sigmtnman

The media has everyone so emotional over it, that not enough people are questioning it. Those of us who do are being labeled as terrorist sympathizers or something. How many folks died defending our Constitution and the American way of life? Why are we so quick to toss that out the window? The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

There were around 50,000 Americans that died fighting in the American Revolution. I believe the Constitution is worth as many lives as it takes to uphold what they fought for.

The same emotions will be used to do away with our rights and the precedent will have been set to do whatever is necessary for the protection from terrorists. Heck, only terrorists would need a gun anyway huh? Make no mistake. Without meeting the requirements of the Constitution with regards to Treason, this is an impeachable offense. If they have the necessary satisfaction, why is it not presented? Without satisfying the requirements it is a worse offense than Watergate and Monicagate combined.

This is not about him. It is about the Constitution. Emotions are making it about him and it will backfire.

To be sparkling clear. I would provide a new rope, a tall tree and the horse from which to slap out from under his ass. Once the conditions of Treason are proven beyond a shadow of the doubt, per the Constitution. I don't trust those SOBs in Washington and frankly I am flabbergasted that so many people blindly do, especially when the consequences are so grave with regard to scope creep.

How it happened is neither here nor there. It is the fact that Treason and how to deal with it is spelled out specifically in the Constitution. The same document that we revere and hold up as proof to our right to bear arms and protect ourselves. There appears to be the belief that it is ok to pick and choose which portions are applicable.

So you feel your use of the same argument is more valid? I'm just trying to understand your point and the examples above really don't seem to apply. Are saying that regulation of our modern firearms is legitimate and does not exemplify and erosion of our rights? Like it would be ok to do away with hi-cap mags since the founders used muskets?

For example: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/opinion/10collins.html

And this is why we will eventually lose the right to bear arms. Is that not the same argument used by the anti-gunners regarding our weapons of today?

The constitution clearly states that there must be 2 witnesses to an overt act or an admission in open court. Do you feel that the constitution can be overridden with regards to bearing arms?

So, it would appear as though things are not always as they seem. Duly noted.

Perhaps if you could weave dancing with stars into the story it would sell.

Cognitive dissonance. Hardly any of us trust Obama or his admin with anything else, but we are ok with secret evidence against this citizen? Have I missed the evidence to support Treason as defined in the Constitution? I'm not talking about "alleged ties" or "said ties".

Cognitive dissonance. Hardly any of us trust Obama or his admin with anything else, but we are ok with secret evidence against this citizen? Have I missed the evidence to support Treason as defined in the Constitution? I'm not talking about "alleged ties" or "said ties".

If said alleged enemies are US citizens, then per the constitution, yes. Treason is clearly defined in the constitution. Without proper evidence and handling this is an impeachable offense.

Is there any data to indicate the state of residence for the attackers? Perhaps due to the shear number of states that border TN, there is a greater pool of folks who cross the state line to commit the crime further from home where they are less likely to be identified? Although, I reckon the inverse could be true as well.

Are you saying he didn't commit the offense or just that the offense was worse than claimed, thus the lynchin?

Darr's closed back in 2007 IIRC.

Dr. Paul on trusting Obama.

Who needs evidence in this day and age. The court of public opinion rules!

How about just using a holster with a strap?

Thank you for setting me straight. Corporate personhood and their psychopathic behavior are very interesting topics to me, but I admit I have not spent much time on Walmart. I had assumed it was his kids, I need to check that out.

-General Pat Cleburne, CSA

You sure you weren't a professor?

You mean liberal history right? One thing I found back when I attended college was that most every professor had an agenda and most every professor was close minded and took offense to challenging their view of history, which generally was written by the north. To boot they were no smarter than the common man, yet much more dangerous due to the influence they wield. But hey, they sure know how to string together big words.