Losing the Internet

PJ Media, by Richard Fernandez

The administration’s plan to create a “free and open Internet” means, as usual, the opposite of what it says. As Gordon Crovitz explains in the Wall Street Journal, it is really a monumental, bare-faced power grab.
The Internet, which allows anyone to introduce a website, app or device without government review, ends this week. On Thursday the three Democrats among the five commissioners on the Federal Communications Commission will vote to regulate the Internet under rules written for monopoly utilities.
No one, including the bullied FCC chairman, Tom Wheeler, thought the agency would go this far. The big politicization came when President Obama in November demanded that the supposedly independent FCC apply the agency’s most extreme regulation to the Internet. A recent page-one Wall Street Journal story headlined “Net Neutrality: How White House Thwarted FCC Chief” documented “an unusual, secretive effort inside the White House . . . acting as a parallel version of the FCC itself.”

The more than 300 pages of new regulations are secret, but Mr. Wheeler says they will subject the Internet to the key provisions of Title II of the Communications Act of 1934, under which the FCC oversaw Ma Bell.

The specifics of the grab don’t matter as much as the direction in which things must inevitably move. Regulation is an absorbing state like the Hotel California. You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave. Three hundred pages of regulation will become 301 … 302 … A new administration might slow down the rate of growth, but it can never reverse it. (It can, but the only one ever to do so was the Reagan administration when it ended the anything but “Fairness Doctrine.”)

The very success of the Internet doomed its independence. And if there’s anything this administration — and to a lesser extent any administration — hankers after it is power. So a-raiding they will go. Here is prince Barack, at the tech city gates, demanding the key. Not that he will know what to do with it.

There is the notion, often reticently expressed but frequently glimpsed in news stories, that the key to the future World Order is information. Information is the key to power.

The information sharing the president proposes will naturally enough be put under Homeland Security rather than the NSA.

The actual effect of government control is to institutionalize incompetence. The more Obama controls, the more he destroys.

The administration’s proposal has been called Obamacare for the Internet. What Obama’s Internet grab will do is activate the Law of Unintended consequences. The princes may be attracted to the glittering city in the sands but they don’t know a thing about running it. Once they lose information — and cover it up in the habitual way — the loss can have deadly consequences.

Will the administration give you a “freer and more open Internet” than you have now? We are doomed by this move. The difference is we know it. The administration has not yet figured out that in incompetent hands even the finest weapon can be turned around to face its hapless wielder.

Boy, will they be surprised.

(Wake me up when it becomes a hate crime to do or say anything that a gay or African-American or Hispanic-American or Muslim can tweak into something he finds offensive.)
***

You'd better believe that this will affect the content of this Board. That's the whole point of it, the regulations will monitor content, probably to the extent that Dave will have to eliminate Misfire's altogether. It's also possible that the entire site will be eliminated, as they'll no doubt try to use it to eliminate pro-gun sites as well. The regs will make it too expensive to operate the site. The goal, as always, will be the unconstitutionally totalitarian elimination of political opposition.

Back in the first few months of the then new admin, they announced that the #1 threat to the US was cyber security, and they dumped hundreds of billions into solving the 'problem'. It looked plain as day, probably intended, build the tools to tax this thing.

I have a hard time believing that any forum such as this can be regulated by the Govt, especially as a mechanism to control free speech. Regulated where commerce and intellectual property rights are concerned? That I could see. This internet forum is really no different than having a conversation with someone you meet on the street. Even the intellectually dishonest liberal wing of the court will side with my rights to have a simple conversation, even if it is in writing.

Ken, when I earlier brought up your point in context of The Patriot Act no one in Misfires cared that the US government was rooting through their library cards, visa accounts, phone calls, medical records etc and that it was a criminal offence to say they were under investigation.

When Snowden blew the whistle that government was listening and collecting literally everything on Internet and elsewhere, Misfires consensus was he's a traitor, to be hanged and quartered, even a notion it would be different under another political party. Ideology to the point of calumny.

What we have here are puffed-up patriots singing anthems, hands over their hearts, solemnly praising Bills of Right and Freedoms and Constitutions, honouring the sacrifices of our soldiers, sailors and airmen for protecting our rights and freedoms, the First and Second---all corrupted by statist KoolAid!

Jim says it's Communism.

Hmmm, that's not the way I remember it.

The snowman took tactics, procedure and capabilities to the soviets, I mean russians. I can't recall anyone here belly aching about having their favorite blog hacked. But, I appreciate your perspective on the humanity of the divide.

Please elaborate, Craig. Disclosing dimensions of illegal government incursions on constitutional rights and privacy should be lauded not condemned; responsible citizenship and responsible journalism demands it.

I've forgotten how Snowden fetched up in Moscow but I think it may have been the first country to take him in. His files had already been cached with responsible persons and newspapers. Doesn't seem he ran with secrets to the Kremlin.

The Communist Takeover Of
America - 45 Declared Goals
From Greg Swank
12-4-2


You are about to read a list of 45 goals that found their way down the halls of our great Capitol back in 1963. As you read this, 39 years later, you should be shocked by the events that have played themselves out. I first ran across this list 3 years ago but was unable to attain a copy and it has bothered me ever since. Recently, Jeff Rense posted it on his site and I would like to thank him for doing so. http://www.rense.com Communist Goals (1963) Congressional Record--Appendix, pp. A34-A35 January 10, 1963 Current Communist Goals EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 10, 1963 . Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America. At Mrs. Nordman's request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following "Current Communist Goals," which she identifies as an excerpt from "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen: [From "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen] 1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war. 2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war. 3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength. 4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war. 5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites. 6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination. 7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N. 8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N. 9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress. 10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N. 11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.) 12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party. 13. Do away with all loyalty oaths. 14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office. 15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States. 16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights. 17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks. 18. Gain control of all student newspapers. 19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack. 20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions. 21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures. 22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms." 23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art." 24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press. 25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV. 26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy." 27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch." 28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state." 29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis. 30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man." 31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over. 32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc. 33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus. 34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities. 35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI. 36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions. 37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business. 38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat]. 39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals. 40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce. 41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents. 42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems. 43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government. 44. Internationalize the Panama Canal. 45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike. Note by Webmaster: The Congressional Record back this far has not be digitized and posted on the Internet. It will probably be available at your nearest library that is a federal repository. Call them and ask them. Your college library is probably a repository. This is an excellent source of government records. Another source are your Congress Critters. They should be more than happy to help you in this matter. You will find the Ten Planks of the Communist Manifesto interesting at this point. Webmaster Forest Glen Durland found the document in the library.

I posted ths so everyone can see just how far we've fallen. I high lighted some of the points which I consider the most telling. We you look at the libtard bimbos on the Supreme Court who sneer at our Constitution I still worry that Obama will get another appointment in the next year and a half. It is my hope we can survive as a free Country until we can begin to rebuild in 2016.
Jim

He, he, you make a funny. 'Responsible journalism', is that like an unemployed 'reporter' that dots his I's and crosses his T's at the feed trough looking for benies?

Anywho, the info is incidental, at least in the eyes of your 'responsible' colleagues, and the illegality of it seems to be a unique attribute that only you're aware of. I wonder how many of his former coworkers are identified to and under surveillance by who knows who? For example. C'mon King, the info gets stale quickly, the security upheaval has to raise way more questions, but all the reporters were temporarily unemployed for that job.

Comrade Sralin,

I'm not sure if it's sociopathic psychological projection, or the clear loss of short-term memory. I, for one have never supported the totalitarian aspects of the Patriotic Act. Nor have I commented on Snowden. If I'm in error, please cite my posts.

One of the major reservations I've had, and still do, is the fact that once a sociopathic, religious statist gains power, he would use the act against his political enemies. A fact that is now blatantly obvious, as virtually the entire government has been "weaponized", and is used against those who dare to consider themselves "Free and Equal" to the sociopathic, religious statists currently in power.

As is typical, a religious reaction, denying objective reality.

It sounded to me like he didn't believe you. But I would have taken it a step further and said you're feeding us more of your BULLSHIT flavored KoolAid.



Ah, but you lie to us yet again. Snowden did take secrets to the Kremlin. That much is well known, but you think you can tell us more lies and we'll believe you. The fear in the intelligence community is that he has stolen much more which he has stored on a heavily encrypted and multiple password protected internet cloud data storage bank. As far as having some files being cached with responsible persons and newspapers... are you speaking of responsible Journalistic agents and agencies like Brian Williams and NBC? We've all seen enough to know the "trusted media" is anything but trustworthy. If they're anything like you, we're all in deep shit.

Nobody here really worried about the government looking at our library cards or destinations of phone calls, not actual content of those calls... because we were not contacting Muslim terrorist cells and had nothing to hide.

Isn't it ironic that what we apparently really have to fear is the same Liberal Leftist Democrats who would protect illegal aliens and keep the borders open to terrorists, yet regulate and spy on law abiding citizens. We have to fear the very politicians which you support and defend King.

It is not government we apparently have to fear King. It is Democrats who pose a threat to our freedom. Anti-Gun, Anti-Freedom Democrats!

You're the last guy I'd think of as a huffin' puffin' duped patriot, Ken.
You seem as entertained as much as I am by those who fail to recognize that all deeply held beliefs are ideological in nature, whether true or not.

Even when not part of organized religion, they're based on beliefs that require as much faith. Canadian law regarding terrorism, for example, is ideological.

This is why governments seek to control the definition of terrorism. I believe this is one of your points i.e. "terrorism" is by "others" culturally different from the dominant group.

Changing seats in Washington and Ottawa wouldn't change it.

Well, that's the true issue is it not? Is one's ideology that of Individual Freedom and Equality, as defined by the Constitution, or one of Sociopathic, Statist, Religious Totalitarianism and unconstitutional infliction?

Food for thought, I spent 6 years in Northwest Montana. 1 mile from the Canadian border. When the Patriot act was passed only 1 Senator opposed it. Dem. Fiengold WI. Sorry for the spelling. He was applauded where I lived. A VERY Republican area. Twice I had border patrol at my home. Once they asked, the second they TOLD me they were going to check my property. When we give up our freedoms for security, we loose both.

That is very true Doublefan, but what seems more important is which political Party of our representative government is most prone to abusing any freedoms we voluntarily cede to them in the hope that they are looking out for our best interests as a nation.

We hope and trust that both major parties will preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. But as shooters and gun owners, we all know that it has been almost totally Democrats who have encroached and infringed upon the rights of law abiding gun owners.

And look at your personal situation with the Border Patrol since the Patriot Act was passed. Was there a credible threat from terrorists coming across the Canadian Border which is much much more secure than our Southern Border? The Democrats who now impede Customs and the Border Patrol from doing their jobs and enforcing existing laws now wish to control and regulate the internet, even as they fight tooth and nail against any efforts to control our Southern Border.

If any of us are stupid enough to vote for a party with a history of abusing and infringing upon the rights of law abiding citizens, we are going to end up losing our rights with or without a Patriot Act. That is why the following quote by King Brown is both ridiculous and dishonest...

Terrorism is not an ideology, it is a tactic. Changing the definition on the basis of culture is absurd. It's another example of the soviet rationalization called "Moral Equivalency", when "One Man's Terrorist is another Man's Freedom Fighter". An absurd, sociopathic, doctrinal response. It falls in line with this point of Skousen's Communist Goal list:

42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems.

Both parties are at fault. We need to have people who work for a living being are representatives. These millionaires have no clue! Both sides are corrupted! Sorry for the rant but we need a third party who is for the lower and middle class. I drive a 2004 so I can have a Parker. I choose my purchases. My truck will die, my SxS will live on! Agree to disagree. Compromise and get things done! Don't crawl into corners!

This brings us to another point on the Skousen list.

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

It's the statist, mainstream Republicans who are "enabeling" Obama and the Democrats. You can speak of "compromise" all you want, but the fact is that the march toward Statism/Communism has NEVER had a single aspect of it reversed, so compromise merely facilitates its progression.

And I drive a 1995 so I can have a 1900 Lebeau Courally

Changing definitions may be absurd but it's what we do. And just when you're making sense you raise that individual-freedom-by-constitution line.

You forget the unions---the liberal and conservative parties with their enormous unaccountable checkoffs from majorities who don't realize they're playing the punk's game.

You're an engaging and personable outlier of the unions although obliged to contribute to them because you receive public benefits legislated by the majorities.

You indulge in a radical individualism fantasy bordering on asceticism, retiring into a solitude, an utopia where each does as she pleases.

As James in Arizona, you see the Constitution and the Second as immutable and inalienable when the evidence daily demonstrates no serious longevity.

If they are what literalists claim, there would be no challenges with differing outcomes across the country as "social engineering" common to our lexicon.

Whatever individual freedom existed in the US vanished when the Puritan fathers made law collectively to keep from cutting each other's throats.

I don't think the Puritans were communists.

I'm agreeing with you on this Ken---Numero 15---with the caveat above. They are all in on it. You dream of utopia, I say to hell with it and dream of a dozen wings-bowed bluebills over my tollers. Maybe we're the same.

I don't dream of Utopia, I dream of Freedom. I suppose it's a kind of Utopia. In reality, I dream mostly about getting laid.

Sheesh, now you're trying to fundamentally change duck hunting. Let the puddle ducks set wings. Bluebills should be screaming by with their tail on fire. Hey good analogy, after the fun part, they're tough to swallow.

I think you're covering at least two of the Skousen points in this post. Next time try to see how many you can in one response.

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis. 30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."

At least you can be honest with us Ken... unlike Comrade Stalin who tells us he'd rather be duck hunting, but spends most of his time advancing Socialist Liberal dogma and supporting the Leftist Democrats who would love to take away all of our guns.

I disagree with Doublefan completely. They are not all the same. That's a cop out and an excuse. No politician is perfect, and it almost always comes down to choosing between the lesser of two evils. One party is taking us toward Socialism and encroaching upon the freedoms we still have at a much faster rate. That is the Democrats. I am registered Independent but I vote with consideration of who is more likely to infringe upon our rights and regulate our freedoms. Almost invariably, the Democrat is the wrong choice. Anyone who votes a straight ticket without thoughtfully considering merits should not even have the right to vote.

If you like your internet, you can keep your internet......
(If you like your freedom, you can keep your freedom)...not

C'mon, Ken. Lowering your tip to test the old guy's reflexes? You're confusing Founding fathers who got their heads in gear with the Constitution 150 years after the Puritan fathers established law in the New England colonies.

My reference to the Constitution was that it is not immutable and inalienable, not what you ascribed to me. Hon. Sandra O'Connor's described it as "putting governance in the hands of the people" and "neither so rigid as to be stifling."

"Not so rigid as to be stifling" doesn't sound immutable---"not subject to variation in different cases"---and inalienable to me. Perhaps you bought the myth of the Founding Fathers as Puritans.

If the Constitution isn't open to interpretation---and it clearly is---why would Americans spend hundreds of millions of dollars annually to test their cases in your highest court? Pick it up, please.

This one is so easy you'd have to be beyond stupid to even ask the question.

Cases end up in the Supreme Court simply because lower courts don't always get it right. The only legal interpretation is to determine that rulings abide by the Constitution and original intent. So then, there is an appeals process that ends with a body of what ideally would be the most learned Constitutional judges in the land, the Supreme Court. Their sole purpose is to determine if lower courts erred or if their rulings pass Constitutional muster.

The problem started with the Progressive movement and continues when you get Justices like Sandra O'Conner who think it is their duty to change laws and the Constitution from the Bench. Ruth Bader Ginsberg is an even better example for us here since she hates the Second Amendment and would change or eliminate it in a heartbeat. This is a violation of the Oath they take when sworn in, and it is a perversion... no matter how King Brown sees it.

Unfortunately, it seems that the Justices who tend to stray from the Constitution or the Original Intent of the Framers are Liberal Leftist judges nominated by Liberal Leftist Presidents. Sometimes a Conservative President may make the mistake of nominating a judge who turns out bad. John Paul Stevens is a prime example of this. Earl Warren was another, nominated by Dwight Eisenhower, who later remarked that his appointment was "the biggest damned-fool mistake I ever made."

The Constitution is not immutable. It has been perverted. It is most often perverted by the kind of Left Wing Judges and politicians who King Brown supports. This is why it really makes a difference who we vote for... no matter what King thinks or what kind of dishonest KoolAid he serves.

Go shoot some bluebills King. We've had enough of your bullshit. Telling Ken, "Maybe we're the same" has to be one of the worst insults ever."

The only thing I ever see of what King enters here is when someone else quotes one of his posts. I have him on ignore because I see no point in conversing with someone who doesn't know how to be honest. King is what? 80+ years old? As much as you guys are always telling him to go away, the truth is that you need him here in this forum. Misfits will shrivel on the vine if someone else doesn't come along to replace him prior to his death. King Brown is the reason 80% of the posts in this forum are made, and the reason is that you guys actually enjoy having someone around you can argue with who is always wrong - it's like having a spouse only I haven't figured out which side of the argument represents the wife.

This article will tell you all you need to know about so-called "Net Neutrality". Anyhing funded by the Libtard scumbag George Soros is NOT good for conservatives or for freedom in general and I expect this will be the case as well.
Jim

http://www.newsmax.com/US/George-Soros-F...kt_nbr=uzndcd79

Now, that's the lift to start the day! I get more spontaneous laughs from Misfires, the ones that come as soon as words pass the eye, than from anywhere else. That's why I'm here, for the fun of it. One of my sayings---"If you're not having fun you're not living"---is usually finished by my one of my children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren, they've heard it so often.

It's the same here in Misfires. The pity is that a few take it so seriously. My clan knows the difference of fun, serious and lower base. Other members appear to be getting as much entertainment as I from the nonsense goings-on about who's the fairest in the land. There's always a grump or two who live miserable lives according to their hell-fire emanations of their world coming to blue ruin.

It's therapeutic for those who choose to ignore and live blithely in cocoons to avoid the stress of responses to their posts; I wish them well. Others may consider my posts to Misfires---therapeutic for me as well---as a public service to keep Doubleguns prosperous and attractive to advertisers. Jim of Arizona reminded us earlier of Misfires as most-popular venue.

As for mortality, I'm 83 and could go any day, as everyone here. I'm in debt to Misfires for helping to ward off dementia with a better range of challenges than crosswords or sudoku. I'll stick around for the fun. The little jumping jack craving attention is worth the price of admission alone, and I just got my hands on lighter 50cu/in scuba and new folding boat for my bush plane.

Life is always just beginning!

The pity is, is that so many of the issues and tactics are not so trivial. But hey, more good news despite all the Christian equivocating, '13 was a record and '14 tops it for terrorism numbers. Didn't jkerry just speechify us about the great news that the US and the world is a safer place. I forget the setting, but it was probably from his metaphorical carrier deck, during the 47% off sale. Oh the never forgotten little tidbits that laugh at crosswords or sudoku.

And you won't get the lab.

Low blow on the Lab, Craig! Young Jake with current Jake not in the tea leaves.

As for what's trivial, it's all in perception, how you see the game. The world is a safer place, militarily because of US prowess and politically from US sheltering within political prowess of the indispensable Angela Merkel.

Do you see fear in Merkel's eyes? She and Obama realize limits of bombs and diplomacy. Ukraine is within Russia's sphere of influence and Iran will get the bomb. US will elect a Republican president to save the world.

Ask Dave in NH and Jim in Arizona.

I prefer to remind of johnny mavericks words from I believe yesterday, because he's a favorite of yours. The policies of this admin since '09 have made the US and the world a much more dangerous place.

Shafted again! The FCC voted to take control and impose rules for the Internet. The vote was along strict party lines with the 3 Democrats voting yes and the two Republicans voting no. This has the potential of putting a stranglehold on free speech on the Internet something Obama and the rest of the Libtards have wanted for long time. Oh and guess who appointed these Libtards to the FCC? Why no other then the Muslim occupant of the White house.
Jim

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2015/02/26/fcc-approves-net-neutrality-rules/24053057/

It was a much more dangerous place during an Iraq war that claimed 4,500 US military alone, compared to what now---less than drownings in swimming pools?

Merkel and Obama have got it about right under the extremely complicated tribal and religious dynamics of a region neither fully understands---and their countries never did.

I think of Obama (golfer) like Drake finishing his game (bowler), watching the Spanish armada sail up the Channel, then defeating it as we'll do with IS over time.

bo appointee, dir. of nat. intel. jimmy clapper, just yesterday said '14 was the deadliest, all caps, year since they've kept records. When did kerry say the all was rosie parrot the mantra, Tuesday. It's not so complicated and dynamic, as mentioned, nicely summarized by your buddy, the maverick.

You should've seen the fire in his eyes and heard the resolve in his voice. Ah, it's wasn't that great. You don't need scuba gear to cheer lead for these folks, just hold your nose and progress.

Yeah, you're not far off: have faith and pursue the unknown end.

Curious about "deadliest" last year. I'll look it up. It's about time getting them out of there. Let the tribes do the dying, not yours.

Don't like getting weepy personal: I believe five-times Brian has done enough pushing the actuarials.

No, the little water works show doesn't help. You mistaken me for a rubber stamp war mongerer. If you're looking anyway, the Heritage Foundation just came out with it's '15 Index of US Military Strength. Splains in ways, very distasteful to the rubber stamp left, why folks who wear the uniform are stretched a little thin.

There are consequences, but hey we flip the it's okay to believe him for this issue switch, when he said he was going to fundamentally change the mil. Scorched earth tactic with a green and recycled twist, eh.

Never thought of you as warmonger, ever, Craig. You take too much at face value, only puzzler to me. It's not bad to be trusting though and better than thinking everyone is a sob. We know only a speck of what's really going on, and that speck never gets the scrutiny it deserves, and never will.

Before you go King, would you like to unburden yourself? You seem tormented by continuous attempts to dishonestly convince us that Socialism is the right path. I don't think I'm alone in feeling that participation in Misfires is doing nothing to ward off dementia for you. Maybe you could instead start collecting donations to get your hero Obama put on Mt. Rushmore in place of Thomas Jefferson. Countering all of those widespread Human Rights abuses in Canada sounds like a worthwhile goal too. Or have you ever considered flying your float plane to Iraq and talking ISIS into being more civil, and less mean and mischievous? You could do at least as good a job as Obama and Kerry.

I seriously doubt that DoubleGunShop advertisers are attracted to your frequent anti-gun statements and support for anti-gun politicians. I'll bet that most of them actually like the NRA too.

Keep KoolAid.