User Profile: hammer31

Member Since: November 09, 2010


  • June 9, 2014 at 6:43pm

    If all discrimination is bad (as many with your attitude have said) then if you refuse service to someone that can not pay for your services, then you would be guilty of discriminating against the poor. If you do not like the way this guy does business, then go into his community and open your own bakery and beat the snot out of him by serving all that come through your door.

  • June 9, 2014 at 6:39pm

    Anti-discrimination laws were only supposed to apply to governments and not private businesses as they were an out shoot of the civil rights era. Once they were expanded into private businesses then things have gone wrong. A PRIVATE business can pick and choose their clients from those that present themselves but a GOVERNMENT must serve all the citizens equally and fairly. If I wish to reduce my client pool by not serving gays I will have one of three outcomes; 1) I go under, 2) I survive with smaller client list or 3) I fold to pressures of the market and serve all. If #2 happens, a competitor comes in and steals my under served clients away from me and they profit from my decision. Look at that, problem solved without government intervention.

    Responses (1) +
  • May 22, 2014 at 6:52pm

    True, but the limitations on Federal power are found in Article 1, Section 8 that stipulates only the powers that can be exercised by the congress. Since (in theory) the executive can only execute the laws passed by congress, the limitations on congress ARE the limitations on the executive branch. That kills most of the executive branch agencies if the authorizing legislation is repealed or found to be extra-constitutional by the courts (their only power under article 3). I personally would not hold my breath on any of this.

  • May 19, 2014 at 10:36pm

    What?! A historically ignorant progressive! Impossible as they are smartest creatures to ever walk the Earth! Just ask them and they will tell you so!

  • January 26, 2014 at 8:29pm

    I would rather have incidents like this than the riots and burning cars that happen in Paris all the time in the “ethical” neighborhoods (once every couple months or so). There are areas that the local cops do not go into nor do they answer calls for. They actually warn you about those areas that they have abandoned. But covering that would hurt feelings so we can not have that.

  • January 23, 2014 at 8:10pm

    Welcome to the Thug-Ocracy! S&P down grade the national debt, charge them with a crime. Someone criticize you in a movie, charge them with a crime. This is sounding more like the Wilson/FDR/Lincoln administrations with the political motivated criminal charges. What’s next? Political motivated “Disappearances” without a trial (FDR and Wilson pulled this crap too)

  • January 20, 2014 at 10:50am

    These discrimination laws have morphed out of their original intent. They started aimed at the government due to experiences in the Civil Rights era with GOVERNMENTS doing the discrimination activity. Over the decades the governments have aimed them at the people which is backwards, IMHO. If a business does not want to serve someone the business will either continue on with a smaller possible market, fold to the market and provide service or go out of business. GOVERNMENTS are the only entity that MUST serve all the people no matter what. Business can and should discriminate if the owners wish to do it. I am not advocating for them to do so (makes poor market sense to artificially limit ones potential customer base) but it is their right to do it.

    Responses (1) +
  • December 12, 2013 at 9:24pm

    For a fire ant colony, that was a little one. I saw ones in Alabama that were big enough to fall into.

    Responses (1) +
  • December 8, 2013 at 6:04pm

    Is it bad that every time I hear about some “Social Outrage” that results from insults or violent actions against a protected class that I do not believe it? I look at each of these stories and think, BS, they are just trying to “start a conversation” crap. Maybe I am just getting old and crotchety but I look at everything as false unless I can verify it with good data/video/audio that at least looks believable.

    Responses (1) +
  • October 25, 2013 at 8:19pm

    I live just south of Seattle and it has already happened. The WEEKEND AFTER they put these signs up, there were 2 robberies at supporting stores. They did not make the front page of the papers or the newscasts locally but you can find them in the police blotter for about 2 days and then they were scrubbed. Some of the stores that were participating have pulled the signs down since it makes them more of a target.

  • January 11, 2013 at 8:32pm

    So, the unions and the OWS folks said the same and worse and they said it multiple times. I am pretty sure that some of those union folks had CCWs and I have not heard of any of those folks getting their permit pulled. This is very concerning. But this is just like that tool Gregory not getting charged with a weapons violation in DC, if they like you, they ignore any pesky law that gets in your way. We are no longer a nation of laws but of men.

  • November 3, 2012 at 10:08pm

    I thought the UN was supposed to stop this stuff. Oh Wait, they are only there to stop CONSERVATIVE voter fraud. Progressive voter fraud is just fine.

    Responses (1) +
  • October 24, 2012 at 8:34am

    What is wrong with the progressive mind that says things like this are a good thing? We see this all the time with the Gays and Minority communities staging “attacks” and then reporting falsely of the attack. When they get caught it is always to “start the conversation”. WTH?! A conservative does this and they are kicked out of most conservative organizations that I know of and the police lower the boom on them. Libs just skip of yakking on their Obama-Phone about what they did for the “Cause”.

    Responses (2) +
  • October 21, 2012 at 10:19pm

    So let me get this straight. They endorse Obama (maybe not directly but it sure seems like it) and then they have determined to monitor the polls. This is to prevent “conservative vote suppression”. Why are we funding or even listening to these goons? The UN needs to piss off.

  • October 8, 2012 at 3:38pm

    This was done by the Clintons in their day and the Obamas. Why does this surprise people? Progressives love to write laws but can not be expected to follow them (Turbo Tax anyone?).

  • October 5, 2012 at 9:12am

    How is it deceiving the boy? Each meeting, when I was in scouts (made Eagle), we repeated the pledge which included the phrase “morally straight”. If the kid was confused then his parents or teachers are to blame by not comprehending basic English.

    Bottom line is that if you want to advance in any organization, you have to toe the line or leave.

  • August 3, 2012 at 10:25am

    I hate to say this, but as an MP in the military I was told the same thing. A contractor kept coming on a research station (all classified projects) with illegal aliens. After we busted all of his workers for the third time in a week, we were told they were off limits. We even caught a couple taking pictures of some of the communications gear and barracks on the base! If I could not do my job, what was the point. This was one of the reasons I left the military.

    BTW – This was back when Bubba was in charge and I was stationed in the Washington DC military district. Do all progressives behave the same way?

  • July 25, 2012 at 9:52pm

    What gets me is that people complain about “Assault Weapons” (rather nebulous term) about being not “possible for the founding fathers to have seen this”. Back then CANNONS were legal for civilian ownership. Whatever you could afford, you could have. Even back in the civil war, private citizens purchased cannons and small arms and formed companies on their own, on both sides of the conflict. I have found evidence that this occurred during the Spanish/American war also.

    If you think that the populace of the US is for gun control, propose and amendment to the constitution to overturn the 2nd amendment. Since you can not garner those votes then you pass gun control legislation (unconstitutional IMHO, but I think the NFA is unconstitutional also) and regulations. If you can not get your way, then you should freely choose to not purchase nor participate in any of the arms industry, including your ARMED private/governmental protective forces (I am talking to you Bloomberg/Moore/etc..). Until then, buzz off.

    Responses (2) +
  • February 14, 2012 at 9:29pm

    I just did a Google search to try to find any mention of militia during the Bush administration and drew a blank for domestic news stories. I do remember that during the Clinton administration there were several reports of them (outside of the Waco and Ruby Ridge incidents). Is it me or is it during only progressive administrations that this stuff is dredged up like the “Hidden terror of the JEW!” (Germany ala 1930′s) as a domestic boogie man?