First time visitor? Learn more.

Ray Lewis: No weapon formed against us shall prosper!

by Rodan ( 160 Comments › )
Filed under Humor, NFL, Sports at January 24th, 2013 - 9:22 pm

RayLewiscries

Love him or hate him, Ray Lewis knows how to get attention. After the Baltimore Ravens won the AFC Championship over the New England Patriots, Lewis got emotional and praised God for his victory.

Ray Lewis gets deep again in the Raven’s locker room at the Trophy ceremony.

Ray Lewis saying “No weapons formed against us shall prosper” was very emotional and deep!

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!

160 Responses to “Ray Lewis: No weapon formed against us shall prosper!”
( jump to bottom )

  1. darkwords
    1 | January 24, 2013 9:28 pm

    True, various French regimes have sabotaged U.S. interests on multiple occasions, but the Mali request seems tailor-made for the Obama Doctrine of “Leading from Behind.” Instead, Mr. Obama is threatening to undermine the entire operation; without in-flight refueling, it will be impossible for France to sustain the current pace of air and ground operations, giving the rebels a chance to re-group and launch new offensives.


  2. 2 | January 24, 2013 9:34 pm

    @ darkwords:

    Russia has offered to step in with airlift. Obama does not want France to beat al-Qaeda.


  3. unclassifiable
    3 | January 24, 2013 9:38 pm

    @ darkwords:

    Let the socialist hash it out. As long as our flying warriors don’t get caught in the doo, watching Obama getting snotty remarks from his international fan club is OK by me.


  4. 4 | January 24, 2013 9:40 pm

    @ unclassifiable:

    It’s funny how much the Euros love Obama, but he hates them.


  5. brookly red
    5 | January 24, 2013 9:42 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ darkwords:

    Russia has offered to step in with airlift. Obama does not want France to beat al-Qaeda.

    obama, al-qaeda same shit. he is a militant muzz, there i said it.


  6. brookly red
    6 | January 24, 2013 9:43 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ unclassifiable:

    It’s funny how much the Euros love Obama, but he hates them.

    same as American voters.


  7. unclassifiable
    7 | January 24, 2013 9:43 pm

    @ brookly red:

    Well said too sir.

    Succinct and unambigous.

    Golf clap.


  8. brookly red
    8 | January 24, 2013 9:50 pm

    unclassifiable wrote:

    @ brookly red:

    Well said too sir.

    Succinct and unambigous.

    Golf clap.

    I mean WTF Americans should not have guns but we should pay for the MO to have tanks and jets. This is past ironic he is neither a Christian nor an American. There I said it.


  9. Speranza
    9 | January 24, 2013 9:51 pm

    We need to proofread our threads!


  10. brookly red
    10 | January 24, 2013 9:54 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    We need to proofread our threads!

    your right I said MO I meant MB… sometimes I just get frustrated


  11. unclassifiable
    11 | January 24, 2013 9:55 pm

    @ brookly red:

    I want a tank or a jet.

    Actually a tank would be better. The traffic sucks around here.

    Hmmmmmm.

    OK so if I immigrate to Egypt Obama will let me hava a tank lets say.

    OK OK now how to get it back…

    I know I’ll use Somali pirates. I’ll just put a courtesy of Our Lord and Savior Barak Obama.

    That ought to do it.

    OH Boy this is going to be fun.


  12. heysoos
    12 | January 24, 2013 9:55 pm

    brookly red wrote:

    Speranza wrote:
    We need to proofread our threads!

    your right I said MO I meant MB… sometimes I just get frustrated

    need a cookie tiger?


  13. brookly red
    13 | January 24, 2013 9:57 pm

    heysoos wrote:

    brookly red wrote:

    Speranza wrote:
    We need to proofread our threads!

    your right I said MO I meant MB… sometimes I just get frustrated

    need a cookie tiger?

    you wanna come over and watch gladiator movies?


  14. 14 | January 24, 2013 9:58 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ darkwords:
    Russia has offered to step in with airlift. Obama does not want France to beat al-Qaeda.

    I’m not a Russian citizen, not of Russian descent, and never even set foot there, but if the Russian government asked me to take a bullet on their behalf I’d do it.

    Why? Just because.


  15. heysoos
    15 | January 24, 2013 10:00 pm

    brookly red wrote:

    heysoos wrote:
    brookly red wrote:
    Speranza wrote:
    We need to proofread our threads!
    your right I said MO I meant MB… sometimes I just get frustrated
    need a cookie tiger?

    you wanna come over and watch gladiator movies?

    brookly red wrote:

    heysoos wrote:
    brookly red wrote:
    Speranza wrote:
    We need to proofread our threads!
    your right I said MO I meant MB… sometimes I just get frustrated
    need a cookie tiger?

    you wanna come over and watch gladiator movies?

    what a day to quit smoking eh?


  16. heysoos
    17 | January 24, 2013 10:01 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    Rodan wrote:
    @ darkwords:
    Russia has offered to step in with airlift. Obama does not want France to beat al-Qaeda.

    I’m not a Russian citizen, not of Russian descent, and never even set foot there, but if the Russian government asked me to take a bullet on their behalf I’d do it.
    Why? Just because.

    sometimes in the fall, I feel the same way about the Cowboys


  17. unclassifiable
    18 | January 24, 2013 10:01 pm

    @ heysoos:
    @ brookly red:
    @ 1389AD:

    Wait wait wait!

    WTF?

    I mean WTF!!!???

    How did we go from Ray Lewis to O is a muzz to tanks and jets to cookies to gladiator movies to taking a bullet from the Russians?

    Holy crap this is a cloosterfook.


  18. heysoos
    19 | January 24, 2013 10:05 pm

    brookly red wrote:

    Hey this is promising… http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/number-nations-sheriffs-refusing-enforce-unconstitutional-gun-laws

    yeah…what a cool grass roots effort…very inspirational
    I think a lot of people have just disregarded BO and events, keeping their head down, but BO is piling on and people don’t dig it


  19. brookly red
    20 | January 24, 2013 10:06 pm

    unclassifiable wrote:

    How did we go from Ray Lewis to O is a muzz to tanks and jets to cookies to gladiator movies to taking a bullet from the Russians?

    THREAD JACK!


  20. heysoos
    21 | January 24, 2013 10:06 pm

    unclassifiable wrote:

    @ heysoos:
    @ brookly red:
    @ 1389AD:
    Wait wait wait!
    WTF?
    I mean WTF!!!???
    How did we go from Ray Lewis to O is a muzz to tanks and jets to cookies to gladiator movies to taking a bullet from the Russians?
    Holy crap this is a cloosterfook.

    I had intended to kick Ray’s ass, but things turned…he’s pretty lucky


  21. Speranza
    22 | January 24, 2013 10:07 pm

    brookly red wrote:

    your right I said MO I meant MB… sometimes I just get frustrated

    I was referring to the title of the thread which I fixed -- “prosper” not “proper”.


  22. brookly red
    23 | January 24, 2013 10:09 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    brookly red wrote:

    “No weapons formed against us shall prosper

    I was referring to the title of the thread which I fixed. “Prosper” not “Proper”.

    well than change formed to forged :)


  23. Speranza
    24 | January 24, 2013 10:09 pm

    @ brookly red:
    Actually “formed” is correct. It is a Bible quote.
    Isaiah 54 17

    knowmewell85 says: Jan 23, 2013 11:23 PM

    Am I the only one who is sick of Ray Lewis taking bible verses out of context? Sorry but “no weapon formed against me shall prosper” does not mean “the other team will not score more points that the ravens


  24. unclassifiable
    25 | January 24, 2013 10:10 pm

    @ heysoos:

    I thought you said you couldn’t even kick your sister’s ass ;)


  25. 26 | January 24, 2013 10:10 pm

    @ 1389AD:

    Russia is Capitalist. Irony of history.


  26. heysoos
    27 | January 24, 2013 10:10 pm

    @ Speranza:
    we read your mind!


  27. unclassifiable
    28 | January 24, 2013 10:11 pm

    @ Speranza:
    @ brookly red:

    Blessed are the cheesemakers.


  28. Speranza
    29 | January 24, 2013 10:12 pm

    heysoos wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    we read your mind!

    Not a difficult thing to do when I am tired.


  29. brookly red
    30 | January 24, 2013 10:12 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    @ brookly red:
    Actually “formed” is correct. It is a Bible quote.

    King James yes… other translations use forged, made, used and even prepared… Hmmm OK formed it is.


  30. heysoos
    31 | January 24, 2013 10:13 pm

    unclassifiable wrote:

    @ heysoos:
    I thought you said you couldn’t even kick your sister’s ass

    you know, I really couldn’t till I was like twelve, but by then I didn’t want to…when you see ray, tell him I said he is a woosie…thanks


  31. unclassifiable
    33 | January 24, 2013 10:14 pm

    @ heysoos:

    He’s standing right here. He’s sharpening a knife and crying.

    Note to self: Lay off the ‘shrooms.


  32. brookly red
    34 | January 24, 2013 10:15 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ 1389AD:

    Russia is Capitalist. Irony of history.

    they were once and now they are again… no irony the just got over their hope and change period and moved on.


  33. unclassifiable
    35 | January 24, 2013 10:17 pm

    @ brookly red:

    Um Stalin vs. Obamaninny

    Is there really any comparison there?


  34. heysoos
    36 | January 24, 2013 10:17 pm

    sum moozak
    something fundamental…for Ray


  35. The Osprey
    37 | January 24, 2013 10:18 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ unclassifiable:
    It’s funny how much the Euros love Obama, but he hates them.

    Because Europe is the ancestral home of YT, and Colonialism!


  36. unclassifiable
    38 | January 24, 2013 10:18 pm

    @ heysoos:

    Denied.

    Ray is laughing at you.


  37. brookly red
    39 | January 24, 2013 10:19 pm

    unclassifiable wrote:

    @ brookly red:

    Um Stalin vs. Obamaninny

    Is there really any comparison there?

    well Stalin was actually a natural born Russian ;)


  38. unclassifiable
    40 | January 24, 2013 10:21 pm

    @ brookly red:

    Actually no, he was Georgian. But it was part of the Russian Empire and it’s closer to Russia than Kenya is to the US.


  39. The Osprey
    41 | January 24, 2013 10:22 pm

    Moe Katz wrote:

    Saudi Air Force sergeant accused of child rape in Las Vegas

    Ship him to South Africa and use him for bait to capture all those loose crocodiles. :twisted:


  40. Moe Katz
    42 | January 24, 2013 10:28 pm

    @ The Osprey:
    Heh….


  41. unclassifiable
    43 | January 24, 2013 10:28 pm

    @ brookly red:

    Stalin did say that he remembers the screaming of the victims at Lubiyanka in the morning as the most beautiful sound in the world.


  42. lobo91
    44 | January 24, 2013 10:35 pm

    More gun expertise from Congress:

    McCarthy: Traditional Rifles Easier For Women To Use Than Assault Weapons

    Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D., N.Y.) said that experts would suggest traditional rifles are better for self defense and easier for women to use than assault weapons Thursday evening on CNN:

    PIERS MORGAN: I have an interview coming up with two young women who wrote a piece in which they said they wanted the rights of the AR-15 weapon at home because they feared they would be attacked and they wanted a gun that would guarantee they would murder or would kill their attacker. How do you respond to that particular argument, which is they believe under their second amendment right they should be allowed an AR-15?

    CAROLYN MCCARTHY: I will tell you, if you talk to professionals, hunters and certainly sportsmen, they’ll tell you that’s not the gun to use. A rifle is more accurate. It’s certainly easier for a woman to be able to do that.


  43. 45 | January 24, 2013 10:36 pm

    @ lobo91:

    That bitch took advantage of her husbands death. He died in the LIRR shooting in 93. Then she won her seat in 96 on his death.


  44. lobo91
    46 | January 24, 2013 10:37 pm


  45. lobo91
    47 | January 24, 2013 10:38 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    That bitch took advantage of her husbands death. He died in the LIRR shooting in 93. Then she won her seat in 96 on his death.

    The guy clearly shot the wrong members of that family.


  46. unclassifiable
    48 | January 24, 2013 10:39 pm

    @ lobo91:

    I think I’ll take advice from anyone on this blog before I’ll take self-serving advice from musket boy and one of the useful idiots of the party of jackasses.


  47. song_and_dance_man
    49 | January 24, 2013 10:40 pm

    Ray Lewis is a creep. Did any of you see the tackle he made where it looked like he tried to break the Denver receivers arm?


  48. heysoos
    50 | January 24, 2013 10:41 pm

    good grief…I saw a picture, I’m an expert


  49. heysoos
    51 | January 24, 2013 10:43 pm

    song_and_dance_man wrote:

    Ray Lewis is a creep. Did any of you see the tackle he made where it looked like he tried to break the Denver receivers arm?

    he’s paid $10m a year to break arms….just doing his job


  50. 52 | January 24, 2013 10:46 pm

    @ The Osprey:

    Yup!


  51. heysoos
    53 | January 24, 2013 10:46 pm

    in America, you get paid $10m to break arms, and $25 to fix them…I love this town!


  52. 54 | January 24, 2013 10:46 pm

    @ lobo91:

    I agree!


  53. song_and_dance_man
    55 | January 24, 2013 10:47 pm

    unclassifiable wrote:

    Is there really any comparison there?

    Well…no. The Left have killed more people with Roe v. Wade than Stalin could have ever imagined,


  54. lobo91
    56 | January 24, 2013 10:48 pm

    unclassifiable wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    I think I’ll take advice from anyone on this blog before I’ll take self-serving advice from musket boy and one of the useful idiots of the party of jackasses.

    I like when she admits that she has no clue what’s in the bill she introduced.

    That right there should result in it being shitcanned automatically. It would if I were running the Senate.


  55. lobo91
    57 | January 24, 2013 10:49 pm

    heysoos wrote:

    in America, you get paid $10m to break arms, and $25 to fix them…I love this town!

    According to Obama, the doctor will probably cut the arm off instead, because he’ll get paid more.


  56. song_and_dance_man
    58 | January 24, 2013 10:50 pm

    heysoos wrote:

    he’s paid $10m a year to break arms….just doing his job

    Now if he played for New Orleans I can but that. But he’s payed to tackle, not to maim.


  57. unclassifiable
    59 | January 24, 2013 10:52 pm

    @ song_and_dance_man:

    Um I don’t think so. 25 million by Stalin in the Ukranian Famine and that was a state planning bump in the road.

    Probably throw in another 50 million or so when his good buddy Hitler turned on him in Operation Barbarossa.

    Stalin is up there in the echelons of Progressivism.


  58. heysoos
    60 | January 24, 2013 10:53 pm

    song_and_dance_man wrote:

    heysoos wrote:
    he’s paid $10m a year to break arms….just doing his job
    Now if he played for New Orleans I can but that. But he’s payed to tackle, not to maim.

    he’s a throwback…maiming is beside the point…I’m no fan and he knows I’ll kick his ass when I see him, but he’s just an old time hitter


  59. lobo91
    61 | January 24, 2013 10:54 pm

    Another thing I find amusing about McCarthy’s ignorant comments is the fact that on the same day she said that women can’t effectively use an AR-15, the administration made the announcement that they were going to let women into combat arms specialties.

    I guess we’ll have to get them Nerf guns or something…


  60. song_and_dance_man
    62 | January 24, 2013 10:54 pm

    @ lobo91:
    That’s so much bull. Guns are not guaranteed by the 2nd A for hunting. Well, in a sense they are, but not for animals. Oh wait.


  61. heysoos
    63 | January 24, 2013 10:55 pm

    @ lobo91:
    good point, you’d think the GOP would hammer that home


  62. unclassifiable
    64 | January 24, 2013 10:57 pm

    @ lobo91:
    @ heysoos:

    Well played.


  63. lobo91
    65 | January 24, 2013 10:57 pm

    heysoos wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    good point, you’d think the GOP would hammer that home

    They would if any of them had half a brain.


  64. unclassifiable
    66 | January 24, 2013 10:58 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    heysoos wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    good point, you’d think the GOP would hammer that home

    They would if any of them had half a brain.

    Or testicles. Oh wait. They do have Michelle Bachman.


  65. lobo91
    67 | January 24, 2013 11:01 pm

    I found O’Reilly’s choice of “experts” on the subject of women in combat this evening to be interesting, too.

    He had a former Army infantry captain on one side, and a retired female Air Force A-10 pilot on the other.

    Since the proposal in question has nothing to do with pilots, I’m not sure what her expertise on the subject is. And I heard Tammy Duckworth yapping about it today, too. She was a helicopter pilot.

    As soon as they can come up with a woman who’s made it through the Infantry Officer Basic Course and Ranger School, I’ll listen to what she has to say on the subject.


  66. lobo91
    68 | January 24, 2013 11:02 pm

    song_and_dance_man wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    That’s so much bull. Guns are not guaranteed by the 2nd A for hunting. Well, in a sense they are, but not for animals. Oh wait.

    You don’t hunt bulls.

    And certainly not with an AR-15.
    //


  67. AZfederalist
    69 | January 24, 2013 11:02 pm

    unclassifiable wrote:

    @ brookly red:

    Um Stalin vs. Obamaninny

    Is there really any comparison there?

    Lets be realistic. Stalin killed six million people. Jugears will not be able to do so ; a civil war will start before he can do that.


  68. heysoos
    70 | January 24, 2013 11:04 pm

    the entirely tepid response from the GOP regarding this weeks grab, leads one to think that Boehner is in bed with Reid…I’ll make sure it doesn’t pass the Senate if you shut the fuck up…not the leadership I want


  69. song_and_dance_man
    71 | January 24, 2013 11:07 pm

    r. @ unclassifiable:
    Well if we want to add other countries around the glove I think the stats are close to 40 million a year.

    Even if this number is inflated by half that’s still 20 million a year and close to 1 billion in the past 50.

    I have no idea if the numbers are correct but in both instances, whether it be Stalin/Hitler or the pro-death prog crowd over 1 is not acceptable.


  70. unclassifiable
    72 | January 24, 2013 11:10 pm

    @ AZfederalist:

    Admittedly I did get figures from the Black Book of Communism so they are disputed.

    But still a pretty high toll for Progressive policies.

    I get the distinct feeling you are right about O’s blood commitment.


  71. song_and_dance_man
    73 | January 24, 2013 11:11 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    You don’t hunt bulls.

    Let me rephrase that. That is so much donkey./


  72. song_and_dance_man
    74 | January 24, 2013 11:15 pm

    @ lobo91:
    Do you have any idea what gender neutral means? That is part of the debate. If it means I can get into military service by doing 20 pushups on my knees then at 55 I might be able to lead a squad of fierce florists.


  73. unclassifiable
    75 | January 24, 2013 11:15 pm

    @ song_and_dance_man:

    Well, maybe predictably, you can get into hair splitting when it come to abortion. Here in the U.S. it is the individual that makes that decision in almost all cases.

    Somewhere like China with a 1 child policy it is the state that makes that decision.

    That’s a difference albeit equally distasteful for you.

    I do in fact align with Rodan on this point just to let you know.


  74. unclassifiable
    76 | January 24, 2013 11:17 pm

    @ song_and_dance_man:

    Oh I HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR THIS!!!!


  75. lobo91
    77 | January 24, 2013 11:19 pm

    @ song_and_dance_man:

    As long as they don’t change the standards, as far as I’m concerned, they can let women waste their time trying to become infantry officers all they want. They’ll never make it, though.


  76. Moe Katz
    78 | January 24, 2013 11:22 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ song_and_dance_man:
    As long as they don’t change the standards, as far as I’m concerned, they can let women waste their time trying to become infantry officers all they want. They’ll never make it, though.

    Don’t you think a very small number might be strong and fit enough?


  77. song_and_dance_man
    79 | January 24, 2013 11:23 pm

    @ unclassifiable:

    You are soooo un-PC. And the vid has a flaw. I saw no hand back and forth three snap. Back to training.


  78. AZfederalist
    80 | January 24, 2013 11:23 pm

    @ lobo91:

    CAROLYN MCCARTHY: I will tell you, if you talk to professionals, hunters and certainly sportsmen, they’ll tell you that’s not the gun to use. A rifle is more accurate. It’s certainly easier for a woman to be able to do that.

    Wow, that’s ignorant. I had no idea an AR-15 is not a rifle. Guess I wasn’t using a rifle when I was shooting my now lost SR556 to shoot prairie dogs at 200+ yards. I had no idea. As far as home defense, a short carbine is way better than a traditional rifle. Kind of nice when the media is on your side; you can just make crap up and not be challenged.


  79. song_and_dance_man
    81 | January 24, 2013 11:26 pm

    @ unclassifiable:

    Are we past the OT demarcation point? Yes? Well then here is one of my fav Monty skits.

    Yeah, and I thought I had it bad back in the day.


  80. Moe Katz
    82 | January 24, 2013 11:27 pm

    @ lobo91:
    Another concern, though, is the possibility of capture. Should women be exposed to the risk of capture by Muslims?


  81. lobo91
    83 | January 24, 2013 11:28 pm

    @ Moe Katz:

    Don’t you think a very small number might be strong and fit enough?

    Possibly, but they generally have better things to do, considering that they’d likely be Olympic-level athletes.


  82. lobo91
    84 | January 24, 2013 11:28 pm

    Moe Katz wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    Another concern, though, is the possibility of capture. Should women be exposed to the risk of capture by Muslims?

    They already are.


  83. unclassifiable
    85 | January 24, 2013 11:29 pm

    @ song_and_dance_man:

    The funny thing about the military fairy sketch was it was the gay python that played the butch commander.


  84. Moe Katz
    86 | January 24, 2013 11:30 pm

    @ lobo91:
    True. Women in non-combat roles can still be captured.


  85. lobo91
    87 | January 24, 2013 11:30 pm

    @ AZfederalist:

    Kind of nice when the media is on your side; you can just make crap up and not be challenged.

    Well, it was Piers Morgan she was talking to.

    One of those prairie dogs you shot would know more about the topic.


  86. unclassifiable
    88 | January 24, 2013 11:32 pm

    @ Moe Katz:
    @ lobo91:

    I was thinking they would have to be at Diana Nyad level of fitness.

    Now she probably could do it back in the day.


  87. song_and_dance_man
    89 | January 24, 2013 11:34 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    As long as they don’t change the standards

    And that is the key. Those women who want to battle elbow to elbow with the men must have the strength to carry a wounded fellow soldier to safety.


  88. lobo91
    90 | January 24, 2013 11:34 pm

    Moe Katz wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    True. Women in non-combat roles can still be captured.

    They’re probably more likely to be captured than someone in a combat unit would be, honestly.

    We’ve rarely taken significant losses in straight-up combat in Iraq or Afghanistan, really. The vast majority of our casualties have come from either roadside bombs blowing up vehicles or from rocket/mortar attacks on bases.

    When they try to attack one of our units in a dismounted fight, it usually results in somewhere between a 10-1 and a 100-1 casualty ratio in our favor.


  89. AZfederalist
    91 | January 24, 2013 11:35 pm

    @ lobo91:

    :-)


  90. unclassifiable
    92 | January 24, 2013 11:37 pm

    @ song_and_dance_man:

    Makes me smile.


  91. song_and_dance_man
    93 | January 24, 2013 11:37 pm

    @ AZfederalist:

    What they are trying to do is reshape what the 2nd amendment is about. It’s not about sport or hunting and the necessity of guns for that reason.


  92. lobo91
    94 | January 24, 2013 11:39 pm

    @ song_and_dance_man:

    And that is the key. Those women who want to battle elbow to elbow with the men must have the strength to carry a wounded fellow soldier to safety.

    Good luck with that.

    Same thing goes for tank crews. Everyone thinks a tank is some sort of push-button video game combat. Everything on a tank is heavy as hell. That ammo doesn’t magically appear in the racks inside the turret, either. And you can’t call OnStar when your track breaks.

    Tanker uniforms these days have extraction straps built into the back, so you can pull a wounded crew member out if the tank is hit. There are no escape hatches in the belly anymore. You have to grab that strap and pull them straight up through the hatch in the turret top.


  93. AZfederalist
    95 | January 24, 2013 11:40 pm

    @ song_and_dance_man:

    Yep. Hopefully they will fail.


  94. song_and_dance_man
    96 | January 24, 2013 11:40 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    One of those prairie dogs you shot would know more about the topic.

    Funny, I didn’t know prairie dogs were smarter than rats.


  95. Moe Katz
    97 | January 24, 2013 11:40 pm

    @ lobo91:
    I see your point.


  96. lobo91
    98 | January 24, 2013 11:43 pm

    Moe Katz wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    I see your point.

    Then you now understand more than at least 99% of the media, and 98% of Congress (a few of them have actually served).


  97. Moe Katz
    99 | January 24, 2013 11:44 pm

    @ lobo91:
    :)


  98. lobo91
    100 | January 24, 2013 11:46 pm

    @ Moe Katz:

    They keep conflating “serving in combat” and “being assigned to a combat arms unit.”

    Yes, plenty of women are currently serving in combat. Some have even been directly involved in firefights with the enemy.

    That’s not the same as being in a position where your job is to go out there and intentionally find the enemy and fight them.

    It’s sort of like the difference between someone having a concealed carry permit and being a cop (although not exactly, because cops go home at the end of their shift).


  99. song_and_dance_man
    101 | January 24, 2013 11:46 pm

    @ AZfederalist:

    They wish it read like this.

    A well regulated Sporting Group, being necessary to the security of free hunting grounds, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed [unless the arms kill other than sport].


  100. lobo91
    102 | January 24, 2013 11:48 pm

    song_and_dance_man wrote:

    @ AZfederalist:
    They wish it read like this.
    A well regulated Sporting Group, being necessary to the security of free hunting grounds, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed [unless the arms kill other than sport].

    Next they’ll want the right to arm bears.

    //fairness


  101. Moe Katz
    103 | January 24, 2013 11:49 pm

    @ lobo91:
    I’m totally opposed to it myself, except possibly for my wife, who likes to fight….

    /


  102. AZfederalist
    104 | January 24, 2013 11:49 pm

    @ song_and_dance_man:

    Pretty much nails their reading of the second amendment.


  103. unclassifiable
    105 | January 24, 2013 11:51 pm

    Good night folks.

    Tomorrow Peirs Morgan will have Mr. A. Grizzly from Alaska discussing bear/man weapons parity.


  104. The Osprey
    106 | January 24, 2013 11:51 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    song_and_dance_man wrote:

    @ AZfederalist:
    They wish it read like this.
    A well regulated Sporting Group, being necessary to the security of free hunting grounds, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed [unless the arms kill other than sport].

    Next they’ll want the right to arm bears.

    //fairness

    At Glockmeister, in Mesa AZ they sell a T-Shirt with the California Flag on it, but the bear is missing his front two limbs…across the top it says “California Republic” and below “No right to bear arms”.


  105. Moe Katz
    107 | January 24, 2013 11:51 pm

    unclassifiable wrote:

    Good night folks.
    Tomorrow Peirs Morgan will have Mr. A. Grizzly from Alaska discussing bear/man weapons parity.

    But does he shit in the woods??


  106. Da_Beerfreak
    108 | January 24, 2013 11:52 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    Another thing I find amusing about McCarthy’s ignorant comments is the fact that on the same day she said that women can’t effectively use an AR-15, the administration made the announcement that they were going to let women into combat arms specialties.

    I guess we’ll have to get them Nerf guns or something…

    Assault purses…


  107. song_and_dance_man
    109 | January 24, 2013 11:53 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    Same thing goes for tank crews. Everyone thinks a tank is some sort of push-button video game combat. Everything on a tank is heavy as hell. That ammo doesn’t magically appear in the racks inside the turret, either. And you can’t call OnStar when your track breaks.

    It may come to an all women Company/Battalion or thereabouts.


  108. The Osprey
    110 | January 24, 2013 11:54 pm

    Moe Katz wrote:

    unclassifiable wrote:

    Good night folks.
    Tomorrow Peirs Morgan will have Mr. A. Grizzly from Alaska discussing bear/man weapons parity.

    But does he shit in the woods??

    Piers is a Brit. He shits in “the loo”.


  109. Moe Katz
    111 | January 24, 2013 11:56 pm

    Another reason against it I think is that women in combat units would be even more vulnerable to sexual abuse by their own than they would in military situations where they are not in such close quarters over long periods of time.


  110. song_and_dance_man
    112 | January 24, 2013 11:57 pm

    The Osprey wrote:

    they sell a T-Shirt with the California Flag on it, but the bear is missing his front two limbs…across the top it says “California Republic” and below “No right to bear arms”.

    And that pretty much nails both coasts.


  111. song_and_dance_man
    113 | January 24, 2013 11:58 pm

    Moe Katz wrote:

    But does he shit in the woods??

    Polar bears don’t/


  112. AZfederalist
    114 | January 24, 2013 11:58 pm

    @ lobo91:

    Another thing I find amusing about McCarthy’s ignorant comments is the fact that on the same day she said that women can’t effectively use an AR-15, the administration made the announcement that they were going to let women into combat arms specialties.

    M1 Garrands. According to dub@$$, the women can defend themselves better with rifles than those military style weapons.


  113. Moe Katz
    115 | January 24, 2013 11:58 pm

    @ The Osprey:
    Dunno where Piers shits but he really pissed on America’s rug with this business….


  114. Calo
    116 | January 24, 2013 11:59 pm

    @ song_and_dance_man:

    It may come to an all women Company/Battalion or thereabouts

    Yep. No thank you, I won’t join.
    Talk about sleeping with one eye shut.

    Women are just as likely to kill each other in their own Battalion first and forget about about the enemy lurking outside.


  115. AZfederalist
    117 | January 25, 2013 12:00 am

    @ AZfederalist:

    Should have been “dumb@$$”


  116. Moe Katz
    118 | January 25, 2013 12:00 am

    song_and_dance_man wrote:

    Moe Katz wrote:
    But does he shit in the woods??

    Polar bears don’t/

    Maybe that’s why they’re endangered.


  117. song_and_dance_man
    119 | January 25, 2013 12:01 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    Next they’ll want the right to arm bears.

    I think that is the reason for the latest change to the military code/


  118. lobo91
    120 | January 25, 2013 12:02 am

    @ song_and_dance_man:

    It may come to an all women Company/Battalion or thereabouts.

    With what? Toy tanks?


  119. song_and_dance_man
    121 | January 25, 2013 12:05 am

    Moe Katz wrote:

    Another reason against it I think is that women in combat units would be even more vulnerable to sexual abuse by their own

    I don’t want to ask, so don’t tell. /


  120. Calo
    122 | January 25, 2013 12:06 am

    @ lobo91:
    As long as we can accessorize the toy tanks with our handbags, we’re cool..


  121. lobo91
    123 | January 25, 2013 12:06 am

    @ lobo91:

    I suppose we could buy some of those K-1 tanks the South Koreans have. They’re basically a 3/4 scale version of the Abrams. Works for them, since they tend to be smaller than Americans.


  122. lobo91
    124 | January 25, 2013 12:07 am

    Calo wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    As long as we can accessorize the toy tanks with our handbags, we’re cool..

    They’ll be camouflaged, though, so don’t drop them. You won’t be able to find them.
    //


  123. song_and_dance_man
    125 | January 25, 2013 12:09 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    With what? Toy tanks?

    I didn’t want to say it when I keyed my response, but I was thinking about armored Prius’ and a pony Calvary.

    sorry gals/


  124. The Osprey
    126 | January 25, 2013 12:09 am

    Moe Katz wrote:

    @ The Osprey:
    Dunno where Piers shits but he really pissed on America’s rug with this business….

    As the Aussies or Rhodesians would say, he’s a pommie bastard…

    And as the Afrikaners would say, he’s a soutpiel! :lol:


  125. AZfederalist
    127 | January 25, 2013 12:11 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ song_and_dance_man:

    It may come to an all women Company/Battalion or thereabouts.

    With what? Toy tanks?

    … and full body armor won’t weigh much less either.


  126. Moe Katz
    128 | January 25, 2013 12:12 am

    @ The Osprey:
    Cool link. So many pejorative names for the English!


  127. lobo91
    129 | January 25, 2013 12:14 am

    @ AZfederalist:

    … and full body armor won’t weigh much less either.

    They wear that now.

    And no, it’s not much lighter.


  128. song_and_dance_man
    130 | January 25, 2013 12:16 am

    Calo wrote:

    Women are just as likely to kill each other in their own Battalion first and forget about about the enemy lurking outside.

    Fighting over the hunk in the next foxhole eh?

    Seriously now. I have no idea just how many women really want to engage in combat on the ground level, but I have heard some say it has to do with the lack of promotion for women in the forces. I can see that. There would be little chance of any woman aspiring to the rank of General or even Colonel without a record of hard battle on the line.

    The whole thing smacks of PC and it will hurt the military and in no way helps. It is just another way for Leftist dogma to infiltrate the last bastion of heretofore slightly unmolested American tradition.


  129. Calo
    131 | January 25, 2013 12:18 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    Calo wrote:
    @ lobo91:
    As long as we can accessorize the toy tanks with our handbags, we’re cool..
    They’ll be camouflaged, though, so don’t drop them. You won’t be able to find them.
    //

    Who the hell would drop a perfectly good handbag that coordinated with her combat pumps? Shit might blow up on accident for the sheer stupidity of that comment.


  130. lobo91
    132 | January 25, 2013 12:20 am

    @ song_and_dance_man:

    I have no idea just how many women really want to engage in combat on the ground level, but I have heard some say it has to do with the lack of promotion for women in the forces. I can see that. There would be little chance of any woman aspiring to the rank of General or even Colonel without a record of hard battle on the line.

    That’s all it’s about. They want to be able to make some woman Chief of Staff of the Army, and that post is always filled by a combat arms officer.


  131. The Osprey
    133 | January 25, 2013 12:27 am

    Moe Katz wrote:

    @ The Osprey:
    Cool link. So many pejorative names for the English!

    I had to look up pommie, because I could not remember if it was spelled with a y or ie… turns out, you can spell it either way.

    The soutpiel thing is great though…I’d heard that before from some South African folks. It’s such a fitting description…Piers does have one foot in America, one foot in Britain, and he’s a dick!


  132. song_and_dance_man
    134 | January 25, 2013 12:31 am

    @ The Osprey:

    Weird. Once a slur now becomes a non-slur? Fa shizzle ma nizzle.


  133. song_and_dance_man
    135 | January 25, 2013 12:32 am

    Moe Katz wrote:

    Cool link. So many pejorative names for the English!

    I waiting for a French link.


  134. Moe Katz
    136 | January 25, 2013 12:32 am

    @ The Osprey:
    Piers even gets taken to task by a BBC interviewer here.


  135. song_and_dance_man
    137 | January 25, 2013 12:33 am

    lobo91 wrote:

    That’s all it’s about. They want to be able to make some woman Chief of Staff of the Army, and that post is always filled by a combat arms officer.

    That was my feeling also once I heard a retired military guy expound on this on a local radio show. It smacked true.


  136. lobo91
    138 | January 25, 2013 12:34 am

    Well, I’m out. Another class in the morning.


  137. Moe Katz
    139 | January 25, 2013 12:36 am

    @ song_and_dance_man:
    French Canadians have names for Anglo Canadians, including squareheads and eaters of hot dogs.


  138. Moe Katz
    140 | January 25, 2013 12:36 am

    @ lobo91:
    Night Lobo!


  139. song_and_dance_man
    141 | January 25, 2013 12:36 am

    I’m gone too. 0530 comes all too quickly at night.


  140. Moe Katz
    142 | January 25, 2013 12:37 am

    Me too. Nytol.


  141. The Osprey
    143 | January 25, 2013 12:47 am

    song_and_dance_man wrote:

    Moe Katz wrote:

    Cool link. So many pejorative names for the English!

    I waiting for a French link.

    The most common French insult for Brits is rosbif… roast beefs.


  142. AZfederalist
    144 | January 25, 2013 12:56 am

    Goodnight Lobo, S&DM & Moe


  143. The Osprey
    145 | January 25, 2013 1:01 am

    I’m getting the yawnies as well here. See y’all tomorrow.


  144. AZfederalist
    146 | January 25, 2013 1:09 am

    Nihght Osprey, I’m out for the night as well.


  145. 147 | January 25, 2013 3:56 am

    Ho-hum. Another Friday. “SNAFU”, so far as I can tell so far. Made what is becoming a daily check of vendors this morning (on the off chance I might catch them with supplies momentarily on hand.) Ammo not available? Check. Magazines not available? Check.

    When I execute my escape plan from here in a week, I am going to have to check my local retailers. I hold out little hope for that effort, but it has to be done, I suppose.


  146. 148 | January 25, 2013 4:25 am

    Okay, I know I’m going to hell for this one…

    Hat tip -- John Florida at GCP (and also of “It’s About Liberty”)


  147. mtc
    149 | January 25, 2013 5:36 am

    @ 1389AD:
    I don’t post here much but I think we should take up a collection to send 1389 to Russia forthwith so that she may have her wish. I feel that I must speak out about her and other’s secessionist beliefs. My family didn’t fight in the Revolution and didn’t help to create this great nation in order to have some some vile trash wish for its’ destruction. You claim to be against Muslim terrorism as am I but wishing for the destruction/breakup of the US plays right into their hands as well as Obama’s hands. You claim to be a Serb so go there. I propose that the Blogmocracy take up a collection to send 1389, Czech Rebel and the rest of 1389 blog to Antarctica which needs people. Unfortunately, most of its people are research scientists, and that crew wouldn’t qualify. America has had bad Presidents before and does again but we will get through this as we always have. Also, if a breakup does occur, what makes you think the new leader will be better? Remember, the secessionists were willing to break the law to break off from th US in the first place, so what makes you think they would embrace the rule of law once they gain power? They would have no moral authority. And what about multiple secessions? Secession sucks and is wrong. Our ancestors fought for unity and they deserve better than this treasonous claptrap. I wonder how many of those advocating secession actually got off their butts and voted last year?


  148. 150 | January 25, 2013 5:37 am

    @ Mike C.:

    Thanks for the morning guffaw! :D


  149. 151 | January 25, 2013 6:01 am

    @ mtc:

    Well actually, seccionists in the late War of Northern Agression didn’t break any law by secceeding, nor would any do so today. There’s no law against it. But the folks you are railing against hold that seccession would be peaceful. I assume they’re color-blind and can’t tell red from blue on a voting map from the last election -- that’s the most charitable interpretation I can come up with. Don’t know for certain, but I strongly suspect Russia and Serbia don’t exactly roll out the red carpet for people with no money who don’t speak the langauge and who have outdated technical skills. I could be wrong on that, but that’s my guess.

    @ MacDuff:

    Laughed my ass off!


  150. mtc
    152 | January 25, 2013 6:24 am

    @ Mike C.:
    I like the cut of your jib.


  151. 153 | January 25, 2013 6:40 am

    @ mtc:

    Hear! Hear! I publicly washed my hands of her because of a history perniciously impolitic remarks, but the statement to which you are referring, almost made me break my embargo. The words “take a bullet”, context be damned, have a specific value and further confirm my distaste for her and her toxic views.

    Yeah, good riddance to bad rubbish, and the sooner the better.


  152. 154 | January 25, 2013 6:50 am

    @ mtc:

    Heavens, I haven’t owned a jib since I sold the Sonar, way back when in 89. Not much use for a sailboat in the lower Shenandoah valley, you know.


  153. 155 | January 25, 2013 6:54 am

    @ mtc:
    @ Mike C.:

    Heh, that’s a wonderfully descriptive phrase I picked up from my mother that one doesn’t hear that often any more. Well done!


  154. 156 | January 25, 2013 7:06 am

    I had not heard of “The Battle of Athens” (TN)

    A friend of mine posted this on FB. About 14 Minutes long, but if you have the time it’s worth watching.


  155. 157 | January 25, 2013 7:14 am

    @ MacDuff:

    Coming soon to a town around you…


  156. 158 | January 25, 2013 7:20 am

    Mike C. wrote:

    @ MacDuff:

    Coming soon to a town around you…

    Ain’t it the truth! It’s a good example that a certain degree of parity in firepower between the people and the authorities is a feature, not a bug.


  157. waldensianspirit
    159 | January 25, 2013 7:27 am

    Sheriffs against Obama’s anti-gun executive orders

    It’s amazing how many Americans Obama wants to take on. It’s like he sat around in college dreaming


  158. The Osprey
    160 | January 25, 2013 10:45 am

    Mike C. wrote:

    Okay, I know I’m going to hell for this one…

    Hat tip — John Florida at GCP (and also of “It’s About Liberty”)

    I’m guessing the detergent they use is Apart-Tide. :lol:


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David