User Profile: Pondskum

Member Since: September 24, 2011


  • [5] January 14, 2016 at 8:20pm

    For an english teacher she sure does have a one word vocabulary. I’d be embarrassed if I was the institution that employed her. Another thing, seems like it’s not all gun control, there’s alot of black lives matter and I hate cops in her rant there. I guess as an english teacher at that university you have alot of spare time on your hands.

  • [-1] January 14, 2016 at 8:09pm

    “As with any other business, if they are open or available to the public to purchase their services, they must equally serve all, regardless of religion, gender identity, race, etc… the usual protected classes commonly subject to bigotry.”
    I disagree here, I believe the constitution trumps the relatively newly made civil rights laws and they infringe on anyones right to freely associate and in this case it infringes on their religious beliefs. Obviously more than just our Supreme Court has been filled with judges not happy with just justifying laws constitutionality but they’d rather just make them fit.
    Unlike activists, if a business doesn’t want my business I have no problem finding one that wants my it.

    Responses (2) +
  • January 12, 2016 at 2:11pm

    I’ve been mulling over your comment here, and being just an ordinary joe i’m having trouble figuring out your point. Best I can come up with is your argument here states that people owning guns should undergo regular training as a requirement of their having that firearm and that “incompetent, incapable, sociopathic or mentally deranged” should be dealt with (having that right removed more than likely) by the “community”. Now if I have indeed translated this couple paragraphs correctly, i’ll take some time to say for a self proclaimed historian you seem off.

    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
    Reads when mixed with the history of the time that a regulated militia would have to be called upon to protect the U.S. homeland and that the right to own arms would not be taken away. If you wanted to quickly draw an effective army, the best way is to take from a pool of people that knew their arms well before you had to train them. You then only have to train them in standard military procedure and not how to fire their weapon as well. Some of these militias had men that knew their weapon better than they knew their own wives which made them crack shots. Yes, once drafted into the service of a militia they sorted out the undesirables as every military does, then released them from service. Seems you’re using that excuse to allow for rights to be infringed.

    Responses (1) +
  • [1] January 1, 2016 at 8:30am

    Our rights obviously include the right to a cake now…I have a right to associate or even do work for anyone I wish. Our relatively new discrimination laws are in direct conflict with the constitution, I can refuse to do work for anyone I choose. I face the consequences of losing some business but that’s how…wait for it….free market works. There is no “being a dick to others” clause in the constitution and no right to have someone work for you, sorry.

  • [1] May 30, 2014 at 8:14am

    I would like to know if anyone else noticed part of her argument that their V.A. is fine, is that they have new graveyards?

  • March 5, 2013 at 8:24pm

    not that i was considering reporting his comment…but why is it i am given the option of reporting every comment but the one posted by encinom…are the chronically stupid given special treatment?

  • March 2, 2013 at 9:26pm

    Sure seems like he’s advocating choosing candidates by the color of their skin not the content of their character doesn’t it?

    Responses (4) +
  • February 25, 2013 at 3:45pm

    Lived in north dakota for years. Great place, good people, rotten winters and amazing summers…there was no kkk organized up there and it’s a plains state they can’t just burn wooden crosses, there aren’t enough trees.

  • February 25, 2013 at 3:32pm

    I find it odd that had they shown up in che, mao or stalin masks i’m certain not one word would have been said, not one article published. But you put someone in a kkk like hood or nazi like uniform and people immediately will get offended and think i’m going to care…just seems odd to me

  • February 6, 2013 at 10:19pm

    Amendment 5 of the constitution the parts that apply are

    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except the Militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger..

    This would explain why an officer can take a life if necessary it’s under public danger. Again i’m not a scholar this is just my take on it.

    Far as I can tell and i’m not a scholar this means that you need to be tried before sentence is given unless as it says your in service at time of war or a matter of public danger.

  • February 3, 2013 at 9:53am

    A lack of religion isn’t a religion in itself. Just thought i’d point that out.

  • December 18, 2012 at 12:11pm

    I’ll be joining the NRA as soon as i’m done posting this. I have no need of what is currently classified as an assault rifle but find it interesting that people that support gun ownership would actually find this acceptable. Who determines what makes an “assault rifle”? Lets look at it, semi automatic-covers a wide range of guns, lightweight-not my cup of tea but alot like their firearms light, scope-I don’t know if they consider this assault worthy but the point is they could, bayonet mount- my mosin nagant has one of these not what i’d call an assault rifle, high capacity magazines-how high is high capacity 5,10,15. My point is who determines what constitutes an assault rifle and chances are they will err on the side of being too regulatory and we’ll all be sitting around with single shot black powder firearms or bows and arrows. I have been given the right to keep and bear arms, which has saved many lives people don’t think about. The japanese were asked after world war 2 why they never invaded the mainland of the united states after the war was over and the response was…there would be a gun behind every tree. Our right to bear arms I believe has saved us from more deaths than people remember.

  • December 10, 2011 at 1:46am

    As an agnostic I still celebrate Christmas, my celebration centers more on being close to family and friends and good will toward all men…though there are many self important jerks that believe that the universe revolves around themselves and their beliefs. Agnosticism and Atheism are not religions and should not be treated as such, they are a lack of religion.
    Another point I’d like to bring up is I don’t remember the exact phrasing in the constitution that says that you and I have the right not to be offended, could have missed that one. I think Lee Marvin said it best in Paint Your Wagon when speaking of California “Where you don’t have to love thy neighbor, you leave the b-stard alone!”

  • December 5, 2011 at 3:23pm

    No wonder so many people cheat that system, her housing allowance is about what I make in a month at my full time job…it’s sad.

  • November 28, 2011 at 4:59pm

    Encinom first point i’d like to make is that though tea party folks believe generally in the 2nd amendment I don’t believe it’s part of the tea party platform.
    To answer your question “Tea Baggers explan to me how these holiday pictures are any different than those from the West Bank, with kids posing as jihadists? ”
    1. Generally in the jihad photos their faces are all covered.
    2. Santa would be decapitated due to the fact he’s an infidel
    3. Americans look happier with their guns.
    4. Never seen a west bank jihadi roundup photo with a snowing background and colorful presents…they generally stick to more drab backdrops.
    5. I think you have gun ownership mixed up with watching our current presidents speeches

    Happy holidays and keep your powder dry…I’m getting old I prefer my ol ’39 Mosin/Nagant

  • November 26, 2011 at 12:41am

    I personally believe the governors communications director sucks for scanning twitter during the field trip, the governor sucks for getting bent out of shape and the school principal sucks even more for being so afraid that the schools precious image may be tarnished by a twitter post that he overreacted. If she was tweeting during school hours and it’s not allowed, punish her for that. If saying someone sucks is considered swearing and breaks the rules on foul language at school punish her for that. Neither of those is reason to write a letter apologizing for hurting the feelings of the governor dictated by the principal. Perhaps people need to start remembering that mean things are said all the time and you just consider the source and move on with your life…

  • September 24, 2011 at 9:03am

    I had a shepard/pit mix for 12 years of her 16 year lifespan, first 4 were in a cage fed once a day before I got her. Best dog I ever owned, best around kids though they occasionally had a pinecone thrown in thier face. Not one aggressive action from her as a matter of fact I used to joke about someone killing me and she’d be in their car ready to go for a ride. My aussie was my protector, and now I own a great pyranese (forgive the spelling) that attacks other animals. I never trained a dog for protection that’s why I have guns. Just saying in my experience you never really know what attitude your dog will have, alot like people they each have their own personality. My dogs are members of my family and try and ban mine and you won’t have to worry about my dog but may have to worry about me.

    In reply to the story Should Certain Dog Breeds Be Banned?