HOME/ABOUT  Prayer  SCOTUS  ProLife  BangList  Aliens  StatesRights  ConventionOfStates  WOT  HomosexualAgenda  GlobalWarming  Corruption  Taxes  Congress  Fraud  MediaBias  GovtAbuse  Tyranny  Obama  ObamaCare  Elections  Polls  Debates  Trump  Carson  Cruz  Bush  OPSEC  Benghazi  InfoSec  BigBrother  IRS  Scandals  TalkRadio  TeaParty  FreeperBookClub  HTMLSandbox  FReeperEd  FReepathon  CopyrightList  Copyright/DMCA Notice 

And now less than $1k to the yellow! Let's get 'er done! Thank you very much for your loyal support, Jim

Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Free Republic 4th Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $78,514
Woo hoo!! And now over 89%!! Less than $9.5k to go!! Thank you all very much!!

Posts by Let_It_Be_So

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • The GOP’s “Abolish the IRS” Crackpots

    11/29/2015 1:20:25 PM PST · 26 of 55
    Let_It_Be_So to NaturalBornConservative

    Weak attempt at setting up a false premise and arguing from said premise.

    Most proposals concerning the IRS have as a follow, “abolish the IRS as we know it”. Of course, as long as there are taxes there will be tax collectors (or a system designed to ensure that taxes are collected).

    The IRS, as we know it, has evolved into much more than a system to collect taxes. And THAT system (including the massive tax code/regulations) needs to be abolished or reformed beyond all recognition.

  • State By State Map That Says It All (GOP Dominance Of States)

    11/04/2015 3:53:24 PM PST · 34 of 39
    Let_It_Be_So to Amendment10

    Exactly. Is the “Convention of States” concept getting any momentum?

    Just curious, since I don’t see a lot of talk about it at this point. But I may be a bit “out of touch” on this issue.

  • Boehner Warns Conservatives About The Tea Party: Reavows Calling Ted Cruz That Jack-Ass (Video)

    09/27/2015 3:36:53 PM PDT · 46 of 62
    Let_It_Be_So to 2ndDivisionVet

    Reportedly, the House of Representatives holds the purse strings of the Federal government.

    Let’s see, exactly what was the level of spending in Washington at the time he was elected Speaker and exactly what is the level of spending in Washington at the time he leaves that office at the end of September?

    The answer tells us all we need to know about how “successful” he was.

  • Cruz rebukes Carson for comments about Muslim president [Original title]

    09/21/2015 1:20:27 PM PDT · 140 of 255
    Let_It_Be_So to editor-surveyor

    “We cannot set religious tests for office in our laws.”

    True enough. I don’t see where Carson ever suggested that we do.

    By analogy, a self-described satan worshipper has the constitutional right to try to get his name on the ballot (assuming he meets all other qualifications other than his religious beliefs), but if one of his opponents expressed his opinion that a satan worshipper should not be ELECTED President that’s perfectly okay.

    He might lose all the support from the satan worshippers (and their supporters) around the nation, but he might also gain the support of many voters who happen to agree with his stance. It’s still okay for him to express his opinion on the matter.

    Absolutely nothing illegal or unconstitutional about it.

  • GOP leaders face tough test in Congress to keep govt open

    09/21/2015 8:02:12 AM PDT · 34 of 36
    Let_It_Be_So to Sacajaweau

    “The babies are still being killed. That’s not even the issue. The protest is that they are being sold for parts.
    The problem is, of course, abortion itself. And it’s legal. Overturn Roe vs Wade.”

    While I don’t disagree with your basic point, it seems to me that there is another point with regard to this issue (and actually many other spending decisions made by Congress).

    Specifically, it has to do with whether the government (taxpayers) SHOULD pay for a particular program. IOW, even if it’s technically “legal” to do so, does that mean that the taxpayers should be asked to pay for it?

  • Dr. Ben Carson: President Should Be "Sworn In On A Stack Of Bibles,Not A Koran"

    09/21/2015 7:48:35 AM PDT · 74 of 88
    Let_It_Be_So to DoodleDawg

    “..and saying that someone should not run because they are a Muslim.”

    I haven’t seen any quotes where Carson has said a Muslim shouldn’t be allowed to run.

    On the other hand, what I have seen are quotes where Carson basically says it’s his opinion that this country shouldn’t elect a Muslim to the highest office in the land and anyone who is elected to that office should be sworn in by making the oath while placing his hand on a bible rather than a koran.

    It would be analogous to saying that an active Ku Klux Klan member (or an avowed satan worshipper, or worshipper of the moon goddess, etc) shouldn’t be elected to the Presidency. He or she could run, but it would not be a good thing for the country for the American electorate to vote such a person into that office.

    In other words, it’s Carson’s opinion on who should and should not be elected, as opposed to who should and should not be allowed to put their name on the ballot...and as such does not violate the Constitution.

  • 'Common Misunderstanding of Constitution Has Led to Serious Erosion of Freedom [Video]

    09/09/2015 11:15:36 AM PDT · 41 of 44
    Let_It_Be_So to TexasFreeper2009

    “All that remains is for the now all powerful president to destroy the courts and the transformation to a dictatorship will be complete.”

    Except that the Constitution provides a process for the States to “check” any or all of the three federal branches via an Article V convention of states. The time to invoke that process is at hand.

  • 'Common Misunderstanding of Constitution Has Led to Serious Erosion of Freedom [Video]

    09/09/2015 8:02:30 AM PDT · 32 of 44
    Let_It_Be_So to Yulee

    “It takes a unanimous decision to convict a man. Why not a unanimous decision to determine if a law is Constitutional. Where there is a dissenting opinion, there is doubt.”

    Interesting. On the other hand, what if
    1. a state (say, Massachussets) passed a law banning personal ownership of firearms,

    2. it is appealed to the federal bench based on the assertion that it violates the US Constitution’s 2nd ammendment,

    3. Federal judge upholds the state’s law

    4. it is appealed to the USSC and it is also upheld because the vote was 8-1 (only one Justice ruled that the state’s ban on firearms was constitutional)

    5. and since it wasn’t unanimous, the state’s law stands and firearms are banned. other states follow suit, etc.

  • BREAKING: [Clerk Kim] Davis held in contempt taken by U.S. Marshals.

    09/03/2015 4:08:44 PM PDT · 657 of 747
    Let_It_Be_So to Ransomed

    “...but if she is refusing to issue licenses for gays because there is no KY law telling her she must do so, why not continue to do so for others in the meantime? Has she said?”

    Not sure of her “official” response to your question, but it seems to me that she would then be opening herself up to the charge that she is not treating everyone equally, eg illegally discriminating, etc.

    As it is, since the Kentucky laws (as well as a host of laws in many other states) have been declared unconstitutional by the five black robes, the Kentucky legislature must now meet to re-write their marriage laws in a way they think could pass constitutional muster (or, some other type of legislative remedy).

    Therefore, perhaps Mrs. Davis (probably upon advice of legal counsel) figures it would be best to simply stop issuing ANY marriage licenses until the matter has been cleared up when the Kentucky legislature meets in January.

  • Obama wins critical backing on Iran deal, virtually ensuring passage in Congress

    09/02/2015 8:16:21 AM PDT · 9 of 10
    Let_It_Be_So to KarlInOhio

    The headline is inaccurate, to say the least.

    Nevertheless, it would be an “Obama deal” only. The next President could, and should, revoke the “deal” as his/her first order of business 16 months from now.

    Of course, that could be too late.

  • Obama: Climate Deniers Who Ignore Science Are on Their Own Shrinking Island

    09/01/2015 5:26:24 PM PDT · 73 of 109
    Let_It_Be_So to Bob434

    “...man produces just 400 ppm CO2...”

    I have no doubt that you know MUCH more than I about this, but I’ve read elsewhere that as a trace gas, the 400 ppm figure was total CO2, not the figure attributable to man.

    Am I wrong on this?

  • Mysterious Russian Statue Is 11,000 Years Old - Twice As Old As The Pyramids

    08/30/2015 5:04:08 PM PDT · 50 of 56
    Let_It_Be_So to TruthWillWin

    Per article:
    “It stands 9.2ft (2.8 metres) in height but originally was 17.4ft (5.3 metres) tall, as high as a two storey house.”

  • Dream ticket Trump, Cruz to announce something very big over the next two weeks in Washington

    08/28/2015 10:51:48 AM PDT · 92 of 109
    Let_It_Be_So to moovova

    “Could you support a Trump/Cruz ticket?”

    I could, if Trump happens to get the nomination, but would be more comfortable with a President Cruz.

  • Dream ticket Trump, Cruz to announce something very big over the next two weeks in Washington

    08/28/2015 6:29:53 AM PDT · 6 of 109
    Let_It_Be_So to Enlightened1

    I could support a Cruz-Trump ticket, in that order.

  • Undercover Planned Parenthood Videos Were Altered, Analysis Finds (MSN "analysts")

    08/27/2015 10:16:23 AM PDT · 13 of 33
    Let_It_Be_So to pabianice

    Obviously, PP is hoping for the great unwashed to see a headline using words such as “manipulated” and dismiss the entire matter as being deceptive and therefore “unreliable”.

    This could be said of any lengthy video of an undercover operation where excerpts are disseminated to social and other media outlets (rather than allowing the media to do their own “editing”).

    If all PP is alleging is that the videos were edited (with such an undercover operation, it would be shocking if many hours of video was not edited), then one need only produce the original unedited video to the Congressional Committee.

  • A little girl is dead Frustrated moms #BlackLivesMatter Facebook rant goes viral

    08/22/2015 11:55:19 PM PDT · 11 of 40
    Let_It_Be_So to Dallas59

    Strong language aside, this woman speaks some truth...tells it like it is (and should be) out there in the real world.

    It won’t matter to the thugs/criminals she is talking to, but there are millions of other Black mothers and fathers who can receive this strong mother’s words and stand with her and begin to truly change the mindset of the sub-culture for the better.

    She is taking a strong stand. How many will stand with her?

  • British Leftists Want Bibi Netanyahu Arrested for War Crimes (over 74,000 sign online petition)

    08/21/2015 2:33:12 PM PDT · 4 of 17
    Let_It_Be_So to Dave346

    “British Leftists Want Bibi Netanyahu Arrested for War Crimes (over 74,000 sign online petition)”

    With several billion persons occupying space on the Earth, one could get hundreds of thousands (maybe millions) to sign a petition stipulating that Leftists as a whole are responsible for significantly reducing the quality of life for all of humanity. So what?

  • HuffPo Writer: Pretty Much Everything is Racist

    07/14/2015 2:07:15 PM PDT · 32 of 41
    Let_It_Be_So to rightistight

    Poppycock! Or should I say balderdash!? Well, ok.


  • Mike Huckabee: Conservatives Can Ignore Gay Marriage Ruling Like Lincoln Ignored Dred Scott

    06/28/2015 2:17:29 PM PDT · 18 of 20
    Let_It_Be_So to Hugin

    Thank you for your explanatory reply! Based on this information, then, it is in the hands of Congress to pass legislation which stipulates those exceptions and to issue regulations pertaining thereto.

    Very interesting. Should a future Congress elect to reasert this power, (as we all know this Congress will not), in theory no one could claim to be a legitimate party in case of a lawsuit, nor could any judicial entity be a legitimate jurisdiction to hear such a lawsuit. I suspect, however, an attempt by such a bold Congress to reclaim their original power would be challenged in the courts and we could find ourselves in a true constitutional crisis should the SCOTUS reject their constitutional argument. I suppose that is when the Congress would simply make it clear that the SCOTUS opinion is of null effect and ignore the black robes altogether.

    That makes me wonder how the “people” would handle such a crisis?

  • Mike Huckabee: Conservatives Can Ignore Gay Marriage Ruling Like Lincoln Ignored Dred Scott

    06/28/2015 6:19:10 AM PDT · 14 of 20
    Let_It_Be_So to Hugin

    Your post: “Congress has the authority under Article III to put any law it passes out of the authority of any court to rule as unconstitutional. They could also attach criminal penalties against any judge who tried to do so. Of course it would require both houses, and the presidency, and some balls to enact it into law.”

    If true, wouldn’t this put Congress and the Executive beyond the “check and balance” principle? Seems that there would be a second side to that sword.

    Hypothetical question: What if Congress passed a bill and the Executive signed it into law which said in essence that the right to bear arms applied only to state federal police forces, not individuals?

    Or, what if a law was passed which said that the 1st amendment applied only to entities that produced information through the “press” (newspapers and magazines only)? Or, a law which said that individuals could indeed “freely practice their religion” as long such practice did not violate any subsequently passed “hate crime” legislation. ETC

    Just wondering. I’m probably missing something.

  • Enjoyed my years engaging in discussions on Free Republic, but I am done. Time to face reality.

    06/23/2015 3:00:31 PM PDT · 152 of 337
    Let_It_Be_So to Blood of Tyrants

    The basic problem with the state of this Republic is two-fold, imo. We should at least try to address these two things before throwing in the towel:

    1. Failure to adhere to the founders’ vision of a limited government with enumerated powers, as articulated in the 10th amendment. Just think of the reduction of our concerns/fears of an “out of control” federal government if there was no EPA, Dept of Education, Dept of Health, Federal involvement in welfare/food stamps, etc, etc.

    2. Failure to restrict or limit the amount of money (or spending authority) available to the federal government, thereby giving those in power a virtual blank check to continue amassing power and control over our every day lives (think something on the order of a Balanced Budget Amendment with an upper limit clearly defined and tied to the nation’s GDP, or something similar).

    If this country addresses these two things, we would have an all new ballgame. Other pressing issues such as immigration, national defense and other foreign affairs matters, infrastructure such as the interstate highway system, how to fund the limited federal government (eg system of taxation, etc.) would be much more manageable it seems to me.

    So, give up? I say no, not until this mechanism given to us by the founders (Convention of States) is given a good old-fashioned try.

  • Why Can't Republican Presidential Debates be More Like the NCAA Playoffs?

    05/31/2015 3:03:09 PM PDT · 19 of 20
    Let_It_Be_So to RIghtwardHo

    It would take four NATIONWIDE primary elections to determine who advances to the final two candidates. Voters would be asked to go to the voting booth 3 times (and a 4th time in the General Election)

    Sweet 16 National Primary Election, held first Tuesday of April preceding the General Election: Sixteen candidates on the ballot, the top 8 advance

    Elite Eight National Primary Election, held first Tuesday of May preceding the General Election: Eight candidates on the ballot, the top 4 advance

    Final Four National Primary Election, held first Tuesday of June preceding the General Election: Four candidates on the ballot, the top two advance.

    The final two candidates would be brought to the national party convention for selection of the party candidate to face the other party’s candidate in the General election.

  • When did you give up MSM news?

    05/30/2015 3:15:01 PM PDT · 95 of 114
    Let_It_Be_So to MNDude

    Late ‘80s, I believe around 1988 or close to it. Tuned in to several of the channels from time to time during extraordinary events (eg 9-11, Gulf War, major disasters, Presidential election returns, Clinton impeachment, etc), but for all practical purposes, quit watching “mainstream” news outlets 99% of the time.

  • What's Up With Amazon Product Reviews?

    05/30/2015 5:06:59 AM PDT · 35 of 48
    Let_It_Be_So to alexander_busek

    Thank you for your post. Helps starting off the day with a hearty laugh!

  • PURE VANITY: IF you could put an end to one specific thing, what would it be and why?

    05/29/2015 4:45:41 PM PDT · 42 of 91
    Let_It_Be_So to NormsRevenge

    Income tax system as we know it

  • Christian one-liners

    04/19/2015 8:40:12 AM PDT · 7 of 13
    Let_It_Be_So to NKP_Vet

    Genesis 1:1 In the beginning, God...

    God didn’t begin in the beginning...God began the beginning.

  • Study: Earths Orbit Causes Global Warming Today And Climate Change 1.4 Billion Years Ago

    03/11/2015 4:11:12 PM PDT · 35 of 36
    Let_It_Be_So to Steve_Seattle

    Answer to your first question: Yes

    Answer to your second question: It can’t

  • MSNBC reporter asks Rick Perry if hes smart enough to be president

    12/11/2014 8:52:21 AM PST · 70 of 95
    Let_It_Be_So to rfreedom4u

    “His response should have been:
    ‘Compare my college transcripts to Obama’s and ask me again.’”


  • On the Staten Island Decision: The grand jury may have gotten it wrong on Eric Garner.

    12/04/2014 10:05:26 AM PST · 38 of 39
    Let_It_Be_So to FunkyZero

    I agree 100% with your assessment of this situation. It has to do with “proportional” reaction by the police. Had this man been suspected of being a “dangerous” criminal, perhaps such a “take-down” would have been considered reasonable and proportional.

    However, the police knew who they were dealing with (a petty criminal with no history of being “dangerous”, as far as I know) as he had been arrested several times in the past for illegally selling cigarettes. It’s also illegal to jaywalk, litter the sidewalk, drive 40mph in a 35mph area, solicit prostitution, loitering, panhandling and any number of relatively minor infractions of the law.

    Proportionality of the police response is the one and only issue here, and it seems to be an inappropriate response. I’m not talking about whether the Grand Jury’s decision was correct, or incorrect, as that’s a different discussion. Had the response been proportional, the Grand Jury would have never been involved as the man would not have lost his life in a “take-down” in the first place.

    To me, it matters not whether this response is a common or accepted practice. It needs to be an uncommon one and deemed unacceptable.

  • The Benefits of Being Politically Correct(not a satire but reads like one)

    11/29/2014 6:21:50 AM PST · 18 of 31
    Let_It_Be_So to TigerLikesRooster

    The “politically correct” phenomenon boils down to a desire by the “elite” among us to enforce group-think (or, minimize individualism). It is intolerance in the name of tolerance.

    When I was a young man, I understood that there would be people who had opinions (beliefs) different from my own, but had been taught to adopt the attitude of tolerance in the name of free speech.

    We often heard people say “I vehemently disagree with what he said, but will defend with my life his right to say it”, or something similar. At the same time, we seemed to have the ability to discern when a “line” had been crossed, that we would not tolerate so easily (eg speech that attempted to incite to riot, or was libelous, etc).

    Now, it has often become an attitude of judging one’s heart and eschewing tolerance for intolerance: “I vehemently disagree with what he said (believes), his heart is full of hate, and I will do what I can to punish him for saying (believing) it”.

    This “politically correct” attitude has no place in a free and open society.

  • Think its unusually warm outside? Then you must be left-wing: Climate change beliefs affect

    11/26/2014 5:44:11 PM PST · 21 of 23
    Let_It_Be_So to eyedigress

    Another Reagan quote (where Reagan was paraphrasing American Humorist Josh Billings):

    “Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.”

  • BOLD Solution: Power to the States [FR idea]

    11/18/2014 9:38:31 PM PST · 28 of 63
    Let_It_Be_So to conservatism_IS_compassion

    “I would favor having 2 prospective SCOTUS justices run as running mates of a presidential candidate.”

    Interesting idea, but I’m not sure it would be a good thing, depending on who is elected POTUS. For example, Obama would have brought four new Justices with him in the ‘08 and ‘12 elections...and four others would have had to step down. If the four that had to step down were the more conservative variety, then that would tilt the SCOTUS too far to the left. Or am I missing something in this scenario?

  • BOLD Solution: Power to the States [FR idea]

    11/18/2014 3:23:34 PM PST · 24 of 63
    Let_It_Be_So to Arthur Wildfire! March

    This shotgun approach to amending the Constitution has virtually no chance of succeeding, imo. That said, I applaud your thinking outside the box (way outside) and attempting to get others to begin thinking.

    To me, a constitutional convention (state-initiated only) limited to only two things, perhaps three, would go a long way toward restoring the original intent of the framers.

    One, an amendment that requires Congress to stay within revenues when appropriating funds for spending...requiring a balanced budget. There would need to be a provision to allow an exception in cases of national emergency.

    Two, an amendment that restores the original intent behind the enumerated powers principle. This would force all federal spending to cease on all programs not specifically enumerated (with debate on issues such as phasing in the cuts, applying “savings” to retire the national debt, returning “saved” monies to the states/taxpayers, etc).

    The only other possible amendment would be one to establish term limits on appointed judges (including the USSC).

  • Massachusetts Town Mulls Nation's First Total Tobacco Ban

    11/16/2014 5:20:33 PM PST · 30 of 51
    Let_It_Be_So to Drango

    “The people have a fundamental right to proscribe items”

    Regardless, is it not desirable to promote freedom? Although the people “can” vote to limit your freedom (with certain specified exceptions contained in the Bill of Rights), freedom-loving people should resist such efforts.

  • Smug Obama administration duped the public

    11/16/2014 10:45:58 AM PST · 10 of 32
    Let_It_Be_So to DeweyCA

    Headline, “Smug Obama administration duped the public”, is not really accurate in that ALL polls taken of the “public” before, during and after passage of Obamacare showed that only a minority favored the thing. Many of those who voted for the thing have since been voted out of office.

    The only people who were truly “duped” were Obama’s and the Democrats’ core constituency? While their numbers are significant, they do not represent the “public” at large...yet

  • The GOP should threaten publicly to use Obamas amnesty precedent once theyre back in White House

    11/13/2014 9:54:31 PM PST · 29 of 34
    Let_It_Be_So to robert14

    “If he can wipe immigration laws off the books with his signature he can cancel the next election with his signature”

    Not really.

    Just take a poll of American voters and ask the question: “Would you support the President of the United States suspending elections and taking away your ability to elect your leaders?”.

    His attempting such a thing would be overwhelmingly condemned by almost every voter across the American political landscape, probably to the tune of at least 98% of the electorate. He would be impeached forthwith and convicted by even a Democrat-majority Senate.

  • How the GOP Should Deal With Obama's Incorrigibility

    11/07/2014 8:58:20 AM PST · 49 of 54
    Let_It_Be_So to Kozak

    As much as I would like to see major funding reductions (if not outright abolishment of certain agencies), the fact remains that it would take a “veto-proof” Senate majority to make such moves stick, would it not?

    Short of a Convention of States type effort (which could force a re-thinking of the entire role of the federal government vis-a-vis the reinforcement of the original intent and application of the 10th amendment), perhaps a more pragmatic approach would be to pass a bill that would basically shift existing funding to the States in the form of block grants. This would allow for a deliberative process in each state as to what program(s) would continue and what programs would basically sunset and go away.

    When Obama vetoes this kind of Bill, he would not be able to do so while asserting that Congress is trying to “do away” with Education (DOE), the environment (EPA), the less fortunate among us (HHS), etc. The Congress can then say, “we aren’t making that judgement, we’re just wanting these decisions to be made at the State level”.

    Then,even if Congress doesn’t override Obama’s veto, the case can be made to the electorate that if you like the idea of having these decisions (and the funding that goes with it) made at the state level, give us the rest of the Senators we need to override such vetoes and/or a conservative President in 2016.

  • America faces most dangerous two years in 150 years

    11/05/2014 7:47:08 AM PST · 54 of 70
    Let_It_Be_So to Dick Bachert

    I don’t disagree with much of your post, and I appreciate your cautious optimism, but the reality is that major changes (via legislative bills passed by Congress) to the decades-long buildup to the federal bureaucracy would most likely get a veto from the Executive. The number of votes to override a veto is 60 votes in the Senate, and there aren’t enough Senators to override a veto.

    While it is true that Congress can do some things that some of us would view in a positive light, I don’t see how a major dismantling of the alphabet agencies (EPA, DOE, etc) can take place as long as the Executive uses his veto pen.

    I tend to believe that the long-term answer to bringing the country back closer to the federalist principles underlying the original Constitutional Republic is through a “limited agenda” Convention of States approach.

  • Steel Plant Manager to Obama: Why Are Health Care Costs Rising?

    10/05/2014 11:41:43 AM PDT · 13 of 25
    Let_It_Be_So to Nachum

    “because it turns out that this year, and in fact over the course of the last four years, premiums have gone up at the slowest rate in 50 years.”

    Obama gives a non-answer.
    The question was about “health care costs”, which isn’t restricted to premiums alone. The rate of increase in premiums may (or may not) have slowed but the costs for actual health care have increased considerably when considering increased premiums, increased deductibles and increased co-pays...for everyone except the dependent class that is.

  • Two stories offering more confirmation that Democrats are basically nitwits

    09/25/2014 11:58:40 AM PDT · 7 of 10
    Let_It_Be_So to afsnco

    (Just a couple of questions that have resulted in many a sleepless night for me.)

    How witty is a nit anyway? Does a nit who has not wit ever get invited to a wit party?

    How many half-wits does it take to make a nitwit?

    And now you’ve introduced the subwit into the conversation. I suppose a subwit is equivalent to a half-wit, but I’m really not sure of anything anymore.

    I’m close to giving up.

  • 300,000 marchers ring climate warning bell in NYC, around globe

    09/21/2014 8:17:49 PM PDT · 51 of 107
    Let_It_Be_So to ProtectOurFreedom

    “What, exactly, do these people propose to do about their perceived problem other than meet and talk with fellow-travellers?”

    The more “informed” of the crowd would say something like:

    “Why, uh, replace the evil fossil fuels and, uh, other carbon emissions with green, renewables, like uh, wind and solar power...of course! Don’t you flat-earthers care about saving the planet?? Good grief!”

  • Study warns of sudden climate change woes

    09/15/2014 2:51:59 PM PDT · 29 of 29
    Let_It_Be_So to Citizen Zed

    “The panel called on the government to create an early warning system.”

    It will be called the “CLEWS” (The Chicken Little Early Warning System).

    There is already something in existence that could be called a CLEWS, see UN IPPC Assessment Reports. They have a lot of Chicken Littles, issue a lot of “early warnings” and think of it as a system, sort of.

  • New Horizons Sights Tiny Pluto Moon As Spacecraft Races Toward Dwarf Planet

    09/15/2014 12:48:09 PM PDT · 2 of 24
    Let_It_Be_So to BenLurkin

    A plutoon!

  • Poll: Majority See Obama As Divisive Failure

    09/09/2014 8:10:06 AM PDT · 19 of 30
    Let_It_Be_So to skeeter

    Progressive/Liberal/Leftists SOP:

    If POTUS is Democrat/Liberal:

    1. Hide or de-emphasize anything negative
    2. Blast from the rooftop anything positive

    If POTUS is Republican/Conservative:

    1. Hide or de-emphasize anything positive
    2. Blast from the rooftop anything negative

  • Justices: Can't make employers cover contraception

    06/30/2014 11:01:49 AM PDT · 39 of 49
    Let_It_Be_So to DestroyLiberalism

    I don’t see how simply ignoring the ruling would do them any good. If Hobby Lobby contracts with an insurance entity and the health insurance coverage for the Hobby Lobby employees excludes paying for contraceptives, what can anyone actually do to “punish” Hobby Lobby when payment for the contraceptives is denied at the point of sale or upon receipt of a bill for payment?

    The covered employee could file a lawsuit, but it wouldn’t get past first base in light of this USSC ruling, would it? If the Obama administration attempts to levy a fine against Hobby Lobby for refusing to pay for contraceptives, and Hobby Lobby simply refuses to pay the fine, what could the administration do about it?

  • How did the Progressives Empower Themselves at our Expense for Over 140 Years?

    06/28/2014 10:56:35 AM PDT · 11 of 31
    Let_It_Be_So to Oldpuppymax

    There are many ways progressives have empowered themselves, but the fact remains that those in elective office over the past several decades were “empowered” by our fellow Americans who voted them into positions of power in the first place.

    The “takeover” of the Judiciary happened by those in elective office appointing the members of the Judiciary (or consenting thereto).

    Bottom line: barring a hostile takeover, progressives could not have gained such power without a majority of our friends, neighbors and the rest of the voting public allowing it to happen, and in many cases, openly advocating for it to happen.

    Most recent example: voting for Barak Obama not once, but actually pulling the lever for him a second time.

    Even now, if enough people wanted it to happen, the Founders provided a mechanism to correct wrongs. Sadly, I don’t believe enough people want it to happen (yet).

  • John Pinette, stand-up comedian, dead at 50

    04/07/2014 7:53:24 PM PDT · 24 of 26
    Let_It_Be_So to Red in Blue PA

    At the waterpark...

    “So I’m in flipflops and my speedo...(audience laughter)

    Don’t visualize that!!! It’s burn your corneas and give you nightmares!”

    Funny guy. RIP, John.

  • Juan Williams Clashes with Eric Bolling: We Need America to Be a Gun-Free Zone

    04/05/2014 2:52:49 PM PDT · 38 of 96
    Let_It_Be_So to ThePatriotsFlag

    “He means a fum free zone like HIS HOUSE, he actiually stated on air there were no guns in his house...”

    I’m willing to give up all my fum, personally. Never used it much anyway.

  • IRS to give up, release all Lerner e-mails, documents

    03/09/2014 4:16:58 PM PDT · 47 of 48
    Let_It_Be_So to chessplayer

    My take:

    Giving a written order or directive to scrutinize conservative groups or groups with conservative-sounding names was most likely avoided. Rather, the directive was likely a verbal one, in a room with doors closed and recording devices absent.

    Therefore, emails would most likely not contain any kind of “smoking gun” evidence of wrongding.

  • Christine Todd Whitman: Yes, the EPA Has the Power to Stop Climate Change

    02/24/2014 6:25:41 AM PST · 64 of 72
    Let_It_Be_So to dr_lew

    “They think that the massive emissions, and they are that, of CO2 etc. by our industrial activities is inexorably changing the climate according to Natural Law, i.e. physics. It’s far from a ridiculous assertion.”

    One can make an otherwise reasonable assertion (massive emissions by industrial activities is inexorably changing the climate) that turns out to be ridiculously overstated when tested against observable reality, as has been shown to be the case here.

    What is ridiculous is for those same “asserters” to continue to put forward the same assertion even in the face of evidence to the contrary...and for any thinking person to continue to believe it.