First time visitor? Learn more.

“Wait! You Said Chest Nuts! HAHAHAHAH!”

by Bunk X ( 82 Comments › )
Filed under Food and Drink, Humor, OOT, Open thread at December 17th, 2012 - 9:00 pm


Tip o’ the tarboosh to Calo & Suki for sending another great reason to smile on The Overnight Open Thread.

Tags: , ,

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

82 Responses to ““Wait! You Said Chest Nuts! HAHAHAHAH!””
( jump to bottom )

  1. darkwords
    1 | December 17, 2012 9:04 pm

    Self > Family > Community > Govt/Church. The order in which to look for help and responsibility. Too much Self < Govt.


  2. 2 | December 17, 2012 9:19 pm

    Now…make that kid eat those snot-laden candy canes!


  3. 3 | December 17, 2012 9:30 pm

    darkwords wrote:

    Self > Family > Community > Govt/Church. The order in which to look for help and responsibility. Too much Self < Govt.

    Yup agreed.


  4. unclassifiable
    4 | December 17, 2012 9:30 pm

    @ Macker:

    Those aren’t candy canes.

    That’s what an outdoors nose bleed looks like in S. Dakota this time of year.


  5. 5 | December 17, 2012 10:02 pm

    darkwords wrote:

    Self > Family > Community > Govt/Church. The order in which to look for help and responsibility. Too much Self < Govt.

    ever so slight quibble…
    Self > Family > Community > Church > Government
    govt should, imo, be the last resort


  6. coldwarrior
    6 | December 17, 2012 10:04 pm

    ahhh…friday night for me. howz about some tunes!

    the opening sounds like iggy and the stooges lust for life


  7. coldwarrior
    7 | December 17, 2012 10:07 pm

    unclassifiable wrote:

    @ Macker:
    Those aren’t candy canes.
    That’s what an outdoors nose bleed looks like in S. Dakota this time of year.

    or norway in december.

    *cold*


  8. coldwarrior
    8 | December 17, 2012 10:08 pm

    more jet

    gettin some mc5 outta this


  9. coldwarrior
    9 | December 17, 2012 10:12 pm

    iggy

    :lol:


  10. coldwarrior
    10 | December 17, 2012 10:24 pm

    neon trees


  11. coldwarrior
    11 | December 17, 2012 10:35 pm

    straight from iceland to yinz!

    its really a wonderful song

    done live:


  12. 12 | December 17, 2012 10:36 pm

    follow up to my question from last night re gun control.

    What mental illnesses should disqualify someone from owning a gun?

    Should any guns be off limits to the general population, and if so, which ones? Sure, the ‘it’s got that scary looking thing around the barrel, so we should ban it’ statement is typical idiocy from a lib, as is the ‘the Glock is an assault weapon’ comment. But are there full auto weapons that are available to the public?


  13. coldwarrior
    13 | December 17, 2012 10:38 pm

    mfhorn wrote:

    What mental illnesses should disqualify someone from owning a gun?

    and who makes the diagnosis?


  14. coldwarrior
    14 | December 17, 2012 10:39 pm

    of monsters and men live.

    do check them out


  15. CynicalConservative
    15 | December 17, 2012 10:45 pm

    mfhorn wrote:

    follow up to my question from last night re gun control.
    What mental illnesses should disqualify someone from owning a gun?
    Should any guns be off limits to the general population, and if so, which ones? Sure, the ‘it’s got that scary looking thing around the barrel, so we should ban it’ statement is typical idiocy from a lib, as is the ‘the Glock is an assault weapon’ comment. But are there full auto weapons that are available to the public?

    To this specific question. No. Full stop.

    /galt


  16. coldwarrior
    16 | December 17, 2012 10:45 pm

    just a little more of monsters and men


  17. coldwarrior
    17 | December 17, 2012 10:53 pm

    CynicalConservative wrote:

    mfhorn wrote:
    follow up to my question from last night re gun control.
    What mental illnesses should disqualify someone from owning a gun?
    Should any guns be off limits to the general population, and if so, which ones? Sure, the ‘it’s got that scary looking thing around the barrel, so we should ban it’ statement is typical idiocy from a lib, as is the ‘the Glock is an assault weapon’ comment. But are there full auto weapons that are available to the public?

    To this specific question. No. Full stop.
    /galt

    the care and feeding of a ma deuce or a 60 is quite high


  18. coldwarrior
    18 | December 17, 2012 10:56 pm

    nothreat’s favorite song. :(


  19. 19 | December 17, 2012 10:56 pm

    @ CynicalConservative:

    See, that’s an area I can at least understand the concern. I don’t know that I’m comfortable with (as an extreme example) a mini gun in most people’s hands. And yeah, I’d love to shoot one myself, at the Knob Creek shoot!

    At the same time, I know that if we ban those, it’s just the first step towards banning something else, then something else, and before long, .45′s, .44′s, .38′s, and 9mm are on the chopping block. It’s the liberal way- we’ve seen that time & time again.


  20. CynicalConservative
    20 | December 17, 2012 10:56 pm

    @ coldwarrior:
    Yep, it is. Not a reason to be banned though.

    New toy today, break it in tomorrow. SR1911, been waiting 8 months for it.

    /galt


  21. CynicalConservative
    21 | December 17, 2012 10:58 pm

    @ mfhorn:
    Exactly, the camel’s nose under the tent. Incrementalism will be the death of everything.

    /galt


  22. coldwarrior
    22 | December 17, 2012 10:59 pm

    CynicalConservative wrote:

    @ coldwarrior:
    Yep, it is. Not a reason to be banned though.
    New toy today, break it in tomorrow. SR1911, been waiting 8 months for it.
    /galt

    carried the venerable 1911 for a good few years in the army. a fine pistol.


  23. CynicalConservative
    23 | December 17, 2012 10:59 pm

    @ coldwarrior:
    I really wish I got to know her better. We just barely started taking about garden and canning on and offline and everything happened. Still sad.

    /galt


  24. CynicalConservative
    24 | December 17, 2012 11:00 pm

    @ coldwarrior:
    Such a shame that I already lost it in a boating accident (tomorrow afternoon that is).

    /galt


  25. coldwarrior
    25 | December 17, 2012 11:00 pm

    @ mfhorn:

    the a-10′s vulcan comes to mind.


  26. coldwarrior
    26 | December 17, 2012 11:02 pm

    CynicalConservative wrote:

    @ coldwarrior:
    Such a shame that I already lost it in a boating accident (tomorrow afternoon that is).
    /galt

    as i explained to mike c i lost all of my guns in the blizzard / freak volcano of 1993. the lahar took out my collection and sent it to the bottom of the ohio river.

    it was epic.


  27. 27 | December 17, 2012 11:02 pm

    @ coldwarrior:

    The Avenger? Heh- that’s a ball to watch ‘em open up with that one! I was at a target range in Wisconsin in ’84 or maybe early ’85 and a few A-10′s came in. Wow!


  28. Brick
    28 | December 17, 2012 11:03 pm

    mfhorn wrote:

    follow up to my question from last night re gun control.
    What mental illnesses should disqualify someone from owning a gun?
    Should any guns be off limits to the general population, and if so, which ones? Sure, the ‘it’s got that scary looking thing around the barrel, so we should ban it’ statement is typical idiocy from a lib, as is the ‘the Glock is an assault weapon’ comment. But are there full auto weapons that are available to the public?

    The 4473 already addresses mental issues. Question 11f.

    Yes, full-auto is available but are more strictly regulated than semi-auto.


  29. coldwarrior
    29 | December 17, 2012 11:03 pm

    CynicalConservative wrote:

    we lost a good one there.

    i got all the mumford and sons for her and a t shirt for a present about 4 months before she died.


  30. coldwarrior
    30 | December 17, 2012 11:04 pm

    mfhorn wrote:

    @ coldwarrior:
    The Avenger? Heh- that’s a ball to watch ‘em open up with that one! I was at a target range in Wisconsin in ’84 or maybe early ’85 and a few A-10′s came in. Wow!

    the a-10 is the culmination of killing technology.

    precise, fast, effortless.


  31. coldwarrior
    31 | December 17, 2012 11:06 pm

    this vid is terrific


  32. coldwarrior
    32 | December 17, 2012 11:08 pm

    any country fan should love the above vids. these guys are fantastic


  33. coldwarrior
    33 | December 17, 2012 11:13 pm

    this is a link to mumford and son’s glastonbury 2011 show.

    me and mrs coldwarrior love these guys


  34. lobo91
    34 | December 17, 2012 11:14 pm

    @ Brick:

    Yes, full-auto is available but are more strictly regulated than semi-auto.

    The main thing preventing most people from owning full auto weapons is the cost, not the bureaucratic hoops you have to jump through. As long as you live in a state that allows them (not all do), it’s mainly a matter of filling out some forms and paying a tax.

    The problem is that no full auto weapons have been manufactured or imported into the US for civilian sale in about 20 years. What’s already in circulation can be sold, but that’s it. There’s a finite supply, so the prices are outrageous.

    The government pays about $1000 for an M-4 from Colt. A civilian-legal full auto M-16 will cost you about as much as a pretty nice car.


  35. coldwarrior
    35 | December 17, 2012 11:20 pm

    @ lobo91:

    i WILL own a thompson one day.


  36. Brick
    36 | December 17, 2012 11:21 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ Brick:
    Yes, full-auto is available but are more strictly regulated than semi-auto.
    The main thing preventing most people from owning full auto weapons is the cost, not the bureaucratic hoops you have to jump through. As long as you live in a state that allows them (not all do), it’s mainly a matter of filling out some forms and paying a tax.
    The problem is that no full auto weapons have been manufactured or imported into the US for civilian sale in about 20 years. What’s already in circulation can be sold, but that’s it. There’s a finite supply, so the prices are outrageous.
    The government pays about $1000 for an M-4 from Colt. A civilian-legal full auto M-16 will cost you about as much as a pretty nice car.

    Don’t forget insurance, and incorporation, or trust set-up if you’re in an area where local law enforcement won’t sign off on your transfer docs.


  37. Brick
    37 | December 17, 2012 11:22 pm

    coldwarrior wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    i WILL own a thompson one day.

    You’ve been watching Machine Gun Blues again, haven’t you? :)


  38. coldwarrior
    38 | December 17, 2012 11:26 pm

    Brick wrote:

    coldwarrior wrote:
    @ lobo91:
    i WILL own a thompson one day.

    You’ve been watching Machine Gun Blues again, haven’t you?

    ha!

    nope.

    there are 2 things i want for my retirement

    this is one

    the thompson is the other


  39. Brick
    39 | December 17, 2012 11:32 pm

    coldwarrior wrote:

    Brick wrote:
    coldwarrior wrote:
    @ lobo91:
    i WILL own a thompson one day.
    You’ve been watching Machine Gun Blues again, haven’t you?

    ha!
    nope.
    there are 2 things i want for my retirement

    this is one
    the thompson is the other

    Buy Now

    ::click::

    $35,999.00

    uhm…no. :)


  40. lobo91
    40 | December 17, 2012 11:34 pm

    @ coldwarrior:

    Here you go


  41. coldwarrior
    41 | December 17, 2012 11:35 pm

    @ Brick:

    i’ll take the telescope and just use an AK and pretend its a thompson.


  42. lobo91
    42 | December 17, 2012 11:35 pm

    A nice M-16A1


  43. coldwarrior
    43 | December 17, 2012 11:37 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ coldwarrior:
    Here you go

    unfired!!!!
    wow

    museum piece there.

    i would feel terrible to put a round through that.


  44. coldwarrior
    44 | December 17, 2012 11:38 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    A nice M-16A1

    not worth 25k to spray 556 all over the joint


  45. Brick
    45 | December 17, 2012 11:38 pm

    coldwarrior wrote:

    @ Brick:
    i’ll take the telescope and just use an AK and pretend its a thompson.

    I’d take the AK and pretend an empty paper towel roll is a telescope.


  46. lobo91
    46 | December 17, 2012 11:40 pm

    MAC-11 bargain


  47. lobo91
    47 | December 17, 2012 11:42 pm

    Personally, I think if I were going to spend that kind of money, I’d get this


  48. coldwarrior
    48 | December 17, 2012 11:44 pm

    Brick wrote:

    coldwarrior wrote:
    @ Brick:
    i’ll take the telescope and just use an AK and pretend its a thompson.

    I’d take the AK and pretend an empty paper towel roll is a telescope.

    :lol:

    i have 10″ and 16″ newtonians, we built a slick dobsonian mount for the 16 and the 10 is on an equatorial mount. there will be a research grade scope for my retirement.


  49. coldwarrior
    49 | December 17, 2012 11:46 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    Personally, I think if I were going to spend that kind of money, I’d get this

    i cant see owning an auto…i can see owning a very nice 300mag with a good scope tho.


  50. coldwarrior
    50 | December 17, 2012 11:48 pm

    Brick wrote:

    coldwarrior wrote:
    @ Brick:
    i’ll take the telescope and just use an AK and pretend its a thompson.

    I’d take the AK and pretend an empty paper towel roll is a telescope.

    the 16″


  51. Brick
    51 | December 17, 2012 11:49 pm

    Criminy, it’s late. Off to bed now. Have to make big piles of paper small, and the small piles big in the morning. :(

    Good night everyone, and keep the faith!


  52. lobo91
    52 | December 17, 2012 11:54 pm

    @ Brick:

    Night


  53. lobo91
    53 | December 17, 2012 11:56 pm

    coldwarrior wrote:

    lobo91 wrote:
    Personally, I think if I were going to spend that kind of money, I’d get this
    i cant see owning an auto…i can see owning a very nice 300mag with a good scope tho.

    Me neither. I can’t afford the ammo, much less $44,000 to buy a gun.

    I’m surprised that those M-11s are so cheap, though. I guess people have figured out that it’s a POS. About as useful as the old M-3A1 grease gun.


  54. coldwarrior
    54 | December 18, 2012 12:00 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    I’m surprised that those M-11s are so cheap, though. I guess people have figured out that it’s a POS. About as useful as the old M-3A1 grease gun.

    never had the opportunity to mess with one of those.

    it was ma deuce or 60 on my side for auto.


  55. lobo91
    55 | December 18, 2012 12:09 am

    @ coldwarrior:

    The M-3 was an absolute POS. Stamped steel, only fired on full auto, no sights to speak of, horrendous muzzle climb.

    Probably more effective as a club.


  56. Da_Beerfreak
    56 | December 18, 2012 12:12 am

    mfhorn wrote:

    follow up to my question from last night re gun control.

    What mental illnesses should disqualify someone from owning a gun?

    Should any guns be off limits to the general population, and if so, which ones? Sure, the ‘it’s got that scary looking thing around the barrel, so we should ban it’ statement is typical idiocy from a lib, as is the ‘the Glock is an assault weapon’ comment. But are there full auto weapons that are available to the public?

    There is no law on Earth or in Heaven that will stop the random act of a Madmen. All that can be done is to cleanup the mess afterward.

    A rock is an “assault weapon” in the hands of a Navy SEAL. Shall we outlaw the Earth to make some people feel safer??

    The best prevention is deterrence and when that fails swift and certain punishment.

    Best thing we can do right now is to outlaw all helpless victim zones.


  57. coldwarrior
    57 | December 18, 2012 12:14 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ coldwarrior:
    The M-3 was an absolute POS. Stamped steel, only fired on full auto, no sights to speak of, horrendous muzzle climb.
    Probably more effective as a club.

    they look great in movies tho


  58. coldwarrior
    58 | December 18, 2012 12:16 am

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    A rock is an “assault weapon” in the hands of a Navy SEAL. Shall we outlaw the Earth to make some people feel safer??

    ever mess with a classic david v goliath slingshot?

    nasty.


  59. lobo91
    59 | December 18, 2012 12:20 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    lobo91 wrote:
    @ coldwarrior:
    The M-3 was an absolute POS. Stamped steel, only fired on full auto, no sights to speak of, horrendous muzzle climb.
    Probably more effective as a club.
    they look great in movies tho

    We actually still had a couple of them in my battalion during Desert Storm. The only .45 caliber weapons in the entire battalion, since the pistols had already been changed out for M-9s.

    It looked pretty strange on the ammo board in S-4. There were all these different listings of ammo with quantites in the tens of thousands and then like 200 rounds of .45ACP.


  60. Da_Beerfreak
    60 | December 18, 2012 12:50 am

    @ coldwarrior:
    I’m pretty good with a ‘Wrist Rocket’ and a pocket full of marbles. :wink:


  61. coldwarrior
    61 | December 18, 2012 1:15 am

    @ Da_Beerfreak:

    the ultimate weapon.


  62. 62 | December 18, 2012 1:17 am

    @ coldwarrior:
    Iggy was one of a kind, that’s for sure.


  63. coldwarrior
    63 | December 18, 2012 1:20 am

    Zimriel wrote:

    @ coldwarrior:
    Iggy was one of a kind, that’s for sure.

    i loves me some iggy.

    its lost on some folks tho


  64. coldwarrior
    64 | December 18, 2012 1:22 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    It looked pretty strange on the ammo board in S-4. There were all these different listings of ammo with quantites in the tens of thousands and then like 200 rounds of .45ACP.

    gimme my 1911.


  65. Guggi
    65 | December 18, 2012 4:05 am

    IF will kill me :-P

    ATF, charged with regulating guns, lacks resources and leadership


  66. 66 | December 18, 2012 4:15 am

    The only time I looked at a MAC-10 was at a gun show in OKC in 84. NiB (with silencer) $ 400. Looked like it was stamped out of beer cans. My local range rents a number of full-auto weapons, and I have tried a couple of them, but I wasn’t all that thrilled, frankly. Given the price of legal ones these days, it’s a huge waste of money for anybody anywhere near my income level. Another factor is that my local range is on the other side of the VA-WV line from me, which would mean that I would have to notify the BATFE in writing every time I wanted to take on to the range. Putting one’s self on the official BATFE list of top gun nuts to round up first doesn’t strike me as a good idea. My semi-auto rifle and pistols are fully capable of putting out rounds far quicker than I can get them to land on target. Hell, even the Marlin lever gun is capable of that. Better (and cheaper!) if I spend my time and money practicing putting the rounds where they belong.

    Neatest daydream weapon I’ve seen recently is that brass replica Navy Bullpup Gatling gun Colt apparently produced in extremely limited numbers this past year. Not a Class III weapon according to the BATFE. Chambered for the .45/70. Mega-cool, but rumorored to be priced at about $ 60 K/copy. Now if somebody would make a rationally priced version of something like that in 5.56 or even .22 LR, it might be pretty cool to have one just for fun, but so far, I haven’t seen one. For a daydream weapon a normal person might actually own, I’d fancy a good repro 1885 Highwall Sharps in .45/70 with a barrel in the 30-34″ range and the tang sights. My BiL has a safe full of such things -- Sharps, Ballards, Hepburns -- original and new. Extremely cool. But then, I’m a sucker for old-fashioned stuff. That’s why there’s two lever guns and an SA revolver in the house.


  67. 67 | December 18, 2012 4:29 am

    TGoP (my wife) is of the opinion that there would be a lot less violence if everybody had a big, friendly cat.

    It’s a better idea than any I’ve heard out of any liberal politician or talking head recently… (he syas as the cat is bothering him for attention…)


  68. unclassifiable
    68 | December 18, 2012 5:38 am

    Oh boy. It morphed into a gun thread (all be it slow running). Hooray (I mean that — no sarcasm).

    I have a big kitty but still want this.


  69. unclassifiable
    69 | December 18, 2012 5:41 am

    @ unclassifiable:

    And it’s not an assault weapon. It’s a friggin’ mechanical engineering work of art and just as much an artistic expression as Django Unchained.

    So there. THHHHHHHHHHHFFFFFT!


  70. 70 | December 18, 2012 6:22 am

    Mia Love was just on Fox. Wow, she’s an impressive young lady and she gets more impressive every time I see her!


  71. 71 | December 18, 2012 7:26 am

    @ Mike C.:

    I’ve seen that bullpup gatling. I want one! IIRC, retail was about $45K at the time, but they were going to be a limited run, so I could see them going for $60K now. Nice, nice weapon. They are the kind of gun the gun controllers will never go after, because they are essentially toys for the rich. What the gun controllers want are disarmed plebians. They don’t care if the patricians (especially if they are well-connected patricians) are armed. That way they can calaim that they support the Second Amendment and still disarm all the untermenchen rabble. These people aren’t well-meaning fools. They are evil. They’ll leave you vulnerable to criminals, but that is just a side matter. They mainly want to be sure that you can’t resist them when they com eto take everything you have.


  72. 72 | December 18, 2012 7:49 am

    @ Guggi:

    The BATF is one of the pieces of the bureaucracy I would love to see eliminated. Not only do they perform no useful functions for the most part (you could move the explosives division under the FBI, for example), they have too much blood on their hands and too authoritarian a business culture to becompatible with a free nation. Get rid of them. They are an anacronism forom the days of Prohibition, as is the NFA that they enforce.


  73. Guggi
    73 | December 18, 2012 7:53 am

    Assault Rifles vs Rifles explained

    (For know nothing like me :-) )


  74. eaglesoars
    74 | December 18, 2012 8:04 am

    Good morning. This is a drive-by as I’ve been up most of the night w/the beagle.

    We had a bit of a circus here the other nite. 3 am. Sound asleep. Beagle went off like a rocket. Grabbed the weapons. Emergency lights everywhere.

    Turned out it was emergency medical people at our across-the-yard neighbor’s place. We knew she was ill. She/we thought it was just a cold. We had checked on her every day -- but she just crashed.

    My point. She had installed an emergency alert system. When she realized how ill she really was she pressed her ‘panic’ button.

    Not a bad idea. Hubby told me to install the same thing so I did (he travels quite a bit so Molly and I are alone some times).

    Just a thought.


  75. Guggi
    75 | December 18, 2012 8:05 am

    Poll: Most want ‘fiscal cliff’ compromise but oppose cuts

    Most Americans want President Obama and congressional Republicans to compromise on a budget agreement, though they, too, are unhappy about the options that would avert the “fiscal cliff,” according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.


  76. 76 | December 18, 2012 8:13 am

    @ Guggi:

    Currently we are spending more than a trillion dollars a year more than we take in. If they raised taxes to cover that, they’d collapse the economy. Obviously there have to be cuts. I don’t see how cutting back to 2006 levels could possibly hurt anybody. We got along just fine with that level of government spending. Even that is too much, but there is no way to get the American peopl eto go along with the kind of cuts that we really need. That is one of the things that makes economic collapse almost inevitable. We need draconian cuts in entitlements, and no one wants them. We’ll still get them when the government goes bankrupt, though. Along wiht hyper-inflation and a crashing living standard.


  77. 77 | December 18, 2012 8:14 am

    Guggi wrote:

    Poll: Most want ‘fiscal cliff’ compromise but oppose cuts

    Most Americans want President Obama and congressional Republicans to compromise on a budget agreement, though they, too, are unhappy about the options that would avert the “fiscal cliff,” according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

    As the saying goes “everyone wants to go to heaven but no one wants to die“.


  78. Guggi
    78 | December 18, 2012 8:20 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ Guggi:
    Currently we are spending more than a trillion dollars a year more than we take in. If they raised taxes to cover that, they’d collapse the economy. Obviously there have to be cuts. I don’t see how cutting back to 2006 levels could possibly hurt anybody. We got along just fine with that level of government spending. Even that is too much, but there is no way to get the American peopl eto go along with the kind of cuts that we really need. That is one of the things that makes economic collapse almost inevitable. We need draconian cuts in entitlements, and no one wants them. We’ll still get them when the government goes bankrupt, though. Along wiht hyper-inflation and a crashing living standard.

    They want gain withoput pain. That simple.


  79. unclassifiable
    79 | December 18, 2012 8:24 am

    @ MacDuff:

    This is going to end up in the Supreme Court.

    The GOP should ignore the polls. They will not get a fair shake in the media so it should not matter.

    The quandary is that the automatic cuts may not be legally sustainable but Congress’ power to retain the current debt limit will be legally sustainable unless “boner” and the House majority give it away.

    What would be nice is if the speaker would sue those administration to produce a budget. Not much hope there either.

    Another round of conservative cannibalization seems to be in store for the future. Maybe in the long run there will be benefit from this.


  80. 80 | December 18, 2012 8:27 am

    @ Guggi:

    Yes, and that is simply impossible. There will be pain. By postponing it, they are only making it worse. If we really tried to get a handle on spending now and made reasonable cuts (we could get rid of the BATF as a starting point), we could stave off the economic collapse that is facing us about ten years down the road. Nobody has the guts to come out and actually say that. The Democrats obfuscate, because they want the crash, and the Republicans are cowards.


  81. Guggi
    81 | December 18, 2012 8:35 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    As the saying goes “everyone wants to go to heaven but no one wants to die“.

    There is a German proverb: Wasch mir den Pelz aber mach mich nicht nass.


  82. 82 | December 18, 2012 8:53 am

    St. Louis police Chief calls for arming school personell. It really is the only answer. “Gun free zones” equal disarmed victims. Simply allowing teachers with concealed weapons permits to carry on the job could change that equation. If it saves one life, it is worth it.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David