Free Republic

What you call purist, others call principled. And Mitt Romney does not share conservative principles. He is the perfect candidate to marginalize the Tea Party. With a GOP nomination of Romney, the media will finally be vindicated in labeling the Tea Party as extremists - "He's a sensible Republican, favors gun control, global warming taxes and government run health care, unlike those fringe lunatics, the Tea Party."

Unless you care about a candidate's kin color or religion, there is not a nickels worth of difference between the current president and Romney. If you think otherwise, then you don't know Mitt Romney.

What you call purist, others call principled. And Mitt Romney does not share conservative principles. He is the perfect candidate to marginalize the Tea Party. With a GOP nomination of Romney, the media will finally be vindicated in labeling the Tea Party as extremists - "He's a sensible Republican, favors gun control, global warming taxes and government run health care, unlike those fringe lunatics, the Tea Pary."

Unless you care about a candidate's kin color or religion, there is not a nickels worth of difference between the current president and Romney. If you think otherwise, then you don't know Mitt Romney.

I'm not a Romney fan either but if what you say is true then can we expect to see an Obama bumper sticker on your car if Romney is the candidate? It may as well be there if that's how you feel.

To paraphrase a real Republican (hint - google Lincoln, despotism, Russia):

When it comes to this I should prefer voting for some other candidate that makes no pretense of loving liberty - Obama, for instance, where Gun Control, Global Warming, and government mandated health care can be taken pure, without the base alloy of hypocrisy.

But Homeland Security should look into the possibility that cops can and will be co-opted by the jihadists.

I disagree. Instead of treating people like convicts because they purchased an airline ticket or as you now suggest, profiling sworn law enforcement personnel, maybe they should be profiling Islamic persons with ties to anti-American causes. But I guess that's a job for another administration as the current Secretary of Homeland Security thinks US military veterans and Tea Party activist pose the most significant threat to her and her party and thus America.

State and local officers need to be flying at the request of their agency. In other words, it has to be work related, and it will require their superiors to sign off on their trip.

“The officer was not an air marshal and we are trying to establish contact with the agent.”

State and local law enforcement officers in the line of duty and all federal law enforcement agents are allowed to be armed on commercial flights. It's a great deal for them. When they arrive at the airport, they get met at the terminal by representatives of whatever agency is responsible for policing the airport. They are then walked past security and proceed directly to their gate. They pre-board the plane, meet the flight and cabin crew, and are seated. if they're not flying armed, then they are expected to go the TSA route. Which option would you choose?

They are not expected to leave loaded magazines behind though... whoever did this will definitely catch hell for drawing negative attention to the sweet deal they have.

The level of intellect on this forum as fallen so fat from this time in 2004. It is hardly more than DummieUnderground or the Puffington Host now.

Found it.

http://www.nrapvf.org/

From where did you come up with that list of endorsements?

NRA-PVF Endorsement Policy

We are rapidly approaching the time when NRA’s Political Action Committee the NRA Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF) will begin issuing endorsements in elections across the country.

As always in an election year, we receive many calls and e-mails inquiring about our endorsement policy in general, and specific races in particular. That trend has certainly held up this year, as we have received many inquiries about high profile races, such as the Nevada Senate race. For the record, NRA-PVF has not yet announced any ratings or endorsements in this race.
With few exceptions, and for several reasons, we generally do not announce ratings or endorsements until closer to the elections. There are still votes to be graded and other information to be evaluated prior to issuing an accurate grade as Election Day nears.

I find the article "President Urges Unified Federal-State Action Against Sedition" fascinating.

NY Times quoting someone as saying "Fifth Column Tries to 'Soften Us" and using terms like "internal enemies"... and now they are part of the counter-intelligence wing of that fifth column.

Mr Firby did a great job handling himself with the press. When they tried to bait him with the comment about working hard for what he’s got (and in the process define the shooting as being in defense material things), he didn’t take the bait, he kept the focus on preventing boldly harm against himself and his family.

Great story, thanks for posting.

Why wouldn’t he support him? To a liberal, it’s his vote, not his mind that matters. This guy is a brain-dead rubber stamp, (from the DemocRat prospective) would that Obama had 534 more like him in Congress.

So then just like McCain, if he decides to run for the Presidency he will have to petition the Congress for an SR511, right???

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-sr511/text

No, there is nothing in the Constitution which requires a non-binding Senate Resolution as a qualification for the office of President. And if you read the text of that non-binding Senate resolution, it does not bode well for the birther argument. I'm sure it's author, an avowed socialist from VT, would have written one for Obama if asked.

"... if not born in the US, he'd be a naturalized citizen for Constitutional purposes. This is because he would be a citizen under statutes enacted by Congress. Such have been ruled to be "naturalized" by the Supreme Court, since Congress only has power to make people citizens via naturalization. It's in the Constiutition, article I, section 8."

Bullshit. My wife gave birth to my son while stationed with me in Europe.

www.uscis.gov/naturalization

Just like John McCain, who was born in Panama, my son did not have to go through the naturalization process - he is a citizen by birth.

BTW:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

That's Article II Section 1, dumbass.

"Except for the fact that you have redefine what a natural born citizen is to pretend your guy is one.

You’d better wise up and reevaluate which side you want to be on."

Yeah, my post definitely signals 'my guy' is Obama.

I'll reiterate:

They just passed a takeover of 1/6th of the US economy by using every kind of deceit and corruption, and over the objection of a bipartisan coalition representing most Americans. The is more than enough substance with which we can attack them, without looking like Republican’s answer to the Daily Kos Kooks.

I have no doubt about which side I am on, and I know in time we will win, despite the presence of Birthers in our ranks.

Here's an academic exercise for you:
Explain how Obama's birth certificate nullifies what 219 members of the US House of Representatives did yesterday.

Accept for the fact that Barrack’s mother was a US Citizen and no matter where she was on the planet when her water broke, her child was born a US Citizen.

What the Democrats did to this country yesterday is no joke. You’d better wise up with this idiotic popcorn fart of an attack that enables the Democrats to paint all of Obama’s critics “birthers”.

They just passed a takeover of 1/6th of the US economy by using every kind of deceit and corruption, and over the objection of a bipartisan coalition representing most Americans. The is more than enough substance with which we can attack them, without looking like Republican’s answer to the Daily Kos Kooks.

If Bush lied, was this guy lying as well?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygQVyznw2zE

Last I heard about Sarah Palin and church was back in December 2008 when someone tried to burn down the one to which she belongs.



Link to Moonbat source for story

Liberals really do hate that place ay?

A $15 Billion “jobs” bill on top of everything else Congress has done since 01/20/09 is a drop in the bucket. Anyone suppose they’re picking their battles, and that perhaps the purpose of this is to grab a headline that debunks the Democrat’s “Party of Obstruction” manta that will be forthcoming after the ObamaCare summit this week?

But Jewish activists also see the joint work as an opening for cooperation with the Hispanic community on other issues, such as Israel.

Mexico has a history of supporting the Palestinian Authority. I guess the Jews are blind too.

Opposing Israel is a staple of modern leftist ideology (i. e. liberalism) - an ideology to which at least 70% of American Jews subscribe. It's not too hard to find liberal Israelis who exhibit the same bad judgement.

I was going to say "Jewish by birth, liberal by choice", but when you think about it, is there any liberal that doesn't crap on their religion/culture/heritage/country/etc/etc in practicing their beliefs?

How many tenants of Catholicism do hispanics toss aside when they cast their lot with liberals?

Bottom line, it should not surprise us.