Free Republic

Agreed. The phase "...states won by Joe Biden..." is meaningless. I believe there are none. Well, maybe CA, NY, and a couple other deep blue States. But everyone and their dog knows there was industrial scale fraud committed. Biden did not win anything - he was installed to be a meat puppet / mouthpiece.

The fraud is going to be worse, much worse in coming elections. The 'rats have made a complete and entirely predictable mess of every single thing they have touched. The Country is mad, mad as hell. We are ready to take it out on them at the polls. The 'rats know this and fearing for their beloved power will stop at nothing to keep it. The level of fraud this election is going to be epic. Too bad we don't have firing squads for people caught committing fraud. That would put a dent in many a leftist's enthusiasm for "the ends justifies any means."

We need to quit shying away from the military origins of our favorite weapons.

Couple of points (in agreement) with you:

If we allow the military use or not litmus test to have any impact on our rights we are screwed. Probably every firearm ever designed/created (with the possible exception of some really cheap junk) has at one time or another been used by some military unit somewhere.

As I understand it the M-16 rifle was originally based on a design for a civilian rifle. Armalite took their design and adapted it for military requirements and actually won the contract. The civilian AR series is/was just returning to it's roots.

Finally, just because something is "military" in appearance or capability or whatever should not in any way be a detractor from civilian use. Far from it, it actually recommends such weapons and gear.

• Face it, production of military gear is generally contracted to the lowest bidder. Why wouldn't civilians want to save money too? Surely the left isn't trying to unfairly discriminate against the economically disadvantaged? ;-)
• Military gear is generally also rugged, designed to be nominally/marginally maintained by grunts or their equivalent across the branches. Low maintenance and a tolerance for abuse sounds pretty good to me too when considering gear.
• Military weapons are designed to be effective. Yes, effective at stopping an enemy. I can just hear the leftist snowflakes now "Oh no, they actually try-to, even work-at being more effective at hurting/killing people! {gasp}" I say bravo! If I am in a situation where I need a weapon to defend myself, my loved-ones, or even innocent bystanders then I damn-sure want the most effective tool for the job. Arbitrarily, artificially limiting what people can use to defend themselves is ridiculous. Would anyone accept the notion of "military grade" airbags in Army vehicles but intentionally less capable airbags in civilian cars? Of course not. How about the Military gets big dry chemical fire extinguishers - you get a bucket of sand and a bottle of water, good luck with that kitchen grease fire... If someone proposed such a thing you'd call them insane and/or criminal. Same exact thing with firearms. If innocent lives are on the line why wouldn't you have the most effective tools available...

With the firearms manufacturers selling about $1 billion a year worth of paramilitary sporting rifles, it becomes very hard for anyone in his or her right mind to argue that such rifles are not "commonly used".

That's what I was thinking. AR style rifles are the very definition of "common use." As per the SCOTUS decision that *should* put them out of reach of the leftist's civilian disarmament dreams... But when have laws ever meant anything to a 'rat / leftist?

I am 100% convinced the left doesn't give a rat's backside about public safety - at all. They want power. The left only wants "gun control" as an incremental approach to complete civilian disarmament. The left wants us disarmed because they have hopes/dreams/desires/plans for us so abhorrent to freedom-loving Americans that we would take up arms against them. Therefore they have to disarm us first.

Depp has issues to be sure. But as I understand it when AH came forward with allegations against Depp Disney tossed him out without hearing his side or waiting for the legal outcome. They went full woke, the woman must be right. If I were Depp I’d tell them exactly what they could do with their 300 mil - in small bills with sharp edges.

The Constitution Was Literally Written By Slaveowners. Why Is America Obsessed With Upholding It?

An intentionally misleading association. The writer is attempting to discredit the Constitution. Obviously the Constitution is in the way of something he/she/it/they want to do to us.

By their logic, gee, their ancestors no-doubt owned slaves, why should anyone listen to what they have to say? They were obviously raised and influenced by a long line of racists.

See how that works? You can falsely (or maybe not in their case, who knows?) impugn anyone's integrity if you have non yourself.

Pelosi is a mean, petty, evil person. Nothing she would do would surprise me. Nothing.

More "pandemics" (aka scam-demics) to come because the left got to advance their agenda so much thanks to the last one.

I'm not buying it. I will refuse to believe there is any kind of "pandemic" unless and until I see bodies in the street zombie movie style. Anything else and it is just a political power play as far as I'm concerned, and I will ignore it and any directives coming from the scammers.

..."that a public-carry license applicant provide proof of 'good moral character' remains constitutional,"...

I disagree, vehemently.

If you have to "provide proof" to exercise a right then you no longer have that right - it has been completely infringed upon.

Just who's morals will be used to judge "good" moral character?

What is the objective measure of "good" or good enough moral character?

Apply these same standards to the First Amendment and see how (equally) ridiculous they sound: I'm sorry, you can talk all you want at home, but you're not allowed to speak in public or on the internet unless and until what you are going to say has been pre-approved by the government.

American Airlines has already become one of the least reliable airlines around. At least if you happen to try to fly to/from a city they consider an unimportant market. (as is the case where I am)

I used to fly AA all the time, as my "go to" airline - back in the early 2000s. I flew so often at one point I had over a dozen free round-trip tickets banked through their AAdvantage program. They were well above average back then. Then in the early 2010s they went downhill. In 2017 they cancelled a flight and stranded me for 3 days. I couldn't get a refund and the company I worked for at that time wouldn't eat the cost of the ticket and let me rebook on another airline. I ended up missing an important business event entirely - ultimately cancelling the trip and the company ate the ticket anyway. I swore off AA after that. Since then I have driven to another city 2 hrs away to fly in/out of their airport to avoid AA - more than once.

Well... In early 2022 I had to travel for business on short notice. Nothing available from the local airport on other airlines, nothing available from the airport 2 hrs away that worked either... Ended up having to book on AA in order to meet timelines. I gave them another chance. HA! Once again, they proved why I gave up on them. They couldn't even get me through their hub of DFW on time - either outbound or on the return leg! Two different days almost a week apart. That's because I was flying from an apparently unimportant city to another apparently unimportant city. They have no problem simply cancelling or delaying flights to unimportant cities. They are first up on the chopping block if there is any kind of hiccup in availability of personnel or aircraft.

I get it, from a bean counter perspective it makes perfect sense. Serve the markets (flights) that will generate the most revenue. Used to be they had enough excess capacity on any given day that they could handle the occasional blip in the system. No longer, not for years. They apparently operate so tight on resources that any disturbance in their schedules ripples through the entire enterprise and they have to start shedding flights. I am starting to wonder if that operating on bare bones / ragged edge is company wide - including maintenance and training too.

Since January, I have had to take two additional business trips. (I gave up flying for personal travel years ago, I drive) I used another airline for both trips. No issues whatsoever with either trip - even with some significant weather along the way. They have enough capacity to be flexible and adjust schedules and still get people where they need to go.

I gave up on AA once, then decided to give them a second chance. What's the old saying, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. Well, shame on me, I'm done. There won't be another chance for AA. If another business trip comes up and the only available flight is on AA, I'm not going, there are no available flights as far as I'm concerned. I'm senior enough in my new company I can say that and make it stick.

If you're flying to/from cities AA considers important they're probably no better or worse than any other airline. If your trip happens to involve a stop they consider a "minor market" then you're rolling the dice, and the dice are loaded against you.

Sorry about the long rant but no other company in my 50+ years of existence has ever made me so angry, or caused me so much trouble, or cost me (or my company) so much extra $$$. They could literally offer me free flights for life and I'd say fine - only if I can fly on some other airline and you pay for it. Otherwise thanks but no thanks, I value my time. I only fly for business, and that means I need to get there for something. I cannot trust that AA could even get me across the street on schedule. The truism is, you have to allow a day each way for travel. With AA it is demonstrably two days, maybe even three if you want to be sure.

...he is hopeful the Senate will pass some form of legislation to curb gun violence...

Based on what? Why would he (or any sane person for that matter) believe that "some form of" law would do any better than the thousands of gun control laws already on the books. Across the nation, at the national, state, and local levels we have literally thousands of "gun control" laws on the books. Yet the violence continues. Clearly laws do not prevent violence.

It is pure folly, or political grandstanding, to believe that criminals prepared to break dozens of existing laws regarding violence, firearms, theft, murder, etc. would be in any way deterred by the thought of breaking one more law. To any liberal lurkers out there - it is stupid, and if you think gun control works you are stupid too. That is not being mean or hateful, that is a statement of fact.

Well, two days ago our little suburban town just outside a larger town was suffering a couple of shortages. No gas, no diesel - all three stations in town were out. Similarly one of the two grocery stores in town had no, repeat no milk whatsoever.

The Biden economy - bringing Venezuela to you.

Tell you what, in 2024 I'm voting for mean tweets and $2/gal gas.

I would say that if a state is going to secede from the union any laws the union might have regarding it are moot. The state is basically saying "you don't count anymore, I'm out."

If you leave your job, your former employer's policies regarding mandatory training no longer apply.

Once you move out of your house, if the roof starts leaking that is no longer your concern.

If a state leaves the union, it is by definition no-longer bound by the union's laws and policies. I don't think the union gets a say in it, at all.

Sure, the union could try to take back the territory by coercion (sanctions, blockades, etc.) It could try to take back the territory by force. Though neither sounds like a particularly effective way to endear yourself to the locals. More like a good way to create a lot of insurgents and welcome them back within your borders.

Consider for a moment the absolute, total corruption of the Clintons:

Bill, Hillary, Chelsea, their charitable "foundation" that benefits only them.

The intentional mishandling of classified information.

The election fraud and rampant violation of multiple election laws.

Jeffrey Epstein and his island.

Ambassador Stephens, Benghazi.

The dozens and dozens (are they into triple digits yet) of "associates," friends, etc. that have met untimely ends through "suicide" or highly coincidental "accidents" where the Clinton confidant was the only casualty...

The fact that the entire lot of them are not behind bars for life...well I take that as a sign that justice, real justice, is dead in America. Far too many people such as the Clintons, obamas, various other lefty celebs et. al. get away with literal murder and everything else down to spitting on the sidewalk. Consequence-free. In fact the more criminal behavior, the further they seem to advance. In light of this you could be forgiven for concluding that you'll obey moral laws, but that the laws of man no-longer constrain you, since they no-longer constrain them.

Would I be too obnoxious if I asked my jabbed friends and relatives if I could have their stuff after they die?

Maybe be a little more subtle or sensitive about it. Phrase it in terms of "these uncertain times" and inquire as to whether or not they've updated their wills, trusts, estate planning etc. recently...

There are several jabbed & boosted people I know that, well, I'll admit if someone has got to go, I'm hoping the odds are not in their favor. If this madness that has gripped us for the last two years needs a sacrifice, these people would be excellent candidates. We'd be {fingers pinched together} that much better off without them.

Truly baffling. Gosh I hope they figure this out soon! ;-/

I guarantee you that they won't say {censored} about it until they have two things ready. One, a plausible explanation for it that does not involve the experimental vaccines foisted upon so many. Two, yet another experimental treatment they can foist on victims of their first blunder that will be claimed to be a panacea.

Heck, they may even claim that people who are unvaccinated need the "fix" shot(s) too "just in case." After all, they've gotten a little taste of forcing experimental treatments on people and they liked it... Kind of depends on what alleged other ailment they blame the increased deaths and disabilities on - if they can make it look like the unvaccinated are at risk too...{snort}

Lefty democrats take power (yes take, they were not elected). Enact policies that immediately skyrocket inflation. Then they have the stones to blame republicans? The sheer audacity of their obvious lies is awe inspiring.

Want to know how to stop inflation? Simple. Just do the exact opposite of everything they have been doing since stealing power. We could turn this around in a few short weeks. The only reason inflation continues to worsen is the {censored} in power don't want to reverse their flawed policies.

When Mr. Musk dared speak out against the leftists, the woke mob came for him. Glad to see someone with the stones to fight back.

Hmm, I interviewed for a job with SpaceX a few years ago - didn't get it. (by mutual agreement, after the interview both sides realized I wasn't quite the right fit) I wonder if they have any openings better suited to me now? Might have to put my resume in just for kicks...

You have multiple lawmakers now talking about making it illegal to bring your child to drag events, which is just so bizarre...

Is it legal to bring a minor (aka child) to a heterosexual sex show? No? Then why should deviants be any different.

I think the push to expose kids to drag shows is disgusting. I’m reasonably sure the majority of Americans agree with me.

In other words, the mRNA shots appear to permanently wrongfoot the immune systems of people who receive and bias them toward producing T-cells to attack variants that no longer exist - even though they never were infected with those variants at all.

I wonder if this kind of thing is a factor in the surge in other viruses (flu etc.) noted in another thread? Instead of a swift and robust immune response that knocks off these other viruses, people are subject to them getting "ahead of" their immune systems because the immune system only has one big hammer in it's toolbox now - going after those original covid variants. A delayed or less effective response (due to the early covid variant bias) might be giving these other viruses a foothold, resulting in out of character infection rates for this time of year.