Posts Made By: Forrest Heinle

I guess it all depends on the evidence. Did they really plot or did they just say a bunch of hateful things? I agree, their 1st amendment right protects them from being locked up for saying hateful things, but if the prosecution has proof that it was more than just words, they were actively planning to murder people, well that's a completely different story and the judge needs to have his head examined.

Mike-

In all fairness, it's not as if there's a huge amount he (Obama) can do. The problem is that he's not paying nearly enough attention to it as he should, what attention he is paying he's politicizing like crazy for obvious personal gain and when all else fails, he points at BP and says "EVIL EVIL EVIL!". So a person on the outside sees this, and even if they like some of the other things Obama is doing, they can't help but shake their head and think that he's doing a horrible job of handling this.

I mean, you're talking about criminal investigations and allocating money and man power for that yet they haven't even stopped the oil leak yet.

BP screwed up bad. Can't get around that in any way, shape or form. But if i see one more story of Obama trying to twist this for political gain, i'm going to puke.

Lets see:

Oil spill: Abysmal failure
Arizona Immigration lawsuit: Absolute nightmare
Blank Panther investigation: Distinctly disastrous

And then we have a small increase in exports that may or may not even be attributable to anything Obama has done.

Yeah, i'd pretty much say this reeks of deflection. Something CNN and the liberal media are happy to facilitate given the absolute drubbing he's taking.

David, i was listening to Glenn Beck (yes oh liberals, gasp, wail, gnash your teeth and cry to the heavens)and he was speaking of this and brought up an amazingly good point.

Obama had an interview with George Stephanopoulos some time ago where Stephanopoulos took him to task for this "tax" of the people. For "taxing" them for NOT buying something. Obama got very indignant. You could hear the anger in his voice. He FIRMLY denounced anyone calling this a tax. He stated repeatedly that this WAS NOT A TAX.

Yet here we are now, Obama administration trying to defend the government's right to charge people for not having health care insurance, trying to prove the Constitutionality of it, and what is their argument?? Why, good sir, this is most definitely a TAX. And under the Commerce clause, Congress most certainly has the right to tax individuals!

I don't see how anyone can still support this fraud of a president. Am i going to sit here and preach to you that the Republicans are so much better? No. But anyone sticking up for Obama at this point must being hooked up on an IV of koolaid to actually believe in the administration and their policies.

I agree with your last couple of statements whole heartedly, odd as that may seem.

Why?

Because no matter if they have a D or an R next to their name they are still politicians in the end and only say what they have to in order to get elected. Obama is big time proof of that. We knew he was a big time liberal, but he painted himself as a moderate just long enough to get elected.

As to the Republican scandals.... that's par for the course. We know the lib media will dig something up and make hay with it while doing their best to ignore anything the Dems do wrong ala Charlie Rangel.

As to the Republican unity front crumbling. Perhaps it will. Most of the people that voted R did so to prove a point to Obama and the Democrats. If the Republicans don't see the truth behind that and do what the people want, they'll be removed in short order.

Tony Aguire said:

Really? Is this what the Republican Party has come down to?

http://samuel-warde.com/2013/01/florida-professor-says-sandy-hook-massacre-is-a-hoax/

At least now we won't have to feel so bad about rabid liberal claiming that Bush intentionally bombed the towers on 9/11

Each side has nut jobs, we know this. Acting all shocked when some individual says something off the wall and then somehow making the idiotic and illogical leap that said individual represents an entire party is silly.

This will be interesting to see how it unfolds. We all know the magazine limit bit doesn't work. California has had it for decades, they still have well above average gun violence statistics, as do places like DC and Chicago, who are even tougher.

Greg Shaffer said:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/09/15-Year-Old-Boy-Uses-AR-15-To-Defend-House-Against-Burglars

Bravo! Good for him. It shows what proper training and responsible ownership can do. What was that Obama was saying about it being worth doing even if it saves one life? I just saw TWO lives saved by NOT having a ban on AR-15's.

Rod Kaufman said:

I couldn't believe some of the postings that held up the idea that people need assault rifles here because of fear of tyranny from their own government. But now I see spokespeople go on national TV and proclaim the same thing:
http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t2#/video/bestoftv/2013/01/11/pmt-ben-shapiro.cnn
So many of the gun proponents actually believe they need their AR-15s not for home defense, or target shooting or hunting but they need them to resist the authority of the government of America. This is incredible! It gives a whole new meaning to "gun nut"...

And i can't believe how ignorant of history most liberals are. Our founders CLEARLY stated that the 2nd Amendment was IMPLICITLY crafted to give we the people the right to bear arms to defend ourselves from our government should the need ever arise. The fact that most leftists are sheeple who would gladly grant the government entirely too much power when history has shown time and again that too powerful government + disarmed populace = Hitler and Stalin makes me wonder about their sanity.

For all the posturing, he saw the writing on the wall. Many of these things are "common sense" items that we should have always been doing. Especially gun safes. Many safes sold on the market are pieces of crap that need to be removed or redone before allowing them to be sold again.

He and the left BADLY want to take away some or all of our 2nd Amendment rights away. That's why he pushed so hard about the assault weapons ban, but in the end, he knows that must go through Congress, like it did last time. We'll see what happens. Republicans have already signaled that they won't talk guns until the financial situation is solidified, which is going to take months. I think that's mostly a diversionary tactic to let everyone cool off from the tragedy so they stop letting their emotions rule them and instead think logically about what can and should be done.