User Profile: AllWeatherPatriot

Member Since: September 01, 2010

Comments

  • [1] July 21, 2016 at 12:01am

    After Cruz’s absolutely atrocious performance tonight, I had to come back to add that he’s even worse than I thought before. What an utter disgrace, and the condemnation is pretty universal.

  • July 20, 2016 at 8:36pm

    I’ve never understood the cries that Trump hasn’t offered any specific policy recommendations. Yes, I know, when he’s in his rally mode he just keeps repeating the same general statements over and over. I get annoyed at that, too. But if anyone just looks at his campaign website, they will find that there has been a wealth of specificity right there under everyone’s noses all along.

    Think he’s just spouting nonsense about the wall and getting Mexico to pay for it? Well, his plan to do just that is right there in great detail, and it revolves around blocking billions of dollars in annual remittances from illegals in the U.S. back to Mexico if Mexico doesn’t pay to build the wall (which is how I thought we could do it before I saw that that was precisely his plan). Mexico’s economy depends HEAVILY upon those remittances. I guarantee they will cave rather than lose that revenue stream.

    And there is great detail on dozens of other issues. In fact, I challenge any “never-Trumper” or Trump skeptic to read through the policy details on his website and then tell me ANYTHING they see there that doesn’t align with a conservative governing agenda. The critics have zero credibility if they haven’t even read his policy positions, yet continue to spew venom.

  • [1] July 20, 2016 at 8:13pm

    Wow. Every word I wrote was sincere and heartfelt. I don’t like what I’m observing, but it’s just what I see. As I said, I supported Cruz and still think he was the most knowledgeable candidate with respect to our constitution and founding principles.

    However, his childish persistence in trying to find some way, any way to derail Trump will accomplish nothing but the election of Hillary. Cruz’s turning his back on a pledge he (and others) clearly made, one which the candidates other than Trump demanded that he sign (and he did), is inexcusably dishonorable.

    My wife and I attended Restoring Honor in 2010, and were so moved by it that we got serious about our faith and started attending church, my wife for the first time. It changed our lives. To now see someone held high as an example of conservative principles by Glenn suddenly discard honor for personal gain, and to see Glenn condone that behavior, is incredibly disappointing. I guess “honor” is situational for them. Apparently, “your word is your bond”, which Glenn has said so many times, doesn’t apply to Ted Cruz or any of the others who pledged to support the eventual nominee.

    And your vile crapping on my sincere comments strongly resembles the childishness that one usually expects from liberals. Grow up.

  • July 20, 2016 at 6:19pm

    I have been a fan of Glenn for years, and have subscribed to GBTV/the Blaze since the start. I also initially agreed with him that Ted Cruz was the best candidate, and I supported Cruz throughout most of the primary.
    However, both men have since turned into people I don’t recognize. Glenn went off the deep end with his ridiculous exaggerations of Trump’s shortcomings, his equating him with dictators, and then that atrocious interview with Brad Thor. And Cruz, who I thought to be an honorable man, has instead revealed himself to be a self-centered person with no guiding principle other than whatever it takes for HIM to gain power.
    Glenn, in the off chance that you see this: What happened to the HONOR you spoke of in 2010 at Restoring Honor? How can you support someone who pledged to support the Republican nominee, regardless of who it was, yet when things didn’t go his way discarded that pledge like yesterday’s trash and instead continues to manipulate and connive to achieve his own grandisement? You call that honor?
    As for Cruz himself, I think he has revealed himself to be far worse than Donald Trump’s “Lyin’ Ted” moniker would indicate. When Trump started calling him that, I cringed because I thought it was silly and destructive. Little did I know that Cruz would in the end turn out to be every bit the liar that Trump claimed, and far worse. It is obvious now that Cruz would be happy if Hillary wins, just so he can run in 2020.
    Despicable.

    Responses (2) +
  • [2] March 16, 2016 at 6:15pm

    (Continued)

    And though I support Cruz, I do worry about where he really stands on LEGAL immigration. I believe that he would fight illegal immigration, but he has been pretty squishy on legal immigration, which is just as much a part of the problem as the illegals. I am also concerned about his wife’s connection to the CFR-sponsored North American Union. Those two things just don’t seem consistent with his overall conservative foundation, and they give me pause.

    Regardless, I would unreservedly support Trump or Cruz over Hillary. If either were to win and all they accomplished was to fix the immigration mess, they would have accomplished the single most important thing necessary to stop the current decline. Ann Coulter is right when she says that if we don’t regain control of immigration, nothing else will matter because we will be overrun with third world inhabitants who care not a whit about American principles. That’s the single most important factor in this election, and Trump has made it crystal clear where he stands and Cruz has as well, though admittedly less convincingly when it comes to legal immigration.

    So, I think either will get the job done on the most critical present day issue. Trump, however, comes with significant risk as it pertains to what he would do on other issues, and Cruz (while far more solid overall) worries me when it comes to legal immigration and trade.

    That said, either would be infinitely better than Hillary.

    Responses (1) +
  • [5] March 16, 2016 at 6:00pm

    The circular firing squad that has arisen in conservative circles over this election is ridiculous and has to stop if we truly care about saving the country. Read many of the comments here and elsewhere, and you can scarcely tell the difference between them and the type of vulgar drivel routinely spouted by liberals. It’s embarrassing folks. We’re better than this. We’re supposed to be the side that bases our arguments upon reason, facts, and principles, remember?

    Now, my take on the whole situation is this: I have supported Ted Cruz all along because I believed that he offered the best choice of a strong conservative who understands America’s founding principles, and who is willing to defy the GOP establishment in order to re-establish those principles. However, that doesn’t mean that I believe that Donald Trump is some type of demonic Hitler figure who would destroy the Republic if elected. Quite the contrary.

    I think Trump, while certainly lacking a coherent philosophical foundation, is nonetheless sincere in his concern about the current direction of the country and his desire to “make America great again.” While I cringe at times at his crassness during debates and public appearances (but also laugh sometimes), in every one-on-one interview I have seen he has come across as entirely sincere. I think he really is in this for the right reasons, though he is certainly a risky proposition.

    (Continued)

    Responses (1) +
  • [12] May 18, 2015 at 9:51pm

    That’s also exactly why Bill Clinton’s lying about his dalliances with Monica Lewinsky (among others) wasn’t “just about sex.” He put himself in a position to be blackmailed by foreign entities, which made it a very serious matter as opposed to the trivial nothing that the left tried to portray it as.

  • March 19, 2015 at 9:18pm

    Finally, an explanation for what we’re enduring that makes sense!

  • [4] March 19, 2015 at 8:00pm

    Kathleen, you are obviously someone who thinks deeply about these things rather than just parroting politically-correct bumper sticker slogans. I certainly pray that God will continue to comfort you with respect to your past, and will continue to draw you closer to Him. We all certainly need that.

    With all due respect, though, I have to take exception to your statement that “…we all have the right to be a mother or a father regardless of sin, God, The Bible, The devil or society.” Your particular choice of sexual relationship is incapable of producing children. In fact, if homosexual relationships are just as “normal” and laudable as heterosexual relationships, as many try to claim, then why should anyone care if everyone was homosexual, right? But if that hypothetical actually occurred, there would be no children and the human race would be extinguished, so there could certainly be no homosexual “parents”, because there would no longer be any children.

    And in that lies the perversity of the notion of homosexual “parenthood.” Homosexuals either have to adopt children produced by natural male-female couples, or they must contradict their claim that homosexuality is just as natural as heterosexuality by at least temporarily entering into heterosexual relationships to produce a child. Can you not see from this simple logic that portraying homosexual parents as if they were no different from heterosexual parents is a blatant lie?

  • March 19, 2015 at 7:41pm

    It is impossible for them to get married, if by “married” you mean to another of the same sex. They are trying to redefine marriage by pretending that a counterfeit facsimile of it is the real thing. It is also impossible to “transition” from a man to a woman, or vice-versa. Mutilating ones genitals and taking hormones is merely a crude attempt at imitation that cannot change their predetermined genetics.

    All of this “stuff” is the product of mental illness and severe confusion. To lend it a veneer of credibility just so that we don’t get called a name does a deep disservice to those so afflicted.

  • [1] March 19, 2015 at 7:26pm

    Universal truth has never and never will be subject to the whims of public opinion. Public opinion has many, many times throughout history been in favor of things that were later realized to be wrong, immoral, or outright evil. Human nature tends naturally to push us toward favoring any policy that would give license to our selfish desires. In this case, I think polls are also influenced by decades of relentless PC propaganda pushing people to agree simply to avoid being labeled a “bigot” or “homophobe.”

    What is true and right is true and right regardless of our opinion about it.

  • March 19, 2015 at 7:17pm

    I was with you right up until the last few words. Everyone is redeemable, we have all sinned in some way, and though homosexuality is certainly reprehensible to God, it does not mean that the person involved in it is “…done with Him for good.”

  • [8] March 19, 2015 at 6:55pm

    I’m really tired of seeing those of us who have not had our minds corrupted by PC nonsense subtly acquiescing to the homosexual agenda by using the term “traditional marriage.” To use that term is to unintentionally reinforce the homosexual notion that there are various forms of marriage, with “traditional marriage” simply being one of many.

    The truth, of course, is that marriage is not simply a “tradition” and it is not open to liberal redefinition. The fact that we are even discussing a notion so patently absurd as “gay marriage” is a clear indication of how far we have fallen. While I know that deluded liberals will sneer at any suggestion that there is a God-ordained order to male-female relationships and that marriage is instituted by God for a specific purpose, they cannot ignore simple biology. Again, it is ridiculous that anyone even needs to point this out, but the biological differences plainly obvious to us all argue conclusively against the insane notion of homosexual “marriage.”

    Marriage is what it is and what it always has been, a life-long commitment between a man and a woman. Everyone has equal access to it already. What they do not have, however, is the right to redefine the term.

    Responses (2) +
  • [32] July 25, 2014 at 6:26pm

    Sorry to be the one to tell you this, but as your dung emits planet-killing “greenhouse gases”, you will have to turn that in as well. Fortunately, I know an address on Pennsylvania Avenue in D.C. where you can send it. They do produce copious quantities of excrement themselves, but if anyone knows dung it would be them.

  • May 21, 2014 at 7:17pm

    Yep, completely normal. Also, though the clouds can look dramatic here (partially due to the fact that visibility is always so good here you can actually see them coming), tornadoes in the Denver area are nearly always very weak. I’ve seen some, particularly in the mid to late ’80s, that looked so dramatic you would swear they had to be F5s, yet they were F1s at best. Now once the storms have moved into Kansas or Nebraska and had hundreds of miles to strengthen, that’ same different story altogether.

  • May 12, 2014 at 1:56pm

    It sounds like Rand Paul is falling for the typical Establishment GOP lie: “We must compromise our principles because to do otherwise would upset the electorate and then they won’t vote for us.”

    The problem with that theory is that if it is true that Americans just want more and more liberalism then we are doomed, and there is little to be gained by telling the stupid and evil among us what they want to hear in order to simply hang on to power a little longer. Plus, there is the fact that voters who are liberal (sorry, “moderate”) are not going to vote for “liberal lite” but instead will vote for the real thing (liberal dems) every time.

    But I don’t believe that the country is majority liberal (yet). I think it is still marginally majority conservative, but is waiting for leaders with the courage to stand for something. The Republicans need to cast Karl Rove and his ilk aside and assemble an unapologetically conservative platform. They then need to grow spines and start communicating those conservative principles and FIGHTING for them. No apologies, no half-liberal bones thrown to the mush-headed among us, nothing but pure undisputed TRUTH.

  • [1] May 12, 2014 at 10:54am

    Scratch one more from the list .

  • April 25, 2014 at 3:44pm

    Whatever happened to “I might disagree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it?” I understand Glenn’s concern, but the issue here is not Mr. Bundy’s opinions about race. That’s a red herring that the media are now trying to play up to distract from the real issue, and unfortunately Glenn is helping them make it a distraction.

    The real issue is the government’s appalling behavior, from armed threats, to destruction of property, to “free speech” zones. Mr. Bundy’s personal opinions about race, the weather, or the probability of life on other planets are wholly irrelevant to the central, very important issue of government thuggery. If Glenn and the Blaze stand for the truth as claimed (and I am confident that they do), it is important to make this distinction rather than letting an unrelated comment scare them away from the whole matter. That’s what the devious media are hoping will happen.

    Also, the full context of Mr. Bundy’s comments has been revealed today, and while his choice of words is still inelegant, it sheds a very different light on his intent. Regardless, I don’t care. What I care about is an out of control government that has militarized virtually every department within it and sees nothing wrong with threatening lethal force to collect a bill. Whether their latest victim is a racist, 9-11 truther, or thinks we faked the moon landing has exactly ZERO bearing on the propriety of the government’ sanction. Focus people, fo

  • [1] April 25, 2014 at 3:38pm

    Whatever happened to “I might disagree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it?” I understand Glenn’s concern, but the issue here is not Mr. Bundy’s opinions about race. That’s a red herring that the media are now trying to play up to distract from the real issue, and unfortunately Glenn is helping them make it a distraction.

    The real issue is the government’s appalling behavior, from armed threats, to destruction of property, to “free speech” zones. Mr. Bundy’s personal opinions about race, the weather, or the probability of life on other planets are wholly irrelevant to the central, very important issue of government thuggery. If Glenn and the Blaze stand for the truth as claimed (and I am confident that they do), it is important to make this distinction rather than letting an unrelated comment scare them away from the whole matter. That’s what the devious media are hoping will happen.

    Also, the full context of Mr. Bundy’s comments has been revealed today, and while his choice of words is still inelegant, it sheds a very different light on his intent. Regardless, I don’t care. What I care about is an out of control government that has militarized virtually every department within it and sees nothing wrong with threatening lethal force to collect a bill. Whether their latest victim is a racist, 9-11 truther, or thinks we faked the moon landing has exactly ZERO bearing on the propriety of the government’ sanction. Focus people, fo

  • April 17, 2014 at 3:49pm

    How did Canada_Goose get his/her razor sharp wit? Don’t know, go ask your average third grader.