Free Republic

These guys belong in criminal court, on the way to prison. They are traitors - literally, they engaged in an act of insurrection (which the Democrats say is BAAAAAAAAAD).

So glad that I escaped that $hit hole nearly 25 years ago.

From what I can see, how Haaretz is even worse than the New York Times.

Who, exactly, is shooting all of these people? We all know the answer, and it isn’t the Israelis, nor is it the United States. That leaves one potential force, and that would be Hamas. Not so coincidentally, the very same Hamas whose ability to smuggle in arms and to profit off of food shipments was destroyed by the present food distribution method that bypassed them. So they have an incentive to act badly (as if those savages really need an excuse).

I have heard reports that Israel is gearing up to take care of these scumbags themselves. Give it a few weeks.

“I understand the Senate stripped away the part about silencers and SPR’s.”
——————
They, using the Harry Reid-appointed Senate Parliamentarian AS AN EXCUSE (literally hiding behind a woman’s skirt), stripped out the parts that would have ended the need for getting permission to get a suppressor or SBR and be put on the NFA registry. What’s left is no tax - which is nice, but it means that we’ll be in a slightly more gilded cage.

What’s left (and few realize this) is that by having no tax (which the RINOs threw to us as a bone, they did us no favors), they set up a Constitutional challenge to these parts of the NFA - without the tax, this application and registration scheme is nothing more than an infringement upon our right to keep arms (this particular issue has nothing to do with bearing them). This will be challenged, IMHO, within a week or 2 of the bill being signed into law.

January 1, 2027, and the departure of Traitor Thom Tillis can’t come soon enough. Ditto for my scumbag Senator, Cornyn (Cornholio). Two disgusting liars, promising conservative votes and actions, but stabbing us in the back behind the scenes. BEGONE!

*tyrannized

OK, so a 98 year-old, batshit crazy fossil has issued a death threat against both Trump and Netanyahu, basically ordering anyone in the Iranian military, the IRGC, or Iran’s proxies to murder these two leaders. Since everyone in the world claims to believe in fairness, I think it only fair that both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu issue similar orders to members of their military. Let’s see who dies first.

And if the goat-f’ing camel jockeys who have tyrannies Iran for the last 46 years don’t like that, and maybe they should encourage their leaders to be careful what they say and wish for.

Israel is never allowed to win a war any more, not since 1967.

And the U.S. has put itself in that position also, quite voluntarily and, I might add, quite stupidly.

I would personally rather see neither country need to get involved in any wars in the future. But the question is, “how do we accomplish that at the lowest possible cost?“ Because, let’s not kid ourselves, there are some very bad actors around the world, and they have both us and Israel (and the rest of Western Civilization, but they are mostly useless in defending even themselves - they exist because we do) in their sights. To me, the most effective way to deter future conflict that originates from our enemies involves more short-term cost, but most definite long-term gains. That way is actually quite simple: when either Israel or the United States get involved in a war, prosecute it until the other side is forced to unconditionally surrender. That will involve an awful lot of public pressure being brought to bear against rither nation, and particularly against Israel, but if their enemy in such a conflict is completely demolished, the deterrent effect of that on future enemies would be enormous. As it is, all that the enemies of Western Civilization need to do is suck up a lot of punishment, knowing that we or Israel will go away soon enough, because of our moral cowardice in the face of rhetorical pressure from the rest of the world.

Again, I’d rather see no more conflicts in the future anywhere, but that does not reflect humanity’s history, nor the current world situation. There is going to be conflict in the future, and it is the job of sensible and rational people with some intestinal fortitude to make sure that the number of such conflicts is reduced to the minimum possible. That can only be accomplished with great strength - not just military strength, but most particularly great moral strength to see the thing through. What would the world look like today if the allied nations had tired of war by late 1944? After all, the cost in blood and treasure was enormous, and in the case of both Germany and Japan it was known that there would be further enormous costs until they were defeated. Both Nazi Germany and imperial Japan would have survived, and the world would be unrecognizable today. Instead, the leaders of the United States, the Soviet Union and the UK (no one else mattered that much ) understood that our mutual enemies needed to be utterly destroyed, if there was to be any hope for a peaceful world (for a while) after their defeat.

Peace is achieved through strength, military strength to be sure, but most particularly through the moral strength necessary to complete a hard and costly job.

“And the Israeli program started with stolen American uranium….”

Not necessarily. In this, Wikipedia article regarding these Israeli nuclear program https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israel There is an assertion that the CIA believes that Israel stole uranium from the US Navy. Has the CIA ever been trustworthy? Maybe they did, and maybe they didn’t, and I would suggest that we are never going to have any kind of certain knowledge unless a very high ranking Israeli official who is in the no publicly admit it (and I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for that to happen).

My dogs have never saved me in this fashion, and I wouldn’t abandon them under any circumstances. I do not understand how people can be so utterly unfeeling toward an animal, particularly one that put its life on the line to protect them. There is something deeply wrong with these people.

“Richards had apparently woken up with a melody in his head, recorded it with his acoustic guitar and then fallen back asleep.”
————————
Richards had apparently woken up with a melody in his head, recorded it with his acoustic guitar and then passed out again.

There, fixed it.

*pussified

not “classified” - Siri is clearly a Democrat. 🤬

“Man will never understand women. Women understand each other perfectly. That is why they hate each other.”
——————
True. But if you dare to say that in front of your wife or girlfriend, that’ll earn you a night on the couch… which will be fun, because then you can fart in bed, do what you want with the sheets, and watch what you want on TV without anybody complaining about it.

“White men are the $hit at the bottom of the pile and are held responsible for all that’s wrong with the world.”
——————
Until they need something built or fixed.

The simple fact is that the vast majority of physical things that enable life, and quite a convenient one, at that, were designed and built by men. And, for a variety of reasons, mostly by white men. That most certainly doesn’t mean that non-white men are incapable, they most certainly are, but some of those circumstances Involved an almost complete lack of education and opportunity for those non-white men in the past. I would say that in the present day, those should thankfully not be issues. But 99% of women would not even consider doing the jobs that Mike Rowe showed in Dirty Jobs - and without those jobs, all of modern civilization would fall apart in a week.

I could cut your list down to two items:

1) when asked how many guns he owns, a real man will respond, “more than I need, but less than I want.“

2) show them a video of some genuine muscle cars from the 60s and early 70s drag racing, and see what their reaction is. If it’s anything other than a gigantic smile and saying that “I want one”, they are not real men.

Just those two very simple items will act like a Vulcan mind meld.

There’s pretty much nothing wrong with most men. The problem that Democrats have is facing them in the mirror. I can tell you what’s wrong with them for free. They’re a bunch of classified communists. There’s your answer, they are no longer the party of Harry Truman, JFK, Sam Nunn or Scoop Jackson, they are the party of AOC and males who get their balls cut off and, most of all, hating America and doing their level best to destroy it.

Thune, Cornyn and the other ball-less cowards in the Senate are hiding behind the skirts of the unelected partisan hack appointed by Harry Reid as Senate parliamentarian. She has ripped this bill to shreds, and must be fired. If Thune won’t do it, and if other senators won’t pressure him to do it, then they don’t deserve power.

I have utterly had it with John Cornyn, who pretends to be a Republican, but who always manages to maneuver things so that the Democrats get what they want. The parliamentarian threw out the Hearing Protection Act and the Short act, and Cornyn was ready just a few hours later (at 7 o’clock in the morning) with a “fix” that would eliminate the tax. - but keep the NFA registry, and thus keep the requirement that American citizens ask the freaking permission of their government to exercise their rights. He knew it was coming, because it was part of the plan. He has always been hostile to firearms rights. The tax isn’t the issue, it is the registration and permission requirements. Cornyn can go to hell, and Thune with him if they don’t fire this woman, and restore not just the HPA and Short Act as originally written, but all of the other things (like no Medicaid for illegal aliens - why TF are we spending one thin dime on these people?) that this partisan hack stripped out of the bill.

A POTUS does not have that power. But that is not what happened here.

First of all, Section 1 of the 14th Amendment starts as follows:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

The key portion of that clause is the part reading “…and subject to the jurisdiction thereof….”

This is the clause that people in favor of unlimited immigration, and of anchor babies, love to ignore. It is very clear from the debates surrounding the passage of the 14th amendment in Congress (before it was sent to the states for ratification) that certain people were not considered to be within the jurisdiction of the United States. Specifically mentioned by the main drafter of the amendment were children of foreign diplomats. It is obvious that this entire clause was incorporated into the 14th amendment for the purpose of ensuring that the recently freed slaves and their children would be citizens, with all of the rights that such status entails. Notably, it was not until 1924, 56 years after ratification, that this country recognized native Americans as citizens by birth. If it didn’t apply to Native Americans, who were born here, because they were viewed as having allegiance to their respective nations, and if the individual Native Americans were thus not considered subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, then how on earth could such a clause apply to the children of people who are either visiting here legally (tourists) or those who are here illegally, just because they were born on our soil? After all, the tourists intend to go back to their country of origin and clearly believe themselves subject to the jurisdiction of their home nation, and the people here illegally clearly don’t believe that the jurisdiction of this country applies to them in any way.

Note that there has never been a specific ruling by the Supreme Court on this issue. The only jurisprudence on this issue is some “dicta” (IOW pure judicial opinion not having any bearing on a case) in a single case. So, this is an unresolved issue.

The reason that President Trump issued the executive order in question is not because he was trying to overturn a portion of the Constitution. Instead, what he was doing was drawing a line in the sand. His entire intent is to stop the whole idea of anchor babies. This clause of the 14th amendment is in dispute. He knew full well that by issuing this executive order, someone (or many someones) would start a lawsuit like the one that was that issue in yesterday‘s decision. The whole goal was simply to get the Supreme Court to address the meaning of this part of the 14th amendment. I am certain that if the Court determines that the 14th amendment allows for anchor babies, President Trump will respect that decision - he will certainly criticize the justices and their “logic,” but he will respect the decision.