The Right Scoop
The democratic supporters of Barack Hussein Obama, in many places, are filthy degenerates who would be more at home in Cuba or Venezulea. It's a shame they can't go there and leave us alone. Vote them out, America!
This is the only ammunition they have against the republican conservatives. They have no clue and are not politically educated so they destroy our support signs for republicans.
I not only have anti-Obama stickers on my van, I have a concealed weapons license in order to defend it! Bring it, Liberal loons...I'm ready with my weapons and my faith!
Pathetic. The party of tolerance is anything but tolerant.
This is why I didn't put my anti-Obama sticker on my truck. I didn't want to come out to a vandalized truck. I can get my message out elsewhere.
I cannot wait until we get to see their reaction when Obama loses.
The Nazi brown shirts projected and attacked using the very same hatred, intolerance, bigotry onto Jews in the 1920's and 30's.. They, these radical Obama liberals, are truly a product of 21st century form of Nazism-ie; anti-semitic hate embodied fascist liberalism.. Along with allied partnership with arab islaimic muslim fundamentalist extremism, aka radical islam.
"NOBAMA 2012 - Truth" video. Please pass it on. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLmNiXIsg2c
Where are the police when people are vandalizing en flagrante?? I hope I don't hear mealy mouthed Repubs trying to reason with violent out-of-control people, saying It's all free speech....call the cops!! this is at least disturbing the peace and destroying private property. Property of Repub HQ. Advertising signs are property, not OK to trash.
Leftists are soooooooooooooooooo tolerant, ain't they, bro?
FuBar Ack is practically already gone ----------> it is new NORMAL. ;)
Liberalism is a mental disease.
Levin had another great line tonight.... "take their iphone and they will cut your throat, take their liberty and they will still vote for you."
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."
Benjamin Franklin
(quote source: http://www.cancertutor.com/Quotes/Quotes_Presidents.html)
" I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."-Thomas Jefferson
"God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath?"
-Thomas Jefferson --Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII, p. 237.
(source: http://christianity.about.com/od/independenceday/a/foundingfathers.htm)
Actually the quoit is as follows:
A person who would give up essential liberty for a little temporary safety, deserves neither liberty nor safety.
Franklin never used the word security.
Additionally, the Democrat's platform is an adoption of what God speaks about in Romans 1- it is a platform of utter rejection of their Creator.
"If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a Nation gone under." - Ronald Reagan
(source of above quote: http://www.thelandofthefree.net/quotationchristian.html)
John Witherspoon, Signer of Declaration of Independence, Clergyman & President of Princeton University
"Whoever is an avowed enemy of God, I scruple not to call him an enemy of his country."
--Sermon at Princeton University, "The Dominion of Providence over the Passions of Men," May 17, 1776.
(source: http://christianity.about.com/od/independenceday/a/foundingfathers_3.htm)
"Bad men cannot make good citizens. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience are incompatible with freedom."
Patrick Henry
(quote source: http://www.cancertutor.com/Quotes/Quotes_Presidents.html)
The way we use security today is entirely different from It use 250 years ago. It was not interchangeable with safety as it is today.
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.”
Alexis de Tocqueville
Now de Tocqueville was writing in the early part of the 19th century. It appears that not much has changed, except now we have a political class that maintains it's power by buying votes(all in the name of helping those in need).
Yes I do agree with you. Of course it is amazing how people will sell themselves for so little.
There's someone who is running for Congress in Missouri who gives the low down on this.
He says there are a number of variants (though in his list, he is not listing specifically the one I found on those other sites) incorrectly attributed to Franklin. Here's what he says on this site: http://kevincraig.us/tempsec.htm
'..1759 document, which uses an archaic form of "s":
"Thoſe who would give up Essential Liberty to purchaſe a little Temporary Safety, deſerve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Researchers now believe that a fellow diplomat by the name of Richard Jackson is the primary author of the book. With the information thus far available the issue of authorship of the statement is not yet definitely resolved, but the evidence indicates it was very likely Franklin, who in the Poor Richard's Almanack of 1738 is known to have written a similar proverb:
"Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power."'
So, it's possible that site I used was incorrect, but the above proverb attributed to him indicates to me Benjamin Franklin would have been against selling virtue (if they were willing, as Levin reportedly so graphically put it, to cut your throat) if you take away their government issued, tax payer paid for cell phone. Also, being willing to vote for Obama for a freebie. Would you agree?
The word is "safety", the term security did not mean what it does in our time. You can find both on the web.
If you go back into books the correct quote is safety.
The public school system back then was far from perfect, but not nearly as bad as now. I went to a combination of public, private, and home school myself. There were a number of things I had to memorize in school and I read the Constitution as part of my schooling. But I never had that particular quote quoted in school. What school did you have the privelege to go to where they had you quoting that?
I recognize the word safety is not security sir, but I also would like to verify what you are saying is the correct quote. I guess you didn't read it at the library from Franklin's own work or read it in a book at school since you did not answer that? Or do you not remember the title?
You are asserting something quoted by many websites is incorrect. Just telling me to go look at a book without telling me the particular work of Franklin's the actual quote is from is not helpful.
Sorry about your parents. What do you want me to do about the lack of knowledge being spread by their school system?
Again, get off the web site and go look at a book.
The word is "safety" not security.
Wow- my parents, both senior citizens- neither of them recall quoting Benjamin Franklin in school!
Quoting something in school without having seen Benjamin Franklin's work directly naturally could be just as incorrect as quotes on the internet.
Did you see the saying in a work of his at the library or in a book in school?
I just checked the Almanac's pages available on here for the year listed on that one website (1759):
http://public.gettysburg.edu/~tshannon/his341/pra1759feb.htm
and did not see the quote.
Could it have been from something other than the 1759 Poor Richard's Almanac? If I don't know which work it was from, I can't very well look it up at the library- anything more to go on?
Get off the web and go to a library. Franklin never used the word security, he said safety.
They were quoting this back when I was in school and that was before computers.
In fact check Poor Richard's Almanac
Please provide the source you base your assertion on. I found numerous websites besides the one I source above that say it the same way they quoted it. Here's one that gives the date as well:
http://www.geoffreylandis.com/quotes/quotes-17.html
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."
-- Benjamin Franklin (1759)
This is VA....this is tolerance...the usual Left Wing Haters...they ever pull this on my property GOD HELP THEM....I will be waiting!!! It is time Conservatives, who vastly outnumber these scum, need to fight back. I am sick of these PINKOS who did this in the cover of night afraid of the real men and women that protect them. So they pull their 5 yr old stunts...rejects of society that want to play the victim.....BOO HOO!!
Romney will get even more support from me with each and every one of these stunts!
This is why we have second amendment rights, to keep liberal radicals from committing crimes on our property.
Can't shoot people over property. Unless you want to spend a long time behind bars.
So please do not give this advice.
If they are carrying a weapon and you are in your yard, you could argue that you feared for your life. Knowing those intollerant asshats, I don't think that would be far off the mark.
Yes you damn well are referring to people occupying your land. If they leave when you tell them to leave, none of this discussion exists (other than to maybe press charges if the damage warrants it, which has nothing to do with firearms or confrontation we are going on about here).
Once you inform them they must leave, and they refuse, *they* have escalated into illegally occupying/trespassing on your land. This is simple logic.
And you most definitely have a right to use a firearm in any legally prescribed manner. One of which is to protect your property (some states provide for this particular right, others claim you may not use deadly force to stop theft, but may to prevent major damage, like burning your barn, so each person needs to know their state's laws).
So far, nobody here has mentioned a drawn weapon have they? No, they haven't. No one advocated shooting them outright, did they? No, they did not.
I shouldn't have to spell out the way this works, but you seem to demand it.
1)You walk up to them, taking full advantage of open carry, observing all the usual safety and courtesy rules of firearms, and you tell them to leave.
2) If they refuse you then tell them you are calling the cops.
3) If they still refuse, you may stand there and by your very presence hold them in custody until the cops arrive.
4) If they are stupid enough to try and use force on you, you have a right to defend yourself.
You have never spent much time in the country, I can tell. A sheriff has little sympathy for a trespasser complaining of rock salt in his behind out here.
You just do not f*ck with landowners and expect them to sit in the kitchen waiting on the law.
I am not now nor have I been talking about people "occupying your land". We are talking about people spray painting and using feces to decorate political signs.
Now someone can trespass simply by putting their dirty feet upon your property and you have the right to ask them to leave. You do not have the right to escalate the amount of force used. You do not have the right to use a firearm, which is considered lethal force in every state, to get them to leave.
The Second Amendment is about self-defense. What you are talking about is not self-defense. You pay the police to do a job. Let them and avoid all the problems you will be facing if you do not.
Obviously you do not take anyone into custody without the threat of force. If they decide to occupy your land after being informed they must leave, most states give you the right to do something other than "wait for the cops." The is what the second amendment is for.
If someone has chosen to do something on my land with my property against my wishes, it's already gotten past the "pick your fight" stage. That is what you are missing here.
You are completely missing the point. The entire point is to let the police do their job, so you do not cause yourself problems.
Now how do you intend to "take someone into custody"? Please understand that a person spray painting or decorating a sign is not considered an aggressor under the law. Do you even understand what escalation means as a legal term?
Pick your fights, this one is simply not worth the problems you can cause yourself and family.
Taking someone into custody is NOT escalation. Moving from trespass to OCCUPY is most definitely escalation.
And gun owners are always more familiar with these laws in their states than non gun owners, I assure you. The hell we go through to obtain and preserve out second amendment rights, combined with the regular training a responsible gun owner goes through is one reason why we are so familiar with these laws.
Anyone initiating aggression is the problem, not the law-abiding citizen.
With all due respect, you have the right to tell people to leave your property, when they do not you do not have the right to escalate the situation. You then become the aggressor and are opening the door to all sorts of legal problems.
Simply call the police and let them do their job, it will save you and yours a world of hurt, anguish and money.
Lastly, unless you are a sworn law enforcement officer, you do not have the right to take anyone into custody in most states. So called "citizen arrest" is not legal in all states and I would suggest you check your local laws. To put it mildly, it is not worth the problems you can cause yourself.
You typically have a right to inform people they are trespassing, and must leave. If they refuse, you typically have the right to take them into custody until a law enforcement officer arrives to take custody.
I would be defending my property, not some piece of cardboard.
You don't have the right to simply shoot at trespassers, but you do have the right to defend your property. All day, every day.
First of all, you can argue anything. If you want to spend a fortune to an attorney and possibly lose your home and even your life, go out in your yard, armed, and confront the fool defacing the political sign.
Then plan on spending the next few nights in jail and the next few years in court, to the cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
All so you can protect a $1.98 cardboard sign. And by the way, be prepared for the nightmares that will accompany the taking of a human life in defense of a cardboard sign that was free.
Yea, real smart.
Or you could get the license plate number off the car and call the police and let them deal with the fool. Then the fool can explain it to the judge.
The signs are free, just go get another one and save your family the heart ache.
Personally I would chose option 2.
Of all the places in America the Founding Father I admire most and who wrote the Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jefferson 3rd president of the United States and who was born in Albemarle county Virgina. Is probably Turning over in his grave to see the free speech he stood for, get trample on in his place of birth.
Shame on all those Democrats who have resorted to tyranny and gestapo tactics to silence free speech.
I had a Bush/Cheney '04 sticker on the back window of my nice Ford E350 van...
That window got busted out. My teacher sister said I "deserved" it. Then kinda laughed like it was just a joke.
The only thing you can do is stand up for what you believe and make your life a positive example...
O/T Courtesy of the Cato Institute, here's their2012 Fiscal Policy Report Card On America's Governors.
Connecticut and Illinois are rock bottom. Kansas, Florida, Maine and Pennsylvania get an 'A'. A few of the Bs should move up provided they can expand on what they are already doing. Very interesting and educational!
Yes, thanks nibbles - you too I hope. Did your little ones enjoy some turkey, or are they too small? In the UK we call it the Harvest Festival. We went to a C of E church school and had the best hymns that time of year. Wish it could be a formal holiday there as it is in N. America - an ancient tradition worth honouring with a proper holiday. Take care:)
They did enjoy turkey. Mostly I wanted them to know that it is a day about being grateful for family, friends, and especially God and His goodness. I didn't know the UK had a Thanksgiving type holiday....more wonderful tid bits to fill my obsession..lol. You are the best p m.
Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.