User Profile: 1FreeVoice


Member Since: December 28, 2012


123 To page: Go
  • November 20, 2014 at 4:05pm

    Body armor?

    The latest in breathable comfort, easy to wear for long periods without sweating it, lightweight and moves with you. Collapsible vents between overlapping ‘floating panels’ remain open for ventilation and meld panels together when impacted…. Recessed air channels with micro-fans keep air moving gently around you. (AC/heater optional)

    Perfect for work and play! To see how this product can fit your lifestyle see photos in attached file-
    See our models in evening gowns and prom dresses ready for a killer night on the town!

    [Products A through a5 rated for light arms only, models b2 through c21 rated for high impact ballistics h2 series rated for high impact ballistics and penetrating rounds]
    You know someone will find a way to make a buck on things like this. Clever if they can actually find a way to make staying alive both stylish and cool.

    Responses (1) +
  • November 20, 2014 at 2:30pm

    Better yet.. take him to the firing range and let him shoot real guns and then post those to Facebook and twitter..

    Your idea has merit, but if the kids who complained later saw pictures of his shooting vacation they could report it as some sort of threat or intimidation. I’m not saying that you are wrong, just pointing out what could go wrong… and in that environment you would be less likely to get the law on your side.

  • [15] November 20, 2014 at 2:27pm

    If the kids really felt threatened, then they may need to be referred for psych evaluation. What could cause such irrational fears? Abuse in the home? Abuse at school?… Deliberately creating phobias (of guns, spiders, or anything else) should count as abuse.

  • [5] November 20, 2014 at 2:21pm

    To be fair, I don’t think this was an intended consequence, but on reflection I think that there are some anti-gun people who would still be pleased, or find that it could be made to suit their agenda.

  • [8] November 20, 2014 at 2:18pm

    My husband met someone who had their dog shot by a cop… and the dog was on a leash.

    The big puppy dog jumped up, pulled against the slack and was shot dead as the leash pulled tight- dead before the body hit the floor. Surely the officer could have stepped back a step or two if he felt threatened? There is a tine and place for deadly force, and I don’t think that was it.

    It’s like the cops are getting trained to shoot first on principle regardless of the circumstances. What’s coming next, shooting your kids for aggressively pointing pop tarts… just to be safe? (sarc)

    Responses (1) +
  • [2] November 20, 2014 at 2:06pm

    This is what happens when people think laws are supposed to produce specific effects instead of be general guidelines clearly defined/stated and broadly applicable to a variety of situations (whether they were thought out in advance or not) because they are based in principles that most people agree with.

    If you want to help drivers predict the actions of other drivers and avoid some accidents, you might pass a law that says everyone drives on the right side of the road. If you are trying to pass laws to steer people in a specific direction, then the fact that ambulance drivers have trouble following the law and reaching the hospital by a direct route is an unintended consequence…

  • [5] November 19, 2014 at 7:40pm

    OWS guy like the other one who took shots at the WH?
    Weapon in hand & ammo in vehicle,
    approached uniformed authorities
    “Someone” told him to go to the White House etc. …

    It’s so vague I almost wish they had not published it at all until there was more information. I know everyone wants to be first with the story… why can’t someone want to be first with the FACTS?

  • November 19, 2014 at 7:36pm

    Even if you think he is making a mistake (or more than one) he has the right to learn from his mistakes; he has the right to make his own mistakes. Before you cancel or neglect to renew your subscription please reflect on these things and perhaps do a bit of research:

    You have the right to decide who you will listen to. Who you listen to will shape you and how you see (and relate to ) the world. What kind of person do you want to become?

    How accurate has his information been over the years? Can you find or create a list of predictions he has made and list them chronologically
    Year month prediction
    outcome: right – partly right – wrong – not yet played out
    Examine the percentages, and even the types of mistakes he made most often. How or why was ___ prediction wrong, and what if anything, does it have in common with other mistakes?

    When he has been wrong ( everyone is at one time or another) how did he handle it?

    Then try doing the same for several other people/news sources that you would use as an alternative to listening to Beck. How do they compare?

    Good luck.
    PS Let me know if you actually run the numbers.

  • November 19, 2014 at 7:22pm

    I understand your frustration. I have shared it too. We switched to Blaze and used that instead of slave stream TV for the evening news. We got used to it and suddenly it wasn’t there anymore. We hadn’t logged in to catch the news lately and went to see what was going on, but couldn’t find the current video. No warning that we saw, just gone. It was listed in the files with no time slot anymore… another dead show. We were …upset.

    I decided to throw my lot in with Beck -still. In the past he has made good calls and just been off in the timing of when things will happen or details on how they will shake out. In many of the big things he has been right. I think I will trust his judgement and see how it all plays out over the coming years.

    He is still doing work I support. Though his emphasis or timing may be different from mine, I didn’t work my way up in the business that he did. He has certainly earned the right, and the means, to follow his own star and chart his course.

    I have seen things I may not have been 100% in agreement with too… we are not pod people and should not be expected to agree with everything he says or does. Nor should we be expected to agree 100%. To expect agreement or insist on it is against human nature; good people can disagree. I have watched him grow and change as a human being, and heard plenty that I agreed with.

    Beck is good people and I’ll stand by him, even though we may disagree on some things.

  • [2] November 19, 2014 at 4:07pm

    Would you rather have an stupid/incompetent adversary or a smart and capable one? Hail Pelosi, long may she reign as leader of our opposition.

  • November 19, 2014 at 4:03pm

    Anonymous T. Irrelevant -
    Half of them probably don’t even know who Nancy Pelosi is, much less who the Vice President is.

    Does that imply that when he slams Democrats for being stupid half of his audience thinks he is slamming on Republicans?

  • November 19, 2014 at 2:08pm

    She had 2 insurance companies involved.

    The Canadian system did not pay because comparable care in the USA is priced differently than such care in Canada. American care is “out of network”. Private companies also set their own rules on in and out of network providers.

    They would have known this and (thought) they planned accordingly. Canadians who are traveling buy travel insurance. The travel insurance decided that a pre-existing condition was involved and refused to cover it.

    Your insurance company may cover you anywhere you go, but they may limit the amount they will pay if you go out of network. If you can go to ANY Dr, then you must have a more expensive plan. American health care is not cheap, so if you go outside the US your company may pay less for similar care and not object.

    There are many reasons for this. If you want me to pick one, then how about the rules and regulations limiting who is allowed to offer care and the licensing they must have?

    There are times when a Nurse may have the knowledge and ability to do something but legally (here) it has to be done by a Dr. There are people who would not settle for less than a Dr., period. There are others who would rather take their kids to a vet if that was all they could afford and better than nothing.

    ?? Some of the same people who would object to deregulation on this as dangerous …will support euthanasia/medical suicide which is intended to kill patients.

  • November 19, 2014 at 1:34pm

    It was nearly a year ago, read the story.

  • November 19, 2014 at 1:29pm

    I can see both sides of this and I do feel for the young couple. I see a lot of people weighing in on the family’s side but no one has the nerve to even question whether or not the company may have a point. Let me look at this from another angle at least for a min.

    Her Dr. still thought the pregnancy was low risk, even with the infection he was treating her for. The company must have decided that the bladder infection contributed to the early delivery. Who knows, they may even be right. I’m not a Dr. or an actuary.

    Both the infection and the pregnancy were pre-existing before they bought the policy. This was a large bill for the insurance co. too. It’s never about one case, but every case that may turn up like it, & they must have consistent rules consistently applied in order to even calculate what the risks are.

    They keep track to see what the real probabilities are and assess risks to be distributed among their clients. If they assume too much risk, they will have to charge more to everyone.

    Everyone wants cheap insurance AND everyone wants everything to be covered; you can’t have it both ways. If they pick the wrong balance they may either loose out to a cheaper company or go bankrupt. If the company goes under they can’t help anyone.

    Rules can be known ahead of time.
    Rules can hurt sometimes.
    Lack of rules can hurt more.

    disclosure: Yes, I once sold insurance though not this kind

  • [4] November 19, 2014 at 12:51pm

    Given what I have heard about Government controlled health care, I doubt the baby would have survived if he had been born early on their side of the border.

  • [4] November 18, 2014 at 6:56pm


    Their souls were not for sale on the issue- they were sold long ago.

    Forgiveness redefines the past as something you can walk away from rather than something you are bound by, but it is harder to forgive some people than others. Nevertheless, I can hope that some of them see the light and change their allegiance sooner than later.

    I have just bought used copies of Levin’s Liberty and Tyranny and The 10 Big Lies About America by Michael Medved. Not bad at all. I wish I knew of a way to make stuff like this “hip” and “edgy” to read while the teachers are not looking. Young people like to test their autonomy and oppose authority on general principle. You would think some of this would be naturally subversive and hit it off with more of them.

  • November 18, 2014 at 4:51pm

    While “No means No”, I do wonder a bit at putting an arm around someone being a “battery” charge. Are unrequited hugs a chargeable offense?

    The one about telling someone he had a body in the trunk was over the top, and I have to wonder why no one called the police for that one. If someone said that to me… I don’t think I would blow it off even if it was said in a joking way. Some criminals get off on that kind of bravado, thinking other people are SO stupid or something.

  • [6] November 18, 2014 at 4:27pm

    He is hell bent on the destruction of the Republic….

    Actually while I think some people are, I’m not sure I would credit him with that much understanding of the consequences of his administration’s actions. He is a tool, and his great skill is manipulating the public/media and fundraising. He is great at campaigning – wisdom and understanding… not so much.

    To be “hell bent on the destruction of the Republic.” requires intent, not merely action that has that result. Intent requires him to understand not merely that his actions are wrong, illegal, or treasonous (aid and comfort to the enemy) but that he understand the intended consequences… and that the intended consequences( rather than unintended consequences) include the destruction of our country.

    It would be easier to prove a charge of treason, fraud… or any number of other things.

    Do not ascribe to malice what can be blamed on incompetence.

  • [23] November 18, 2014 at 4:19pm

    re: What a pathetic little Man-Child President we have…

    Yet he is surrounded by domestic enemies using him to further their own agenda(s)… and some of them are disturbingly competent.

    Responses (1) +
  • [21] November 17, 2014 at 9:18pm

    Most people don’t know what socialism really is. They hear nice-ey nice spin and little if any history of how it has wrecked countries that tried it. Middle of the road types think that they can have just a bit of socialism and it will be manageable- a “mixed” economy. They don’t want to hear logical reasons why it can’t work as they want it to.

    They may think we are not “exceptional” but they want to make exceptions for us. Something that was THAT bad for other countries that tried it will be good for us if we only use a little; it will work better if we do a little more. Other countries are not a good example; we are Americans and even if no one else has made this into a Utopian idea made real- WE can! etc.

    Few people notice the inconsistency, they don’t even know what the fuss is about. Republicans and Libertarians have NOT been clear and consistent in their messaging and education on the issue. Their opponents have claimed prime seats in media and the schools… and no effective underground has climbed up through the culture to spread contrasting ideas that debunk them.

    GB is right. We need to tell the stories, not lectures.
    Correction, we need both.

123 To page: Go