[quote][b]friendlyfire[/b] -

@THX1138: You two right wingers are aware that Obama doesn't control the IRS aren't you?

Neither did Nixon, but he had the IRS audit his enemies anyway. By the way, what was Obama's call in hotline for when he asked citizens to report anyone speaking out against Obama care?

[/quote]

After Nixon, laws were changed to limit White House influence over the IRS. The IRS has over 100,000 employees; the White House appoints 2 of them. When the actions under investigation took place, the IRS commissioner was a Bush appointee. The guy that was fired yesterday came along later.

As others have noted, the group that lost its tax exempt status was a left-leaning organization.

@snarkydude:

[quote][b]snarkydude[/b] -

The wait times seemed just as long before this "sequester".

[/quote]

That doesn't match my experience. It used to take me about 10 - 15 minutes max, but about 10 days ago it was well over 30 minutes.

When mentioning an event that we should go see, it is helpful to tell us where and when, and perhaps how much, this event is. Where and when is "Taking Flight?" What is CORE? Thanks.

[quote][b]Thomas Jefferson Snodgrass[/b] -

The idea for sequestration originated in the White House. The bill was signed into law by the President.

Why is it someone else's problem now?

[/quote]

That's a very limited rationale. Are you forgetting that Congress voted to pass it, including a large majority of Republicans? All House and Senate leaders agreed to it. This has just as much to do with Congress as it does the White House. And, it will be (almost) everybody's problem when the negative economic impacts of the cuts are felt.

I've ridden Amtrak from Raleigh to NYC round trip a couple of times in the past year. It's affordable, the routes were close to full much of the way and it was much more pleasant than driving up I-95. It took about the same amount of time, depending upon how many traffic jams there are on the interstates. Some of the trains have Wi-Fi.

@Eastville: "...they proselytize hate ..." That's exactly what you're doing. "Divide and conquer!" likewise......time to look in the mirror.

@T J Haas: Too bad that Thomas Jefferson is the basis of your initials as he was a proponent of the separation of church and state and used the wall of separation phrase also used by the other TJ (Snodgrass) above.

So you disagree with the first amendment to the Constitution?

@Used2baFreeCountry:

A recent poll indicates that 54% of Americans support a ban on semi-automatics and 63% support a ban on the sale of high-capacity magazines.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/01/17/us/poll-americans-views-on...

Also, support for stricter gun laws runs about 55%.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/obama-s-gun-control-package-poll...

[quote][b]Ross[/b] -

The idiocy continues. In the UK, where guns are banned, there is four times as much violent crime per capita as here. An armed citizenry prevents crime. It does not cause it.

Many of you are asking the wrong question. No one should be asking if I 'need' a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds. It is not incumbent upon the citizen to justify his/her rights. It is the burden of the government to justify taking them away.

[/quote]

Please research the homicide rate in the UK compared to the US, then report back.

Maybe you'll want to add Sweden and France to the comparison - or maybe all of Europe. Also, different countries have different definitions of violent crime, so it is not always apples to apples.

@Odins Eye: See my answer to geronimo.

[quote][b]geronimo509[/b] -

Show me a quote of Scalia's that validates your comment.

[/quote]

You forgot to say "please"

"Justice Antonin Scalia, one of the Supreme Court's most vocal and conservative justices, said on Sunday that the Second Amendment leaves room for U.S. legislatures to regulate guns, including menacing hand-held weapons. "It will have to be decided in future cases," Scalia said on Fox News Sunday. But there were legal precedents from the days of the Founding Fathers that banned frightening weapons which a constitutional originalist like himself must recognize. There were also "locational limitations" on where weapons could be carried, the justice noted." http://www.nationaljournal.com/scalia-guns-may-be-regulated-20120729

[quote][b]grove600[/b] -

Anyone care to name one legal gun owner / legal gun carrying citizen who initiated a mass shooting or killed any number of individuals?

Anyone?

No?

The fact is that legal gun owners are a tad more responsible than you give them credit for. None of them have gone out a shot up a mall, movie theatre or elementary school. Someone with mental problems, someone with a known criminal history, yes to the above and more. Yet you are hell bent on taking away guns from the law abiding citizens who haven't harmed a flea. Your laws and edicts from The One won't keep guns from the hands of those intent on doing harm to others.

Put criminals behind bars and kooks behind bars (mental prisons) and then you'll see a sharp decline in these types of events. Good people don't do this. Criminals and kooks do. Get rid of the criminals and kooks. Leave the good people alone.

[/quote]

We could start with 75% of the weapons in mass shootings having been obtained legally. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map

[quote][b]Odins Eye[/b] -

@broomsedge: History dictates otherwise, gun regulations lead to gun confiscations lead to democide. Ask the a Native American how surrendering thier guns worked out for them, Govt sure to care of them...almost to extinction. So all you gun-grabber-nut-cases can just suck it up. Inalienable right: look it up..... My gun rights are not up for discussion...ever..by you or anyone else..ever...period

[/quote] Inalienable right? The word "regulated" is before militia. Even Scalia thinks there can be limits on gun ownership. Given that we have freedom of speech, anyone can discuss your rights. In fact, I'm talking about them right now (so maybe you should suck it up). Stop getting bent out of shape and don't call me a nut case or I'll report you to Joel. By the way, name calling doesn't help your side either.

[quote][b]fishin4u[/b] -

Under this new invasion of privacy, your Dr has to ask & report about your guns. If the Dr does not report you, he is in trouble. If you tell your lawyer everything about a case you are involved in, he by law cannot speak to anyone about what he knows.......................

Somethin' aint right here......

>>>>>FISH>>>

[/quote]

Wrong. "Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes." "Has to" is different from "does not prohibit." And if someone is a victim of gun violence in the home it should be reported. That does not mean your doc is going to ask how many guns you have at home whenever you go in for a checkup. If you seriously think that is going to happen, you are not being rational.

[quote][b]PoRo912[/b] -

@Odins Eye: No body is talking about confiscating your damn guns or taking away your 2nd amendment rights. You nuts that keep floating this idea that the government is coming to your house and take your guns are just plain "fear mongers", I think you are actually trying to start an insurrection by planting the seeds of doubt that american citizens are being stripped of their rights and privacy. You take a little bibical history, mix it with a little world history, sprinkle that with a lot of your rightwing BS and you feed it to the masses to get a reaction. I support the President for trying to find sensible ways to end gun violence, and I despise the nra for it's role in spreading the lies of the gun manufactures and gun lobbyist.

[/quote]

Thank you!

When most of you folks are to the right of Justice Scalia, you know you're out of touch.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/29/scalia-opens-door-for-gun-con...

From Business Insider: Scalia, a strict interpreter of the Constitution, said there's an "important limitation" on the right to bear arms.

http://www.businessinsider.com/scalias-2008-second-amendment-opinion-201...

Nice column!

A portion of each of those 22 spaces is on public property, as pointed out. If the rest of the spaces belong to Stiles, what obligates ACC to provide a 200' long curb cut for access to his spaces? ACC could put in a curb and a narrow sidewalk within the right-of-way and he's left with under-sized spaces and no way to get to them. One could say those spaces are a traffic hazard - backing into Lumpkin St. in order to get out. It might be more in his interest to try and work with ACC and the other business owners.

@Curls:

[quote][b]Curls[/b] -

Notice that coal-producing states did not vote for Obama.

.

[/quote]

Except for Pennsylvania, Ohio and Illinois. That's 3 of the top 10 states for coal production. If you are accusing others of having no credibility, you better have your facts straight.

@hack: Columbine had an armed security guard on campus at the time of the shooting.

[quote][b]grove600[/b] -

The blood of the next killings, and they'll be more, will be on your hands.

[/quote]

That's insulting and offensive. Too bad you are not interested in rational discussion. Should the US look like Central American countries where there are armed cops and military on almost every corner? Is that what freedom looks like?

Teachers need to teach. Firearm training should not be part of the requirements.

How many of you gun folks are OK with a ban an assault rifles and high capacity magazines? What do you need them for? Was it so bad in the 90's when that was in place? You could still hunt and still defend your home.

If I choose to boycott Domino's then I will be supporting workers at another business that I might not support otherwise. I can't support all franchises and their employees but I can choose which ones I want to support.

If Mr. M doesn't believe in abortion rights or contraception then he doesn't have to have one or use them. He should stay out of his employee's personal matters and start providing complete health insurance coverage.

[quote][b]fishin4u[/b] -

The message from J Foxx's film is to kill white people as he covertly worked into his monolog last week on snl.

FISH...........

[/quote] Give me a break! Do you seriously think that is Jamie Foxx's message?

">

"most tastiest"?