User Profile: Apologist JD

Apologist JD

Member Since: December 07, 2011


123 To page: Go
  • [39] February 26, 2015 at 11:59am

    Simple solution: allow people to carry firearms openly there. Pretty sure the dirtbags will be more polite!

    Responses (2) +
  • [12] February 26, 2015 at 11:54am

    Isn’t this exactly what the Second Amendment is for? Namely to prevent the government from rendering its opponents impotent so it can become more despotic than it already is?

  • February 23, 2015 at 11:37am

    Agreed, this kind of thing happens regularly in hockey.

  • [2] February 20, 2015 at 4:51pm

    If you signed up on the government website, you probably deserve this.

  • [28] February 20, 2015 at 4:43pm

    How interesting that they require a reason above and beyond what the general community might have when the Second Amendment explicitly gives the right to bear arms to the general community. The whole point is that you don’t need more reason than anyone else. The intellectual dishonesty of anyone regulating guns is astounding.

  • [26] February 12, 2015 at 4:52pm

    Hockey: the last bastion of real sport, including associated sportsmanship, left on earth! Great story!

    Responses (1) +
  • [33] February 12, 2015 at 4:46pm

    I had hope from the headline and from the beginning of his comments, and then he goes down the same moronic rathole the leftists do about it being some sort of inevitable conclusion because minorities don’t have the same opportunities. I’ll believe you when you start talking about the cultural problems within the minority communities being the cause. Don’t hand me this garbage about lack of opportunity because there are plenty of minorities who make it even if their parents weren’t rich or whatever else you want to blame it on.

    Responses (1) +
  • [4] February 12, 2015 at 3:24pm

    Because our genius president has signaled to the entire world that we won’t stick with anything, we don’t fight to win, and in fact we’ll actually give you our withdrawal date in advance so you can plan your global domination strategy a little easier. It will take decades to make fighting easier for us again, where people actually believe we’ll see the mission through, and in the interim, everything will take 3-5 times as long as it should, because everyone will think they only have to hold out for a little while until we lose heart and back out.

  • [7] February 12, 2015 at 3:20pm

    I’m embarassed that Hatch is from my state, though I can say I didn’t vote for the dirtbag (who reminds me very much of the corrupt senior senator in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington).

  • [7] February 12, 2015 at 3:17pm

    This whole article is premised on the false notion that Congress wants what is best for the U.S. I agree with her points, she just seems to be mistaken on what motivates Congress’ actions.

  • [8] February 12, 2015 at 2:57pm

    “We’re not enemies of each other … they’re not enemies that are in a conspiracy set out to destroy our faith,”
    I wouldn’t be so sure. This is why they have to silence the opposing side. It’s not enough for most of the homosexual movement or the left in general to be left alone, you must accept and celebrate their deviancy. This is, of course, because anything that agrees with the burning conscience they’ve worked so hard to suppress is terribly aggravating.

  • [1] February 12, 2015 at 2:49pm

    I’m glad these people are doing what their religion preaches and I’m happy for the kids who benefit thereby, but I don’t think this is solving the problems with public schools. If anything, it’s enabling them to continue.

    Responses (1) +
  • [10] February 11, 2015 at 4:47pm

    not just whether you FEEL safer?
    Not sure why it posted my comment halfway through typing it.

    Responses (1) +
  • [23] February 11, 2015 at 4:46pm

    “Knowing guns are around doesn’t make me feel any safer.”
    Only because you’re stupid lady. Besides, shouldn’t the criteria be whether you are actually safer, not just wht

    Responses (2) +
  • [8] February 11, 2015 at 3:47pm

    You’re probably right with respect to most of my generation, but this millennial doesn’t own anything Apple, and I definitely don’t surrender (I have more guns than most millennials have Apple products and I know how to use them – and I’m not afraid to either)!

  • [9] February 11, 2015 at 3:44pm

    They still assume that they can vote their way into a home and millionaire status, you know, with some hope and change sprinkled in there. They’ll explain to you that there’s plenty of money out there, it’s just a matter of redistributing it to those who “deserve” it more (i.e. themselves).
    On a side note, I’m part of this demographic but have a doctoral level degree, moved out at 17 and haven’t been back except to visit, own my home, and have a 6 figure salary, so I think I’ve earned the right to refer to my demographic as “they” instead of “we,” And I have a very different viewpoint from how most of these fools think.

  • [34] February 11, 2015 at 1:48pm

    While I have to agree with you, some part of me thinks it would be a little funny if someone tried to stop my wife or I because we would probably insult Allah or the Prophet and when they attack for the blasphemy, they’d see how good of a shot we both are and how much spare ammunition we both carry. I’m having visions of that crappy movie with Jolie and Pitt where they end up shredding some mall in a billion round shootout.

    Responses (1) +
  • [18] February 11, 2015 at 1:05pm

    What the Democrats and Republicans don’t seem to understand is that not passing a bill funding different things (DHS, the entire government, etc.) is an even better outcome to conservatives and libertarians than passing the Republican version. Democrats are especially funny when they play brinksmanship. If I were in Congress I’d laugh at them and say, “you agree to our terms or the whole organization closes, which I prefer anyway.” The threat of shutdown isn’t a threat to me, it’s the ideal.

    Responses (1) +
  • [2] February 10, 2015 at 4:02pm

    I’m sad I can’t give you more than one thumb up on this comment.

  • February 10, 2015 at 3:51pm

    Your description assumes monopolistic behavior (ability to manipulate prices unilaterally), which may or may not exist. The whole point of the article is to show that there might be enough competition in the market to prevent any single producer from controlling pricing much through their own activity. Your point about who can hold out longer is good though. If U.S. production depends on prices above $75/barrel, the point is that competition only kicks in at that point, unless the US producers found a way to hedge against this contingency. I don’t know how they did, but presumably whatever they did will only last so long, so the question is whether their hedge carries them far enough to outlast OPEC’s need for money (so they quit flooding the market to drive prices down).

123 To page: Go
Restoring Love