User Profile: RajCaj


Member Since: March 02, 2012


123 To page: Go
  • [7] September 12, 2014 at 4:40pm

    …and to continue on my last statement.

    The truth of the matter is….EVERYTHING these days has some form of government subsidies associated with it. Remember the “You didn’t build that” mentality by the Elizabeth Warrens?

    The FFRF groups are just picking the low hanging fruit right now (roadside crosses, Nativity Scenes on small town city hall property, etc)

    If you played the logic they are using to it’s conclusion…could they prevent anyone who lives in section 8 housing from putting a cross on their door? Would someone who collects welfare be prevented from religious expression because they are receiving tax payer dollars?

    I find it interesting that there are two efforts going on concurrently….1) establish a rule that anyone / anything that receives any benefit from the gov cannot reference any religion in any form 2) Make everyone / everything receive some sort of benefit form the gov.

    Things that make you go hmm…

  • [1] September 12, 2014 at 4:30pm


    I may be misunderstanding macpappy’s post, but I don’t think he is supporting the logic / court precedence being used by the FFRF to win these cases where religious symbols are being removed on the basis of “separation of church n’ state”. I actually thought he was making the opposite point, by quoting the actual 1st Amendment clause (Congress shall create no law…)

    The stick the FFRF groups are using to beat down all these religious symbols is from a court case in the 70s regarding the display of the Nativity Scene on government property.

    An activist judge ruled in the case that by a government agency allowing a religious symbol on public property (which is paid for by public dollars) it was akin (or equal to) congress creating a law to establish one religion over another. Put simply….it was a hell of a reach, by an activist judge, to connect public dollars being spent (even indirectly) on a religious symbol with the actual reading of the 1st Amendment Establishment Clause.

    Since then, the new legal standard is that no religious symbol shall be on, within, or included in any piece of land, building, or any asset that either directly or indirectly receives public funding.

    Hence, why a state college that receives some of it’s funding from the gov is prohibited from displaying any religious symbol…regardless of the context of said religious symbol.

  • [14] September 12, 2014 at 4:16pm

    Exactly…welcome to the new age of politics….where the two factions have politicized everything under the sun, and there shall be no common ground between. As such, any opinion or preference held in high regard to one party is despised in the other. Meaning, saying the pledge of allegiance is a “Republican thing”, and we most certainly cannot offend Democrats because they should be against it.

    They also might be fearful of a lawsuit from the FFRF….you know CBS is regulated by the FCC & sends it’s content over “the peoples” airwaves….and as such there can be no mention of the word God because it would be an infringement of the separation of church n’ state. (don’t laugh, it’s coming)

    Responses (1) +
  • [8] September 11, 2014 at 9:35am


    William Jefferson is in jail. That said, taking bribes, while wielding the power of a state official is a much different offense than organizing more than the allowable financial contributes to a political campaign are worlds apart.


    Dinish Is American, jumping through all the hoops & paying all the money required to be a legal citizen in this country. His guilt is not in contention here.

    The debate is regarding the sentencing. Should he serve over a year in jail for donating $15,000 to a political campaign, instead of $5,000, while there are countless examples of other more severe lawlessness going unchecked? If his political affiliation were any different, would the prosecution be as aggressive?

    That is the question.

  • [34] September 11, 2014 at 9:26am

    That is exactly Dinish’s point (which the prosecution is trying to use against him).

    How many Democrat politicians do we have that have evaded tax laws or hadn’t paid their taxes?

    How many people ultimately achieve the same ends (donating more than the max allowable $5000 to a campaign) but do so going through PACs & taking advantage of other asinine loopholes?

    Dinish is guilty of breaking the law, and he admits as much…

    But all things being relative, Ray Rice knocks another woman out…or Donte Stallworth kills a man with his car, with an illegal amount of alcohol in his blood with no prison time…..but a guy who convinces friends to donate to a campaign he supports…and who plans to pay them back gets a year in jail?

    Immigrants from another country, who are here illegally, spend less than a year in jail for committing violent federal crimes and they want to send Dinish to jail for 16 months? lol

  • [14] September 10, 2014 at 11:01am


    First off, you’re basing your argument off complete conjecture. We don’t know whether or not the security guard got 2 weeks, or 2 months of training.

    What we do know is what “kind” of training this security guard received…and that is where the focus should be.

    Who told this security guard that there was a zero tolerance policy on wearing camo fatigues, when there was no such policy? Why would the security guard assume that a US soldier in uniform would offend students?

    Furthermore, is this train of thought consistent with the hypersensitivity around “guns” that we’ve seen students get suspended for chewing their pop-tart in the shape of an “L”, or folding their fingers in the shape of an “L”?

    There is absolutely no reasonable argument that can be made to keep a parent of a student off the premises, that happens to be a US Soldier & in their work uniform.

  • [4] September 10, 2014 at 1:08am

    It’s because the Democrats are coated with Teflon. Aided & abetted by the press outlets that haven’t had the “C”onservative scarlet letter strapped around their neck, the Democrats are allowed to spin the very thing that would otherwise do them in onto the Republicans.

    DOJ gets caught illegally running guns to Mexican Cartels and it’s the NRA & 2nd Amendment supporters that are all over the news, in regards to gun rights in our society.

    State Department & the White House make a bad call and get one of our Ambassadors killed in Benghazi, yet they are the ones that have framed themselves as the victims of an overzealous political witch hunt.

    The Republican political hacks are too afraid of political blow back to stand up to the administration, and the Republicans that do are marginalized as bigots.

  • [5] September 9, 2014 at 11:52am

    I agree with the breakout, only to add that in many restaurants the tips are shared between bussers & cooks.

    So if the table isn’t clean upon being seated (busser) and the food is cold, burnt, undercooked, etc. (cook), it does affect the tip.

    And if the tips go only to the server….holding them accountable for the other stuff might prompt them to hold their team members accountable.

    (Much like how a Leshawn McCoy should hold his O-Lineman accountable for him getting stuffed behind the line of scrimmage)

    All that said….all my friends that worked as waiters in restaurants in college pulled down 20-25k a year (part time) while I made only 8-10k a year working part time as an IT manager.

    As part time jobs while in college go, good waiters at decent restaurants will pull in 2x as much a year as most other entry level part time jobs.

  • [39] September 9, 2014 at 9:58am

    What Grizmama said….

    Nothing wrong with flying the Mexican flag…but the generally accepted rule with flying flags is that no other is flown higher than the US flag.

  • [30] September 9, 2014 at 9:50am

    1. You don’t need to be dressed in camo to serve a warrant…even if it’s a drug dealer

    2. There are all kinds of reports over the last few years where SWAT has been called to bust down doors to homes where prank calls get the residents “SWATTED”, or accusations of having firearms, etc….not just evil drug dealers that walk around with AK-47s & Uzis

    3. The guy filming might be a d-bag, but even in the best case scenario (police in this instance are honorable LEOs & the guy filming was an antagonizing a-hole), the precedent this sets allows for much less honorable cops to do the same to much more honorable citizens.

    That is why we have a constitution of negative liberties….to set absolute boundaries on the government, because “discretion” is relative from cop to cop & politician to politician.

  • [9] September 4, 2014 at 4:44pm

    It’s incredible to think that in 2014, this kind of stuff is happening in the world. So many of the generations that did not witness WWII ask how the world at large allowed something like the holocaust happen, or a ruthless dictator like Hitler rise to power. Well…we are seeing it first hand. A twisted mix mash of political correctness, political corruption, with a dose of apathy & naiveté.

    That said….it can’t JUST be the US doing something about this. Where is NATO? Where is the UN? Where are the Arab states that ISIS has their target on next? ISIS members talked about going up to Istanbul to open the water dam, that provides fresh water to Iraq. Saudi Arabia royalty doesn’t want to lose their political power & oil revenue to a bunch of Islamist radicals. Where is Germany, France, Spain, Italy, England?

    Have they forgotten WWII?

    I’m all for the criticism the president has received, in terms of not showing leadership in this effort….but I do agree that this can’t be a US only operation.

    It’s time the Europeans step up to the plate.

  • [1] September 4, 2014 at 11:36am

    That’s because it’s all been sold as an equal application of tolerance, diversity, equal opportunity.

    In reality (and for the people who are in the know & understand CRT) the application of tolerance, diversity & equal opportunity are intentionally a one way street, for the benefit of socially engineering “equality” among races….be it bringing an entire race down a few pegs, or exclusively elevating a minority race up.

    That’s how you can have Black/Hispanic/Asian only fraternities, societies, groups, and not be in violation of the rules that prevent the same for whites.

    I had a hard time reconciling this growing up in the 90s, until I learned about critical race theory later in life.

  • [2] September 4, 2014 at 11:28am


    It’s called cognitive dissonance. Unfortunately, the irony of the situation likely never set in, or changed their view…and was probably discounted as an anomaly, or rationalized the behavior of the black girl that did it.

  • [5] September 4, 2014 at 11:22am

    Point well taken, and I could see the humor in it all if the consequences for crap like this weren’t so severe.

    And this isn’t an isolated case. There was a story not long ago where a black woman set herself on fire & carved the N-Bomb on the hood of her car, and told the police she was a victim of a race based hate crime. There was another story of a lesbian that carved “lesbian” on her body, trashed her apartment, and told police that she was a victim of a sexual preference based hate crime.

    In both cases, radical activists…that have been taught the social construct they belong to faces categorical discrimination at the hands of the “other”….and in the absence of an actual case that backs up their world view, they created one…and tried to make themselves a martyr for the cause in the process.

    And before the truth ultimately came out in these cases, the group of people they tried to pin the crime on suffered for something they never did.

    We will never be able to progress as a society to a place where people’s differences is not an issue so long and people keep dragging us back to the era of discrimination.

    If you have to make crap up to convince people your world view is justified, you’re doing it wrong.

    Responses (1) +
  • [5] September 3, 2014 at 4:18pm

    I think either are bad news. That said, I think countries in closer proximity have more to fear. I have no idea where Bachman got her info, but she said that a rogue jet liner entering Saudi airspace would only have 90 seconds to intercept the plane before it would be in range to take out major oil refineries or operations. Any interruption to oil supplies would further inflate energy prices higher than what they already are ($7.00+ a gallon of gasoline would kill commerce)

    At least we have the benefit of geographic proximity & NORAD to give us enough time to scramble fighter jets to bring down any unrecognized jetliners that were somewhere we didn’t expect to find them.

  • [7] September 3, 2014 at 9:58am


    It took me less than 2 minutes to find that the “English / Jesus” quote attributed to Bachman is complete BS. That quote was also used against the 1925 Texas Gov Miriam Ferguson.

    The IRS IS in charge of your healthcare, in that it is ultimately responsible for enforcing the law that requires everyone to have insurance or be taxed. They will not be picking your health care plan, but will force you to purchase insurance (with services that you may not require or need), or pay a couple thousand dollar tax. (Taking quotes out of context is fun – no?)

    The last statement was inaccurate, as those figures include BOTH the Bush & Obama presidency. That said, if you read the transcript from the interview that quote came from, the larger point she was arguing with Wolf Blitzer was that Obama’s inability to secure a deal with the Iraqi’s to keep US troops in the country meant that we were at risk of losing the 805 billion dollars & over 4,000 US lives spent to liberate the country.

    And what do you know….the amateur “JV” ISIS team annihilated the Iraqi army and is now in control of much of Iraq…and we are slowing shifting more troops back, after the fact.

    The last statement was political hack”ish” at best, but her larger point having been proven right certainly disqualifies her as being moronic.

  • [8] September 3, 2014 at 9:31am


    What is the purpose of having the concept & punishment for Treason, when the charge even evades Americans that join Jihadi forces that want to kill American soldiers / citizens?

    Responses (1) +
  • August 28, 2014 at 2:03pm

    Multiculturalism itself does not allow for sharia law to hold sway over all, but it is the vehicle that allows fringe groups / tribes / cultures to get a foothold into mainstream society…just as it has with socialism / communism so far.

    And you are correct on bigotry & radical animus – on both sides – preventing a return to a melting pot society……and that is absolutely by design of multiculturalism. It divides people into tribes, removes common values / ties between people of different backgrounds, which is then a perfect breeding ground for community organizers to whip those people into an activist mentality.

    And while everyone is busy fighting with each other, laws are changed, regulations are made, rules are twisted.

    The idea of Sharia taking hold in the US seems absurd, but if one wanted to give it the old college try…just do what the communists did (sure worked for them…and they’ve been nearly as brutal as ISIS has)

  • [2] August 26, 2014 at 9:38pm

    Its more than being ill-equiped to bring children in this world. Its the pop nature of objectifying women,glorifying violence, criminal behavior, and n archaic understanding of respect in that might is right. What do you expect from a pop culture that glorifies behavior in neighborhoods that will get you shot dead for no other reason than wearing the wrong color shirt on the wrong street corner?

  • [6] August 26, 2014 at 9:09pm


    That’s been my experience as well. I attended a middle school in the projects in the 90s and remember seeing black kids get teased by other black kids for “acting white” for doing well on tests, participating in class and “speaking proper English”.

    So let’s add this up….blacks are taught that they should first and foremost self identify according to their blackness, they’ve associated qualities that are generally associated with success as being white, and adopting said ” white” qualities is akin to betraying their race.

    Who is holding who back?

123 To page: Go