Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 26, 2015, 07:32:54 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
85809 Posts in 2269 Topics by 1068 Members
Latest Member: cdenny
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Recent Posts
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10

 61 
 on: April 17, 2015, 10:12:06 AM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by DougMacG
Yes, Levin says, you heard that right.  Are you a Genitalian?  Are you someone who makes their decision about who should be the next president based on their genitalia category?

Here's one who says she is:
Nancy Pelosi says "it is important to elect the first woman President".

Does that mean if reversed, still true?  What if it turns out to be Mark O'Malley against Carly Fiorina?  

Suddenly it is not so important.

 62 
 on: April 16, 2015, 11:11:31 AM 
Started by G M - Last post by DougMacG
Other than climate change, getting economic sanctions removed from the world's number one sponsor of terror is the highest priority of this administration.  Pres. Obama is putting the judgment of his "P5+1" group ahead of US people, congress or Senate ratification.  Of the P5, it turns out Russia was chomping at the bit to sell them missiles and same for China with nuclear technology sales.  And Germany has historically been the biggest exporter to Iran.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/14/europe/russia-iran-air-defense-system-sale/
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/china-to-build-new-nuke-plants-in-iran/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/04/germany-economy-iran-idUSL6N0SU20220141104
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jul/5/irans-nuclear-program-helped-by-china-russia/?page=all

Shouldn't at least Russia and China recuse themselves from this process given these facts.  Of course that is a joke, they aren't allies of ours or interested in peace or western security in the first place.  So why do we keep agreeing to this type of phony security framework?

The UN can't be discredited anymore than it has been already - with the Iraq 'oil for food' scandal, the phony UN IPCC reports, the use of the podium by tyrants and bloody dictators, and so many other scandals and problems.   Are there not some basic values a nation must embrace to get a seat at the table?

Let's move past the old, counter-productive framework and create a new one for real international cooperation.  Leave the UN in place so that places like Burundi, Djibouti and Malawi all have a place to talk.  But remove US financial support down to what is commensurate with our one vote.  Then form new organizations with real allies who actually do share our values.   How about putting Japan, India, Taiwan, Israel and Canada on the new security council along with the US and our European allies, for starters.  The topics to address would include how to contain countries like Russia and China.

 63 
 on: April 15, 2015, 09:52:34 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by Crafty_Dog
second post:

A knowledgeable friend comments on this article:

Apart from arabic, they need to understand urdu and related languages.  Much of the terrorism has a Pakistani angle.
Something else to note, when someone speaks in English it's for the western audience. They say reasonable things in English because most of the hardliners don't understand a word of it, while the west laps it up. Their real thoughts are in urdu.  Even if someone understands urdu, unless they are native speakers and have lived there for a decade, a Rosetta stone major wouldn't have a clue. Cultural understanding and background is key, for that there are no books.

 64 
 on: April 15, 2015, 08:49:13 PM 
Started by DougMacG - Last post by Crafty_Dog
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/15/obama-amnesty-granted-more-500k-ssn/

 65 
 on: April 15, 2015, 08:42:25 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by Crafty_Dog
second post

http://www.darrellissa.com/view/?u=12165

 66 
 on: April 15, 2015, 08:35:16 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by G M
Cruz!

 67 
 on: April 15, 2015, 08:33:46 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by Crafty_Dog
Ted Cruz was right on target when asked about his views on the Second Amendment: "When it comes to constitutional rights, what matters is what the Bill of Rights says. It doesn't matter what might be popular at the moment. We've seen regimes across the face of the earth come and take away people's guns, strip away their rights to defend themselves, and sometimes it's been very popular. And yet it is an inevitable prelude to tyranny. Our country was founded on a radical proposition, which is that our rights don't come from government; they come from God. ... The entire reason for the Second Amendment is not for hunting; it's not for target shooting. ... The Second Amendment is there so that you and I can protect our homes and our families and our children and our lives. And it's also there as a fundamental check on government tyranny. And that, ultimately, is not subject to public opinion polls, it's subject to the express protections of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution." Cruz really nailed it.

 68 
 on: April 15, 2015, 08:32:54 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by G M
The Tennessee governor's mansion is occupied by a Republican, and the GOP owns supermajorities in both the House and Senate. The result has been a wave of pro-gun measures, including a "Guns in Parking Lots" law approved in 2013 that gives employees the legal right to store a firearm inside personal vehicles even if it's against an employer's inclinations. The move was a good one; the problem is that "an attorney general's opinion later found that while the law decriminalized the actions of those who ignored posted gun bans on private property, employers could still terminate workers for violating company firearms policies," explains WTVC News Channel 9. Last week, the legislature passed and Gov. Bill Haslam signed a fix that allows fired persons the ability to take legal action. Now, even some Republicans contend the new law infringes on employers' rights. But that's misguided businesses still have the right to ban firearms, but vehicles don't belong to the employer. As Hot Air blogger Jazz Shaw concludes, "This law seems to me to have been a good compromise. The employer can bar carrying weapons in the workplace, but the employee's car is not the workplace. And punishing them for such storage is an unreasonable burden on their constitutional rights." Tennessee hit the bull's-eye on this one. More...

A good law would be to make the employer liable to protect employees they disarm.

 69 
 on: April 15, 2015, 08:29:40 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by Crafty_Dog
The Tennessee governor's mansion is occupied by a Republican, and the GOP owns supermajorities in both the House and Senate. The result has been a wave of pro-gun measures, including a "Guns in Parking Lots" law approved in 2013 that gives employees the legal right to store a firearm inside personal vehicles even if it's against an employer's inclinations. The move was a good one; the problem is that "an attorney general's opinion later found that while the law decriminalized the actions of those who ignored posted gun bans on private property, employers could still terminate workers for violating company firearms policies," explains WTVC News Channel 9. Last week, the legislature passed and Gov. Bill Haslam signed a fix that allows fired persons the ability to take legal action. Now, even some Republicans contend the new law infringes on employers' rights. But that's misguided businesses still have the right to ban firearms, but vehicles don't belong to the employer. As Hot Air blogger Jazz Shaw concludes, "This law seems to me to have been a good compromise. The employer can bar carrying weapons in the workplace, but the employee's car is not the workplace. And punishing them for such storage is an unreasonable burden on their constitutional rights." Tennessee hit the bull's-eye on this one. More...

 70 
 on: April 15, 2015, 08:27:43 PM 
Started by Crafty_Dog - Last post by Crafty_Dog
Hillary's Income Inequality Platform Problem

While Hillary Clinton established her campaign on reducing income inequality, she has not practiced what she preached. "Americans have fought their way back from tough economic times, but the deck is still stacked in favor of those at the top," Clinton said in the video announcing her presidential campaign "Everyday Americans need a champion, and I want to be that champion." Sure, Clinton can talk all she wants, but her platform places her between the idealistic Left and her salary. Progressives are beginning to say a $15-an-hour wage is the only wage they will support, probably to the chagrin of Seattle small businesses that have to close because of the city's $15-an-hour wage experiment. And Hillary has acted precisely like the CEOs and one-percenters she lambasts. Her $200,000-an-hour speaking gigs place her firmly in the filthy rich category. Furthermore, she directs all her salary through her foundation, so she avoids paying taxes. The income deck is, indeed, stacked in her favor. More...

Meanwhile, she also wants "unaccountable money" out of politics. After she raises $2.5 billion, of course.

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!