User Profile: jmbreland

jmbreland

Member Since: November 28, 2012

Comments

  • May 3, 2014 at 7:51pm

    It’s not a issue of fraudulent numbers (although they may very well be false). The real issue is whch numbers are relevant. The number of people not working is vastly different from the number of people who are officially “unemployed.” The number of people not participating in the job market continues to skyrocket. “Unemployment” numbers only account for those who are still looking for jobs. The percentage of people who are not working and not looking is much higher than those deemed “unemployed.”

  • [1] May 1, 2014 at 12:48am

    Sometimes spooning back to people the medicine they’re trying to dispense can be a powerful tool. Folks need to start filing Equal Opportunity complaints and demanding investigations of fools like the administrators at Princeton on grounds that they are illegally discriminating against people based on their gender, ethnicity, religion, etc. EO complaints stall or abort careers. Stir up enough of them, and the idiots might be bothered to get a clue and back off.

  • [1] April 25, 2014 at 9:53am

    So Bundy ruffles feathers among enthusiasts of the “racism” industry. But is he right? Let’s consider the facts. Southern slaves depended on their plantation masters (all democrats, by the way) for food and lodging. Their families were splintered in the slave markets. They had no hope of escape. Emancipation arrived, but then a few decades later, along comes LBJ, master of the government plantation. So today, descendants of the slaves depend on the government for food and lodging. Their families are decimated by government policy. They have no hope of escaping the subsidized poverty cycle. The only different is that the Southern plantations grew cotton. The cash crop on the government plantation is votes.

    So who’s the racist here? Bundy, who questions whether the modern Black family is better off than their enslaved ancestors? Or the political heirs of LBJ, who infamously said of his “war on poverty” scheme, “These Negros, they’re getting pretty uppity these days. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something. I’ll have those n*****s voting democratic for the next 200 years.”

    The truth may be unpleasant, but it’s still the truth.

    Responses (1) +
  • February 21, 2014 at 8:34pm

    I sent the Austin PD an email telling them that they have some serious explaining to do.

    http://www.austintexas.gov/email/police3

  • February 21, 2014 at 8:26pm

    Jackboot police thugs like this are going to get killed. And when I sit on the jury of whoever shot them, I’ll vote for a medal instead of a conviction.

  • February 20, 2014 at 8:24pm

    Glenn is absolutely right, and as an officer in the U.S. Army, I’ve been saying it for some time. Obama (and his string pullers) have successfully mounted a bloodless (mostly, so far) coup against the U.S. Constitution. We military officers have sworn an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I’m convinced that the day is soon coming when we’ll have to make some hard choices about living up to that oath.

    Responses (3) +
  • January 29, 2014 at 7:00am

    And you really think the mere purchase of a permit will stop leaches with lawyers from filing lawsuits?

  • December 27, 2013 at 7:01am

    Yes, and German Jews submitted to Hitler’s requirement to wear yellow stars, too.

  • December 26, 2013 at 9:35pm

    As an attorney in the U.S. Army, I can assure you that prayer is alive and well in the military–as it should be and always will be. Last time I was in Iraq, our commander gathered us all around and prayed aloud before every mission. No one objected. All official ceremonies begin and end with an invocation and benediction, and I’ve never attended a unit-sponsored, special event involving a meal (Christmas, Thanksgiving, etc.) that didn’t involve a prayer. In fact, I would relish an encounter with a military official who tried to infringe on religious expression. He would quickly find himself embroiled in every variety of administrative complaint found in this JAG officer’s kit bag.

  • October 28, 2013 at 8:43pm

    You always will find some elements of the church gullible enough–or corrupt enough–to collaborate with evil. Even Hitler has his collaborators among supposedly Christian groups.

  • June 13, 2013 at 10:53am

    Who are the seventy??

  • March 31, 2013 at 2:58pm

    So it’s “inevitable” that a future GOP candidate fir President will support gay marriage? If so, then it’s inevitable that a future GOP candidate will lose.

    The GOP, in my opinion, is a lost cause. I’ve supported it by default all of my life, but “democrat-lite” is not my party and will not receive my vote.

    And by the way, the “States’ rights” argument is bogus in this context. DOMA doesn’t tell states how to define marriage. It merely defines the marriages in which the parties may receive federal benefits. A state can legalize “marriage” between humans and baboons, and DOMA will be irrelevant until Steve and his baboon buddy try to file a joint tax return.

    Responses (1) +
  • March 30, 2013 at 2:54pm

    And why, pray, is it unacceptable to classify sodomy alongside bestiality, pediphilia, alcoholism, and other deviant behaviors? We must remember that homosexuality was deemed a deviant behavior by the American Psychological Association until the APA leadership, in the 1970s caved to threats, blackmail, and other forms of intimidation and arbitrarily changed the standard.

  • March 27, 2013 at 7:39am

    After reading this article, I immediately scanned the several hundred icons that represent my friends on Facebook. Only one square turned up. I quickly fixed that anomaly.

    Responses (2) +
  • February 4, 2013 at 6:20pm

    Nice try, but if you believe a million parents signed on to have their children led by perverts, I’ll sell you miles of beachfront property in Arizona. I have two boys in Scouting. If the National Organization folds on this pivotal moral issue, we will no longer participate in fundraising activities that benefit the BSA beyond the local troop level. Direct donations will benefit local organizations more effectively, anyhow.

  • November 27, 2012 at 8:27pm

    You’re right, JC, the questions are answered. And the answers aren’t pretty.