This just proves that there is no “two state solution.” The terrorists, I mean, Palestinians will never settle for having their own space. The real goal has always been anti-Semitic in nature. The only question is whether the state that survives is a free, democratic one or whether it’s a terrorist hell hole.
Of course there is no two state solution; there is only one sensible alternative. Please read, 'The Israeli Solution' by Caroline Glick.
 January 21, 2016 at 1:33pm
So you prefer the Sandy Hook approach where teachers and children alike are slaughtered in the classroom, over this situation where he bought time for some students to escape unharmed? And with more/better training, he might have even taken a few dirtbags with him!
Removing guns, assuming it’s even possible (usually only works with the law abiding, not mass murderers), doesn’t prevent attacks, it just changes the weapon. Maybe you prefer schools to be bombed instead of shot up?
Or maybe you have a cool machine like the one in Minority Report where you can see the future and know who will commit a crime and where? I lost mine while riding my unicorn through fairyland.
I thought maybe it wouldn’t be his last because he will have declared himself emperor by January of next year. I wouldn’t rule it out!
 January 12, 2016 at 4:15pm
That’s the problem with lying, eventually the lies begin contradicting one another. This explains liberalism in its entirety.
 January 5, 2016 at 2:16pm
The old rules seem to acknowledge that quaint concept I seem to have read about called due process. The new ones recognize due process as an antiquated notion that makes no sense in our modern society. Thank goodness we’ve progressed this far!
 January 5, 2016 at 2:12pm
I’ve been making this counter point for years when people say the 2nd Amendment is no longer relevant. The thing about Afghanistan that makes it even more astounding is what a small percentage of them are armed, and yet they still are able to frustrate the two most powerful militaries in the world! The same is true in Iraq. Imagine how hard it is to subjugate a population where half of us are armed and you’ll begin to understand why the left is so adamant about disarming the public.
I once read that only a fraction of armed patriots fought the revolutionary war with Great Britain. A small armed and determined force CAN and HAS made a difference many times.
@Apologists JD and @Gleasondj
You two are absurd.
First of all, the people engaging the U.S. military in Afghanistan have military weaponry. Most of that weaponry is old Soviet Era left overs, but it's still miles more than anything American civilians possess. And even with that you need to look at the numbers...
~ 92,000 Afghans KIA and ~ 100,000 wounded since 2001
vs 2,200 US dead and wounded since 2001
that's almost 100 times as many Afghans killed than US Army. And that's fighting a REAL ARMY (with tanks, air craft, rpgs, fully automatic machine guns, etc, etc, etc).
If that's your aspiration, enjoy your early grave.
Secondly, Your desire to possess weapons as protection against American Tyranny demonstrates a fundamental distrust of the American Soldier. How can you in one breath "support our troops" and in another, try and arm yourself to kill as many as you can. It's ridiculous.
Lastly, even if such a battle did unfold, the US army vs the common citizen, it would surely be a total war. In which case you can kiss the boots on the ground goodbye. It'll be all airstrikes all day from now until your house is a crater.
You bring up some excellent points. Notice the Afghan armed population, however small they are protected their homes from outside invaders. That duma$$ in the WH doesn't realize the only thing that is keeping this country from being invaded now and keeping his ass safe is an armed populace. Look to our southern borders. If ever the drug lords would ever band together... Some, if not most, cartels have more money than most countries. And, by the way, the southern invasion has already began.
One of the main differences between Afghanistan and a civil war on American soil is that the military would be fighting on its home soil. Their homes and families would be vulnerable to any resistance if they choose to go against the American people. Their planes and helicopters would be needed to be maintained by people who have vulnerable families. It wouldn’t be difficult to obtain information on homes addresses for anyone. Would you risk your family to keep a helicopter flying against the American people?
I am positive any civil war on American soil will be bloody and brutal for everyone from the soldiers down to their families.
There are several things that people like "UseYourBrainz" don't seem to understand.
First; they have no clue how guerrilla warfare works. Guerrilla forces don't need to start with high tech toys or military style weapons. They can start with hunting rifles and IEDs. They steal what they need from their defeated enemies and improve from there. Forces have been doing this throughout human history.
Second; tactics. You wouldn't stand in the street and shoot at an armored vehicle with a rifle. That's suicide. It's idiotic. But a rifle works pretty good at shooting the person putting fuel in that armored vehicle. Without fuel that vehicle isn't going anywhere.
Third; underestimate the US soldier? No offense to our wonderful veterans and current active duty members but I promise you that many will just "follow orders" and drop the bombs or pull the trigger on their fellow countrymen/women. Look at the viral comments here at TheBlaze over the standoff in Oregon about the so called "terrorists" occupying an shuttered park cabin out in the middle of nowhere recently. People here have been calling for blood over that. And all they are doing is saying that the two guys convicted of arson already served their time... they shouldn't go back to jail again. So if you think many of the US soldiers are going to disobey orders when told to fire on the crowd you're sadly mistaken I think. They'll follow orders.
No one knows if or how such a drastic calamity might occur, but does anyone know what a coup is? That's right, that's when the majority of the military turns against the government. Why do the liberals think the military is going to side with them?
Because American soldiers pledge allegiance to the commander in chief. Unless you're calling all the American soldiers liars?
I agree with your third point (to a degree), but your first two are the ideological ramblings of a 4 year old. You're going to shoot them when they're filling up gas? You don't think Al Queda thought of that one? New Flash - they don't generally refuel in active combat zones. You're gonna "guerrilla warfare them"? Great, MAYBE you'll get a couple and then a targeted airstrike will take out you, your buddies, the house you were in, and everything within a 100 yard radius.
It's a war of attrition. And frankly, you right wing nut jobs don't have enough support from the people to out last.
I'm a gun owner. The second they recall all the guns and you batshit crazies decide to take up arms, I'll gladly turn mine in, enlist, and help the Union turn your Confederate ass into a smoldering crater.
@UseYourBrainz Perhaps you should do as your moniker SAYS and MAKE AN ATTEMPT to use yours?
The US Military DOES NOT pledge an "allegiance" to the CIC! They take an oath to defend the CONSTITUTION against ALL ENEMIES, FORIEGN AND DOMESTIC! Huge difference between what you think and what is REALITY!
 December 21, 2015 at 6:38pm
Why haven’t we banned high-capacity cars like this? At least make her reload before the second round on the sidewalk so sheep have more time to scatter before she tries again! How many more have to die before assault cars are banned? Was the car black and did it have scary looking handles? You know, the right to drive a car isn’t actually in the Constitution. Have I missed any of the stupid arguments?
Amen. Thanks Republicans! You sure showed them! What is the fastest way to kill the GOP so we can get a conservative major party?
 December 15, 2015 at 6:45pm
Yes, terrorists use guns to kill Americans. We use guns to kill them right back. See how this works? The only reason they got the body count they did was they did it in CA, where the laws prevent the law abiding from being armed to defend themselves, and most of the population is too stupid and cowardly to defend themselves even if they were allowed anyway. Nobody I work with would try this because at least on third of the people who work there carry, and nobody knows exactly who carries. Most secure workplace in the world! Bring your jihad and see how far you get!
You are so right, JD. The libs goal is to make us hate ourselves so much we fall on our own swords.
Those who beat their swords into plowshares end up serving those who don't.
 December 11, 2015 at 4:03pm
Poor little Blalock didn’t realize that the fantasy unicorn land he lived in while in college where you get preferential treatment for your skin color goes away quickly in the meritocracy of the marketplace. That’s a tough lesson to learn. He’s never had to compete for anything or be worthy of it before, and he doesn’t understand that kind of system now that he’s encountering it.
As for CNN, you made your bed, now sleep in it right along with all the university presidents that are losing their jobs. The ideology you’ve pushed for decades has produced the very creatures that are now eating you!
 December 3, 2015 at 2:22pm
This was my first thought as I read her article. I fundamentally disagree that it’s the government’s duty to protect us from everything. The government is equipped to fight conventional war, not assymetric war nor conduct police activities. Time to get back to the time when it was a recognized civil obligation to be armed and to come to your neighbors’ aid in case of a situation. The police used to be investigators only, and despite their heroism, they can’t make everyone safe everywhere.
 November 19, 2015 at 4:25pm
Not buying the line they give in the update that this was a botched robbery. I know criminals are dumb, but they don’t attempt robberies directly in front of police stations. This was a BLM-related killing for sure.
 October 4, 2015 at 7:12pm
Please drop out now and spare us the embarassment!
Why don't YOU drop out of this conversation and spare us the embarrassment.
 October 4, 2015 at 4:30pm
Talk about being a discrete minority!
 September 29, 2015 at 4:28pm
The key is her comment about viability. She isn’t saying they never come out of the womb still alive. She’s saying even if they’re born as we all understand the term, they die anyway because they weren’t viable. She won’t say it in so many words though, because then you could ask how that’s any different from not feeding a 6 month old. After all, they aren’t viable in the sense that if you don’t give them any sustenance, they die. She is a cold-hearted murderer.
LOL, or some black smoke eminating from beneath the white robes.
 September 23, 2015 at 5:26pm
But Obama told me ISIS isn’t really even Islamic ;)
 September 22, 2015 at 2:22pm
“How does someone get there?” Altrogge said. “What thoughts or ideologies led him to do the things he did? To me, that’s terrifying.”
Easy answer: liberalism. It’s all about the cult of self. Everything is justifiable when viewed through that lens. Heck, it’s all relative anyway, there are no absolute morals and no absolute moral authority. Can’t be surprised when it creates completely depraved subhumans like this.
What are you talking about?
He said it himself, he explained EXACTLY how he "got there." And it had nothing to do with all the BS in your second paragraph. He read the bible, and he "got there" via that. We don't need to speculate on how he got there, he told us.
There's no absolute moral authority in the westernized religion of Christianity either my friend. The adoption of the doctrine called "sola scriptura" ensures there is no "absolute" moral authority.
When authority is subjugated to personal interpretation, it is no longer "absolute", nor universal. It is relative.
Therefore, one could easily argue that Christianity in America has become hyper liberal! The cult of self, as you call it, is embodied in the heretical doctrine of "sola scriptura", which for the first time in human history, relinquished interpretive authority over to the individual.....aka....the "self".
Oh, what big things to ponder
Yes, it's a hard truth, isn't it?
JB, I don't understand, please use smaller words for me. Sola Scriptura good or bad?
Sola Scriptura is heretical. Scripture itself says, "if all the wisdom in Christ's words were written down, it would fill all the volumes of the world."
This tells us that not everything beneficial is recorded in the Bible. Thus rendering "Sola Scriptura" false.
But the doctrine of sola Scriptura is essential to the protestant faith. Without it, the protestant's entire foundation of faith is shattered. Bible ALONE wasnt the teaching of the Apostles, because the Bible didn't even exist yet!
Jb-Thanks for the info. //if all the wisdom in Christ’s words were written down, it would fill all the volumes of the world// God’s word actually says, “And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.” I can’t find your version “wisdom” anywhere. What translation are you using?
To be clear, your stating that if the bible or God’s word states one thing, and a priest, bishop, pope, etc states another doctrine which is in conflict with the bible (written word of God), that God's word is wrong? Because that is the real definition of Sola Scriptura, it is not the straw-man version that you proffer.
Sola Scriptura–is the Christian doctrine that the Bible is the “supreme authority” in all matters of doctrine and practice. Sola scriptura does not deny that other authorities govern Christian life and devotion, but sees them all as subordinate to and corrected by the written word of God.
If you use the correct terminology, you might come to a different conclusion. -or- If your starting premise is incorrect, your conclusion will also be.
Do you pray to Mary?
Titan: With respect, you are wrong about the practical application of "sola scriptura". The practical application is that nothing outside the Bible is considered authoritative. In addition, the application of "sola scriptura" demands that the INDIVIDUAL determine whether or not a teaching is in line with Scripture. Therefore, everything becomes subjective.
For example: You may come across a teaching from a 1st Century Church Father that YOU THINK contradicts Scripture. See the problem? It contradicts Scripture, according to YOU, and your own personal interpretation of Scripture. What "sola scriptura" did, was open Pandora's Box to personal interpretation of not only Scripture, but Apostolic Christian doctrine in general.
Did Luther have legitimate discrepancies with the Roman Catholic Church? OF COURSE HE DID! However, his solution was to "self-interpret", instead of relying on the Apostolic Tradition.
The Bible was NEVER the "sole" supreme authority for the faith. It was PART OF the supreme authority. Holy Scripture, along with the decrees of the ECUMENICAL COUNCILS, the oral Apostolic teachings, and the testimony of the saints TOGETHER is known as "Holy Tradition". There is where the "supreme authority" resides.
Not in a Pope, not in a single council, not in the individual interpretation, but in the ECUMENICAL body of Christ.....aka....THE CHURCH, which includes Scripture. You cannot divide Scripture from THE CHURCH.
Yes, prayers are offered TO the Theotokos (Mary) within the Orthodox faith. Prayers asking her to intercede for us.
We do not believe that Mary saves, nor do we believe Mary to be divine. She is the Theotokos (God bearer). We do not believe Mary forgives sins.
However, we do believe Mary ascended into heaven, and is present with her son Jesus Christ. Therefore, believing she is there with her Son, we offer prayers TO her, asking that she intercede for all of humanity. Not to forgive us of sins, or to save us, simply to intercede on our behalf.
Veneration is not worship. We believe Mary can intercede and pray for us the same way you can pray and intercede for me here on Earth. It's no different than me asking you to pray for me.
As for the Roman Catholic belief and practice, I'm not sure it's the same. I am not Roman Catholic. I'm Orthodox.