User Profile: DrFrost


Member Since: December 28, 2010


123 To page: Go
  • October 30, 2014 at 8:47am

    “Mayor Annise Parker said Wednesday that the subpoenas weren’t intended to infringe on anyone’s religious freedoms, but rather to help the city defend itself against a lawsuit challenging the ordinance that the City Council approved in May.”

    You subpeona sermons and it doesn’t occur to you that you might be treading on first amendment rights (which includes both free speech and religious freedom)?!?!? Really?!?!

  • [58] October 29, 2014 at 9:50am

    I do indeed wholeheartedly concurr.

    Responses (1) +
  • October 29, 2014 at 9:48am

    One thing you can count on Barkley for is to give you his honest opinion. Sometimes he’s right. Sometimes he’s wrong. But you know he’s not going to lie to you because the answer is hard to hear or politically incorrect. I respect that.

  • [3] October 29, 2014 at 9:42am

    So Farrow is obviously more concerned with “whether this it the most saavy way to frame this” as opposed to “Is this right or wrong.”

  • [3] October 28, 2014 at 9:15am

    “Uh oh… someone noticed our unconstitutional activity. We’ll curtail it for awhile until we get rid of that whole ‘bill of rights’ thing altogether.” – IRS

  • [5] October 27, 2014 at 10:00am

    A president making up the rules as he goes along, rewriting laws carte blanche and refusing to enforce laws he disagrees with – why shouldn’t impeachment be the first card played?

    Responses (5) +
  • October 27, 2014 at 8:53am

    They’re taking a play from the KGB’s handbook. Tell a lie a thousand times and it becomes the truth.

  • [27] October 27, 2014 at 8:49am

    I agree. Kudos to her for helping those people in Africa. Now she needs to help people here and stay quarantined.

  • [2] October 23, 2014 at 8:57am

    I’ve made this point before. It’s not freedom of religion or freedom of speech if they can take away your livelihood and property for expressing yourself or staying truth to your religious beliefs.

  • [1] October 17, 2014 at 10:26am

    You can use the same reasoning for anything illegal. Making it illegal just makes people hide it, and makes it more difficult to trace – putting the public in more danger. So obviously we should just make everything legal and we’d be much safer!

  • [34] October 15, 2014 at 8:53am

    “If someone is speaking from the pulpit and it’s political speech, then it’s not going to be protected.” – Feldman

    I must have missed the part where the first amendment excluded political speech. Pastors who do this risk losing their tax status, they do not forfeit their constitutional rights. But apparently the left knows no bounds in furthering their agenda. As Hillary said “There is only the fight.”

    Responses (2) +
  • October 13, 2014 at 5:25pm

    How can Wells Fargo “not allow” unions?

  • October 8, 2014 at 12:00pm

    Biden is all polish and no substance.

    Responses (1) +
  • [1] October 2, 2014 at 4:20pm

    Yep. If we got rid of all of those freedoms guaranteed in the constitution law enforcement would have a MUCH easier time solving crimes. I’m sure if we just threw that old document out our children would be much safer! [/sarcasm off]

  • September 19, 2014 at 8:33am

    I couldn’t care less if they were technically in debt when they left or if they were worth billions. The only question that matters is if they received money for political favors.

  • September 18, 2014 at 4:29pm

    I don’t have a problem with people who are coming to public service rich. When, however, they become rich while IN public service I begin to wonder…

    Responses (2) +
  • September 17, 2014 at 1:23pm

    Profit and revenue are very different. The NFL brings in a lot of money and puts out even more (it’s essentially a middle-man… similar to a bank in some ways). If you were to treat it like a corporation it would continually operate in the red (i.e. it wouldn’t pay any taxes anyway). The fact that it has nonprofit status actually means we (the public) get more visibility into the organization and the government has more influence over it (which is good AND bad IMO). The NBA gave up it’s nonprofit status specifically so it wouldn’t have to divulge financial information.

  • [2] September 15, 2014 at 10:25am

    My constitution says Zuckerberg can criticize the US government whenever and wherever he pleases.

  • [2] September 11, 2014 at 10:10am

    I haven’t made up my mind about Cruz but I’m proud of what he did here.

    Responses (1) +
  • September 6, 2014 at 10:25pm

    Isn’t that what this administration has done for years? If you criticize them you must be a racist or sexist or whatever other distraction they can possibly throw into the discussion to distract from the real issue. It can’t possibly be their fault… something must be wrong with you.

123 To page: Go