Comments Posted By trentk269
Displaying 1 To 10 Of 16 Comments
WAS THERE AN OBAMA-DALEY DEAL ON THE PRESIDENCY?
How does a guy from Chicago get the cajones to even suggest he's a reform candidate? Winning an election there practically guarantees the opposite.
I'm waiting with baited breath to see which MSM outlet will pick up the Tony Rezko buy/flip of Obama's garden/yard.
Comment Posted By trentk269 On 13.03.2008 @ 21:07
DEMS ON TERRORISM: DON'T WORRY...BE HAPPY
Maybe Reasonable Ron has a point. Assuming
just one 9/11 attack per year of 3000, divided
the US population (295 million) gives a rough
probability of .00102 percent, while the
probability of your mother aborting you
(assuming you're a fetus) is850,000 abortions / 4.1 million live births+850,000 abortions
or about 17.2%. The death by terror threat is eclipsed
by the chance of not being born by about .172/.00102,
or roughly 169:1.What are the chances that Reason magazine will
Comment Posted By trentk269 On 25.08.2006 @ 18:08
begin writing articles about the abortion threat?
Just two: slim and none.
YOU WIN SOME, YOU LOSE SOME...YOU DIE SOME
Richard-
If Clinton had been doing his job instead of getting one, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now. To think that the government need to get a warrant to gather foreign intell indicates that you're thinking more about blow jobs than you are protecting your fellow citizens. Go figure.
Comment Posted By trentk269 On 18.08.2006 @ 19:24
Wow. So Jason Leopold's Rove "indictment" turns out to be a fantasy.
Drug habit. Plagarism. Serial lying. Bouts with mental illness.
But that's not the worst of it- he used to work for the LA Times.
Comment Posted By trentk269 On 13.06.2006 @ 15:19
THE INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY OF THE OPEN BORDERS CROWD
The patriotic illegal immigrant argument is a vacuous one, which is why the proponents have to wrap it in the flag to promote it. This is election year propaganda from a media that is hemmoraging viewers.
The illegal aliens can march every day for a year and will change nothing. The media is behind this for electioneering purposes, and every group pandering to it has an axe to grind.
The reconquistas will find smooth sailing right up until the time that they actually try to take possession of the land. Like the Japs, the Nazis, the communists, and Al-Queda, they'll be in for a colossal surprise on that day. Most Americans are sympathetic to someone trying to better their lot in life, but are real short tempered with race-baiters and their troblemaking ilk. I think that the blowback on these marches is yet to come, and I think that the biggest losers will be the supporters of the do-nothing status quo.
What no one is asking is the obvious question- what will the reconqustas do on the gloious day that they take over Azatlan only to find that its newly minted citizens are all clamoring to cross its new border with the United States? I already know- they'll ask the media to champion an infusion of foreign aid from Los Estados Unidos!
Comment Posted By trentk269 On 3.05.2006 @ 15:12
HOW MSNBC'S CRAIG CRAWFORD SAVED MY DAY
Craig Crawford and his ilk would view a terrorist attack on America as a great opportunity to ply their trade of bad ideas on the American public. They would be the first to blame Bush for failing to stop such an attack, even as they condemn him for overstepping what they claim is the limit of his Constitutional authority.
Our media and civil libertarian "watchdogs" are more interested in protecting the civil liberties of our enemies than they are in protecting the country at large. It should come as no surprise, therefore, that the ACLU is threatening our airports with litigation over profiling "suspicious" behavior. After all, if Bushitler is running roughshod over our freedoms, is it much of a stretch to see our terrorist enemies as the "real" victims?
Our country is in deep trouble right now, more from the enemy within than the enemy outside our borders. If we tie the hands of our security and intelligence organizations, I'm afraid that we'll have no one but ourselves to blame when the nuclear s*** hits the fan.
Comment Posted By trentk269 On 29.12.2005 @ 16:22
LIBERAL DRAMA QUEENS FALL FOR ANOTHER ONE
This thing had the feel of a profressor-generated urban myth from day one; as you mentioned, the gender of the student is unclear and the name is missing. I give this one a "fake but accurate" rating.
The irony in all this is that the list of Communist agents in our government touted by Sen. McCarthy has been largely verified by the declassification of cold war intelligence files, yet unhinged liberals continue to use the term "McCarthyism" anytime that a leftist's judgement or patriotism is called into question.
Being an academic in this country is a lot like being a reporter- you never have to worry about the facts getting in the way of your story.
Comment Posted By trentk269 On 24.12.2005 @ 07:45
OVERHEARD BY NSA AGENTS UNDER RULES MANDATED BY DEMOCRATS
Most liberals haven't bothered to read the fourth amendment, which is exactly why they're claiming suspension of same. Protection from unreasonable search is not the same as protection from any search. A very large body of case law from the Supreme Court as well as the appelate courts bear this out. (Katz v. U.S., 1967, U.S. v. U.S. District court, Truong v. U.S. , Hamdi v. Rumsfeld)
And while we're on the subject, most libs assert that second amendment freedoms apply only to the establishment of a militia. Isn't that tantamount to "suspending" an amendement? I guess suspending the parts of the Constitution that you don't like only applies to those on the right.
Comment Posted By trentk269 On 24.12.2005 @ 07:57
If giving away vital secret technology so that your country's enemies can copy or evade it, this would certainly qualify as patriotism of the highest order.
Do you think that this patriot is the same fellow who sent Mr Valerie Plame on his phony yellowcake fact finding trip?
Comment Posted By trentk269 On 20.12.2005 @ 15:53
IRAQIS HOPEFUL ON ELECTION EVE
Just wait and see how many Dems start to tell us how much better things were under Saddam- especially now that nuclear Iran is coming to a boil. They'll be exactly the same people that told us how bad Bush's father was to play footsie with Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war years: it's not Islamofascism that's to blame for a likely upcoming multi-theater war, it's those Hitler-wannabe Bushes.
The real struggle will be in the next couple of years as Iran attempts to field nuclear weapons. Our current debate regarding Iraq will no doubt look like a luxury by then. One thing will remain constant, though- the Dems will have NO plan of their own, no matter who is in charge of their party.
Our options are few, and every course of action available has risky drawbacks. Sure would be nice if the Party of Sedition would start acting like they have the national interest at heart.
The day an Islamic thugocracy launches a nuclear weapon at a western country is the same day that the Left runs out of political capital; no one will be able to ignore the danger any longer. Will they join in the defense of the country at that point, or continue to demand that we capitulate?
Comment Posted By trentk269 On 14.12.2005 @ 21:31
