staffer Told Ted Cruz He Thought a Reporter Was Nice. The GOP Candidate Responded With Harsh Advice

    07/02/2015 9:02:22 PM PDT · 12 of 82
    Hostage to SoConPubbie

    Now it’s clear why Ted shreds all the leftist media who interview him. He gets on the offensive with a smile and doesn’t let up because he knows what their goal is which is to destroy him.

  • Ted Cruz Goes Rounds with Katie Couric [video]

    07/02/2015 8:43:11 PM PDT · 16 of 26
    Hostage to Publius

    He’s mentioning it more and more.

    Good sign.

  • A Letter to the Gay Community from a Loving Daughter (2nd mom doesn't replace dad I lost)

    07/02/2015 5:40:42 PM PDT · 25 of 36
    Hostage to mom of young patriots

    Thank you so much for your very insightful and helpful post. I need to think more and absorb the thoughts in your post. I think my son is Ok. He has a lot of friends from traditional homes. He’s also really smart and becoming more and more grounded all the time. I will talk to a friend who is a child development professional about what you wrote as I see a lot there worth considering. He’a an only child so having kids over is part of his social development. I’ll get back to you about what my friend advises. Thanks again.

  • A Letter to the Gay Community from a Loving Daughter (2nd mom doesn't replace dad I lost)

    07/02/2015 5:15:47 PM PDT · 24 of 36
    Hostage to Ann Archy

    Pedophiles? Drug addicts, criminals? Heavens no.

    No I draw boundaries. The same-sex parents ‘look’ normal. They don’t always act the same as traditional parents. They in some cases seem intense but I have no clue what’s behind that and I see tension also in traditional parents but some of the same-sex parents seem to be tense around traditional people. I try to be accommodating because of the kids.

    Their kids are allowed to come to our home but my son is not allowed to go to their home. When he is asked over to their home we are usually busy or he has other plans with kids from traditional homes. I make excuses if needed.

    I allow them over to our home because I believe it gives them a chance to see life outside their home. I hope it does them some good. They keep wanting to return because we have a big home overlooking the water and mountains, lots of fun things to do.

    The reason I posted is I am also a human being that has come into contact with this problem of kids with same-sex parents and I notice somethings different about them. I believe they are hiding shame.

    I don’t want to get involved with their problems because I am not qualified or knowledgeable about what goes on behind the doors of their home. If one day one of them ask me for help, I might call a lawyer friend of mine, or some other parents that work in family counseling because I would not know what to do.

    I did write that these same-sex parents don’t look queer at all. But that is their appearance in public. I am not going to speculate what goes on inside their home. I do see the kids having a different interaction than other kids. These kids look Ok, they are dressed appropriately and they seem to do Ok in school and sports. But they are not spontaneously happy and joyful like other kids of their age group. They seem like they are carrying something inside. That’s all I can report.