User Profile: SDW2001

Member Since: May 05, 2012


  • [2] September 16, 2015 at 9:13am

    Eh, as much as I despise all things Clinton, this security guy was just being a bit over zealous in doing his job. If he was personal security, he may have had a concern about why this guy was taking video of his well–known client. Could it be exploited for nefarious purposes (to determine security lapses?). Again, over-zealous. And, clearly not illegal to video her. But this one doesn’t amount to much. I’d much more worry about the fact that they shipped arms from Benghazi to Syria, lied about a video, and essentially took bribes through the CGF. The e-mail thing is just the padlock on all of that, which is why Madam Queen Clinton will do anything to prevent access.

    Responses (1) +
  • December 10, 2013 at 9:58am

    ^What that guy said!

  • February 5, 2013 at 8:11pm

    Ditto on any app (such as TextEdit) that I use. Welcome to protected memory. By the way, my new Dell Windows 7 machine a work has issues with Office quitting for no apparent reason. I’d take my Mac’s stability over Windows any day.

    Responses (3) +
  • February 5, 2013 at 8:10pm

    It crashes Safari, but not the whole machine. Interesting bug.

    Responses (1) +
  • December 18, 2012 at 3:59pm

    “The purpose of good test scores is to garner more money for the union teachers. (It’s never about the kids.)”

    Speaking as a teacher, I find that comment unfortunate and misguided. Most systems don’t have test performance rewards for teachers. If they do, there is no distinction between union and non-union teachers. And, I can tell you that I’m not aware of any union that supports pay for test performance. It’s something they oppose completely.

    I don’t disagree with your other comments.

  • December 1, 2012 at 12:08pm

    Despite the hilarity that is Pastafarianism and the FSM, this lady doesn’t have a chance, legally speaking. Any challenge would come down to whether her “religion” is actually a belief system, or just contrived to make a point. She’s clearly an atheist in reality and is therefore being intellectually dishonest about her “beliefs.”

    Again, I find the FSM and so-called Pastafarianism to be absolutely hilarious, clever, etc. However, what bothers me (beyond the intellectual dishonesty) is the aggressive stance atheists are taking towards believers. I can understand fighting for one’s legal right to display something alongside nativity scene, even if I don’t agree with the message nor necessarily agree with that legal right. However, what I can’t understand is the desire to provoke and offend Christians. I mean, really? You’re that offended by a Christmas display?

  • December 1, 2012 at 12:00pm

    There is quite a bit of truth to what you say in terms of the origins of various traditions. That said, people have been using these traditions to celebrate holidays such as Christmas for hundreds of years, so at this point they could be considered intertwined.

  • October 29, 2012 at 9:27am

    This map is hugely wrong. First, Michigan and Wisconsin are tied. Romney is within 3 in Minnesota…MINNESOTA. Ohio is tied. PA is within the margin, with some polls showing Romney leading by 4. FL, VA, NC and CO are all going Romney.

    But the real story is turnout and party ID. Republicans have seen a 15 point swing in their direction since 2008. These polls are using 2008 data to estimate turnout and adjust the sample. Many polls are still using 2008-like data, including estimates for minority turnout. Additionally, keep in mind that the challenger gets the lion’s share of the undecided vote. That means a 48-48 tie is likely a 51-48 lead for the challenger. Romney will win this by 5-7 points and over 100 electoral votes. Write it down.

  • September 24, 2012 at 8:30pm

    Speaking as a music teacher, I must say: YOU DOLTS. You can have a Russian show..that’s fine. But a show celebrating the Russian Revolution? Are you kidding me? That’s like having a Chavez or Castro Latin American show.

  • September 22, 2012 at 10:38am

    Welcome to the Fascism of the Left, everyone. Those who hold opinions that differ with their extreme views are indicted as racists, bigots, war mongers, idiots, etc. It doesn’t matter what your reasoning is for opposing gay marriage. You can’t even express CONCERN about allowing gay marriage. If you oppose it, you’re a bigot. So says the Left.

    Responses (3) +
  • August 27, 2012 at 10:53pm

    I’ve got to hand it to MSNBC. They’ve amassed a collection of personalities that I would love to punch in the face. Matthews conduct was egregious and outrageous. It’s right up there with Toure and Chris Hayes. These people are in complete meltdown. If they weren’t so hateful, it would be amusing.

  • August 21, 2012 at 7:33pm

    Pell Grants and other government aid makes college more EXPENSIVE. What an intellectually dishonest sack of a President we have.

  • August 16, 2012 at 10:56am

    I am a music teacher in a public school district. There is deep-rooted precedent for religious songs being used to study musical concepts. It happens all the time, especially at the secondary level. The primary purpose of these songs is not religious, which by the way…is the same grounds on which “under God” was upheld in the Pledge (the latter was deemed a “patriotic exercise”). As long as the district is not forcing elementary children to sing the songs over their or their parents’ objections, and as long as they are clearly not being used as prayer, there is no legal problem. That being said, I don’t think I would use such songs in my district, unless they were, say, patriotic in nature. One learns to avoid poking the bear on these topics.

    As for the FFRF: Their entire existence is absolutely absurd. One does not have a right to freedom from religion in this country. One has a right not to practice a religion or believe in God, but one does not have the freedom to avoid all mention of religion. That infringes on the 1st Amendment rights of OTHER people. Ironic, hmm?

  • July 25, 2012 at 3:54pm

    Another example of the Fascism of the LEFT. No disagreement with their “progressive” morality and enlightened thinking is permitted. Whether you agree with the CEO or not, the chain does not “discriminate.” Get ready for a 1st Amendment lawsuit.

  • July 25, 2012 at 3:53pm

    There are some problems with this attitude here. First, they claim to have visited City Hall to investigate what was needed. They were apparently given incorrect information. Secondly, the laws in this case are the problem. He can’t set up a hot dog cart on private property with the owner’s consent? Come on. That is absolutely unreasonable. It’s all being done by a local government that is picking winners and losers based on their “downtown” tax system that “protects” restaurants that pay extra for “amenities.” It’s nothing more than a legal mafia. A permit is one thing. Preventing a food cart of private property is another. In fact, I’d like to see the owner of the property and the boy’s family team up to give the City the collective finger.

  • July 6, 2012 at 10:35am

    Just more lies by Barry Soetero. This administration comes out and just outright lies to our faces, and the media goes along with it. It’s truly incredible. Whether you’re thrilled with him or not, we must all work to elect Mitt Romney and a Republican majority. It’s not about whether we agree with everything they want. It’s about saving the nation from the destruction that Obama, Pelosi and Reid have wrought.

  • June 14, 2012 at 12:56pm

    Yeah, it must be so offensive to see a symbol of a religion you don’t subscribe too. I’m just SO hopping mad whenever I see a Menorah or Crescent Moon. The reality is you and yours are nothing but intolerant and condescending. You don’t just disagree with people of faith, you think they are morons. You scream constantly that the mere fact that you have to look at their symbols is a violation of your First Amendment rights. And yet, you are ironically undaunted in your quest to take away THEIR rights.

    The fact is that the First Amendment is supposed to protect expression, not suppress it. There is no legal prohibition at the Federal or State level regarding religious symbols on public property, nor does the phrase “Separation of Church and State” appear in the Constitution. You have a right not to believe in God. You don’t have a right to take my freedom of expression away. You don’t have a right to impose your <4% minority view on the rest of us.

  • May 20, 2012 at 6:19pm

    Technically you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.

  • May 5, 2012 at 9:26am

    No fan of A-Coop, but wow…well done. He refused to back off on a great point. The entire War on Women is completely and utterly bogus.