RobertNashville

Kristen (his ex) doesn't seem to have much a problem with their breakup; at least not according to what she has written and said. In any case, I don't see how that makes him guilty of anything, except maybe bad judgment...it certainly doesn't mean he doped or that he should lose all his titles. I think the bicycling powers that be are just flexing their muscles and going after a big fish...I also suspect they couldn't be happier that their dirty laundry isn't going to be aired out by the 24/7 news agencies and the sport magazines.

Apparently the seriousness of the accusation is sufficient to prove guilt. Seems like I've hear something similar before???

I have a lot of respect for Lance Armstrong - if he says he didn't dope I tend to believe him until someone can come up with real evidence rather than accusations. Not that it makes any real difference to anything; his conscious is the one he as to live with if he won his races with dope rather then on his own efforts.

What makes you think they would have that much impact? There are at least nine different factions within the party and all, if totally separated, aren't really big enough to have a significant impact on the remainder.Stateed another way; if libertarians were a significant (in terms of numbers) segment within the Republican party they would have been far more effective at setting its agenda and platform a long time ago would they not? If there were enough libertarians in the Libertarian party they wouldn't garner insignificant percentages in elections would they?

why do we need "X" Republicans at all?What we need are servant-leaders who love the country and will do what is best IAW the Constitution, don't we? Somebody calling themselves conservative or libertarian or whatever is beside the point.

The country has been going down the socialism path since the 1930's; none of these problems are going to be changed quickly or easily or with any one man. Ron Paul has some good ideas on some issues but even were he elected, it would, at best, be a very tiny course change.It's going to take a hell of a lot of work by a hell of a lot of people and I suspect that most people alive today won't even see the real results; assuming we can pull it off and return the country/government back to its Constitutional limits.

It's obviously the fault of the guns...I tell you those guns just go around shooting people all the time for no reason at all; especially the empty guns.

I think where Obummer stands and what he want's and will try to do to destroy our country in a second term is pretty obvious; his lies notwithstanding.I believe Romney has the country's best interests at heart and will act accordingly. If he is lying then he is lying but the choice, based on what we do know, seems pretty clear to me.

I don't much like any group or organization changing the rules mid-stream. However, I don't think we should lose sight of why they feel changing the rules is necessary...it is the Ron Paubots who have made it clear that, despite the will of the voters who overwhelmingly voted for Romney, the Paulbots seem to only want to disrupt the convention and cause as much trouble as they possibly can.In my opinion, both groups are being irresponsible and neither has the moral high ground under them.

If I truly thought I was wasting my time I would not be here at all; would you? If I participate in a thread it's because the subject is important to me and politics is one of those subjects. If you look at my statement, I didn't complain about the videos and I didn't belittle Armyvet; at least, that wasn't my intent...I did poke some fun at the number of these threads but if that offends him then I apologize. I made a statement that I suspect most people accept as factual. Does it really matter what day Romney officially receives the nomination? Does anyone here really believe that Romney is not the nominee? And if anyone believes that, is there any evidence from credible sources to support that? If such evidence exists then post it up and let's discuss it. What I am mostly guilty of was getting goaded into responding to one member's post (the STFU comment)...had I realized who made the comment it would have been ignored. However, Tapatalk apparently doesn't recognize "ignore" settings; had I been logged on through the normal forum software rather than Tapatalk I would not of seen the comment I got drawn into

Great sentiment but you can never and will never do what you say you want to do by voting for candidates that cannot win nor will it happen in just a few Presidential elections...Presidential elections aren't even teh place to start; the place to start is city, county elections then state legislatures and governorships and then, perhaps, President.The answer also isn't to kick the two political parties out of power because that will not happen either, the answer is to work within the party structure and mold the structure into a better shape. You make changes by working on it; not by posting videos...not by posting threads in an internet forum or on Facebook...you make changes by knocking on doors and making phone calls and donating money and stuffing envelopes and staying in close contact with your local office holders and state office holders....maybe you are already doing all that and if so, great...if not, you need to. We also need to get people to go VOTE! I've seen studies that show that less than 1/3 of eligible voters, including those who identify themselves as conservative or libertarian, are even registered; even fewer bother themselves to vote. If we can't get allegedly concerned citizens to even register; how the hell will anything will change.

Maybe I am misunderstanding your post the the will of the voters is clearly, by a HUGE margin, for Mitt Romney to be the Republican nominee.

I didn't say that. After all, It isn't as if we've had a lot of these types of posts.And of course they're so useful - sort of like arguing about how much better a 1911 is compared to a Glock.

Earlier, later...today...next week...it doesn't matter because he is the nominee.

I see your point and I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you here but I used to safely operate farm equipment worth six figures plus which were often bigger than some folk's houses when I was 12 years old; should I have also been allowed get my driver's license and drive my dad's Corvette on city streets at that age? We had similar discussions when the legal voting age was lowered to 18 (which happened the same year I turned 18) - in a way, voting like an idiot is no more dangerous than drinking like an idiot Maybe the only real difference is that bad things happening after voting tend to take a while to germinate while bad things happening after drinking tends to be more immediate.

I really don't (and actually, I don't think I want to) understand the mindset of militant open carry advocates. I suppose for some, the only thrill they have in life is to provoke law enforcement, hope for an encounter they can get on video and then post it so they can be "famous". Their actions see to have little to do with carrying a weapon for protection; but rather, they carry to make a political statement.

The article noted that the restaurant has a policy against unconcealed firearms (indicating to me that they don't have a problem with concealed carry).I wonder, then, how is this policy made known? Also, if there is signage that most people can see that makes that policy known, then I wonder if this guy saw it and decided to go in anyway or if he just didn't know? If he knew, through signage or any other reason, then why would he chose to ignore the polcy? As was noted, it appears signage doesn't have the force of law but I suspect that if you aren't wanted there for any reason it can turn into a matter of trespassing. As usual, actually knowing all the details would be enormously helpful but also as usual; we have some info and probably a lot we don't know.

I love any store with lot's of great camping, hunting, fishing and shooting gear. I've only had the opportunity to visit Bass Pro but I've bought a lot of stuff online from Cabella's so I'm looking forward to my fist chance to get to one that is a reasonable driving distance. I probably won't go just for that specific purpose but I'm in that area now and then so I'll definitely be stopping by.

I guess that's true of some women but last Sunday when I was up at the Montgomery County Shooting Complex, a colleague of mine and his wife were with me...one of the guns I has with me was my FNH AR10 (.308). He shot a 10 round mag and was rubbing his shoulder; I asked if she wanted to shoot it, not expecting a positive reply, and she did...she only shot five rounds but she wasn't the least bit afraid of it and probably held the rifle better than her hubby. More importantly, until they bought their first gun about a year ago (a Beretta 92); neither of them had ever shot a gun before. I've been finding out that introducing people to shooting (or at least extending their experience) is one of the most enjoyable aspects of shooting (well, that and kicking someone's but in a contest but that happens VERY infrequently for me!)

In my always humble opinion, accusations that wild should be accompanied by specific citations from credible sources; not someone's blog repeating what someone heard from someone else.Anyway, in the story you reference, you failed to mention that the RP delegated were out of control and disrupting the convention...it would seem that for many RP followers, when they can't win at the ballot box they see nothing wrong with forcing their will on others with procedural tricks and if that doesn't work, rebellion and intimidation. I suspect their icon, Ron Paul, finds these acts just as obnoxious as I do and if he doesn't then he has no business being the President of anything.

The story says the restaurant doesn't allow unconcealed firearms in the restaurant...so I wonder; was this easily known and if so, why did this guy ignore it? I don't know if such a policy has the force of law in KY but if that's their policy then the guy should have followed it and/or eaten somewhere else...at the very least is sounds like he could have defused the situation and didn't. Moreover, arguing "rights" and "the law" with a police officer is beyond stupid...such arguments are for a courtroom; not the lobby or an Arby's restaurant.

Ron Paul didn't win for the same reason he hasn't won before, a majority of the people don't support him. Their reasons for not supporting him vary but it isn't the fault of the press or an unfair RNC. Ron Paul could win if he ignited the electorate and he's never done that. I'm glad we can agree on what has to happen in November; if it doesn't happen then I believe the great experiment is dead.

God, I hope you are wrong. I'm optimistic but should things turn out as you predict I'll be looking for some land in the hills and converting a lot of assets to gold and silver before the complete destruction of the economy hits which is, I believe, exactly what I believe will happen if the socialist state continues.One advantage to being as old as I am is that I know I won't have to put up with it for too long.

It appears that some also forget that Ronald Ragan broke the air traffic controllers union. Unions have done some very good things; no one has said otherwise. At the same time, many unions are totally useless today and exist only for the sake of existing; other are totally corrupt (keeping in mind that I'm talking about the leadership; not the guys in the trenches).Getting back to GM, the UAW, because of its idiocy, had a significant part to play in GM's demise but no one ever said they were the only problem. At the same time, they certainly were not part of the solution either. If you want to think the UAW is the shining knight in this mess you can certainly think that but I've looked at GM's financial records (in part because until a few months ago it was part of my job) and their financial records don't support that conclusion. Someone I know once said that there is nothing wrong with a car company that good products can't fix...unfortunately, GM could make the best cars in the world but if it can't sell them at a price people are willing to pay and still make a profit then the company is doomed. GM is a failed company and thanks to its management, the UAW and BHO, it still has its daemons to face whereas if it had been allowed to fail and go through a true bankruptcy, it could be well into recovery mode right now rather than relying on government contracts and GE buying all its product.

What support form the American people? If they supported him why didn't they vote for him??? I often hear people complain about his lack of media coverage but I just don't buy it. There was at least one and perhaps two major debates he chose not to participate in even though he was invited...he was the only candidate that wasn't at the NRA convention and I hear more than one national conservative talk show host say they had been trying to get RP on but he was never available. All in all, I don't think RP got any more of a bad shake from the media as any other candidate and that the primary reason he didn't get a lot of coverage is because he never made any significant traction toward the nomination...the media didn't pay attention to anyone until they pooled in significant percentages.