I've been busy with Woodsterman and my personal
life. I've just about caught up with all of your
comments. I should finish them up today. This Blog
has been on fire lately. Thank you ALL!
Thanks Skip
Wednesday, September 17, 2025
25 comments:
Put it here ... I can't wait to read it. I have the Captcha turned OFF but blogger insists it be there. You should be able to bypass it.
** Anonymous, please use a name at the end of your comment. You're all starting to look alike.
*** Moderation has been added due to Spam and a Commenter a little too caustic. I welcome comments, but talk of killing and racist (or even close to racist) are not welcome.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Judges enjoy near-total protection from lawsuits for their judicial acts. This was originally intended to allow them to make difficult decisions without fear of being sued by every disgruntled litigant. However, this doctrine has been perverted into an unaccountable shield. A judge can knowingly release a violent repeat offender on a laughably low bail, ignore the pleas of prosecutors and victims, and face zero legal repercussions when that offender inevitably reoffends. The chain of causality is just as clear: the judge’s decision was the direct enabling act that put a predator back on the street.
ReplyDeleteOtto, off with his head!
DeleteThe natural-born citizen requirement for the presidency is one of the most sagacious rules ever codified. The Founders understood that the ultimate commander-in-chief must have an indivisible loyalty. It is sheer insanity that we do not apply this same standard to the 535 individuals in Congress who collectively wield far more power to fundamentally alter the nation. They control the purse strings, write the laws that dictate how we live, and declare war. To allow someone who does not have generations of ancestral skin in the game to wield that power is an act of national suicide. It’s like letting a tenant rewrite the homeowner’s association bylaws to allow them to tear down your house.
ReplyDeleteJohn, I'm with you, now let's convince 535 others to feel the same way.
DeleteThis isn’t about xenophobia; it’s about the logical and biological imperative of self-preservation. A nation that does not prioritize its own children—its native-born citizens—in its own halls of power is a nation that has already surrendered its future. The fact that this is even a controversial statement shows how successfully the narrative has been inverted. The requirement for natural-born legislators isn’t an extremist position; it’s the bare minimum requirement for any nation that wishes to endure.
ReplyDeleteAnon, I'm convinced.
DeleteNice of them to let Utah National Guard where to deploy and any Militia in the area. Hope they at least give the the first hour to let everyone show up before surrounding the area.
ReplyDeleteNed Eastwood, Add to "Things to do."
DeleteLove the second and the last.
ReplyDeleteedutcher, my favorites too.
DeleteWhile judges cannot always determine in someone will re-offend, lately the liberal judges threw that standard out the window in favor of releasing all the criminals and certainly should be held to account for the release of those thugs. Jailing the judges and disbarring them for allowing these criminals to go back on the street would be a good first step. Making the offending judge serve the same sentence as the criminal they released would be a good second step up to and including the death sentence.
ReplyDeletePaul V, Chaos, it's in their master plan.
DeleteIf they’re offended by honor, loyalty, and free speech, they were never your tribe. Keep your standards high
ReplyDeleteDon, never ever.
DeleteOne can appreciate why the founding fathers would NOT have limited Congress to only natural born citizens. At the time, a huge percentage of Americans were British born, yet completely loyal to the nation. At thus point such a change is imperative to prevent even more damage. Ending dual citizenship in Congress is imperative too. It is bad enough that loyalties are purchased in back rooms with "campaign donations."
ReplyDeleteAnon, We need a cold start.
DeleteI have said that for years, has to be something someone can do to at least get the ball rolling on this
ReplyDeleteSkip Jones, I'm for balls rolling.
DeleteI think parole boards that grant freedom to convicts should have to have that convict stay with them in their homes for a period of a year to see if they fully merit freedom.
ReplyDeleteThis is a direct assault on the culture of ‘cheap grace’—forgiving and releasing without any real cost or sacrifice. It forces the purveyors of this grace to pay its potential price. If a board member truly believes in the redemption of a convict, let them put their own safety, their family’s comfort, and their personal property on the line to prove it. Faith without works is dead
Deletehjets, great idea! Let's add it to the list.
DeleteIf a parole board thinks someone’s ready to rejoin society, they shouldn’t mind them joining their own dinner table first. Let’s call it the ‘houseguest reality check’ program
ReplyDeleteAnon, works for me.
DeleteYou can wear your ammo belt with the tips pointed in....wouldn't recommend though. Unless you are part of the "resistance " then go ahead.
ReplyDeleteAnon, ouch.
Delete