A Recent Favorite:

Recent Comments

  1. Wraithkin commented on Glenn McCoy about 18 hours ago

    Odd Hiram, it won’t let me directly reply to you.

    Then let me amend my statement: Your associates have spewed vitriol (see the comments that contain “RepubliCON’s” or “Rethuglicons” etc). But what I haven’t seen from you is a denouncement of those. I have, many times, denounced my conservative peers when they levy name-calling and demeaning comments like that. The absence of that from you implies consent.

    As to your list, I wasn’t saying you specifically were calling them lazy, or anything like that. I’m saying there are stereotypes that exist, and the black community’s actions aren’t helping to dispel that stereotype.

    My challenge is why don’t people who truly care about “blacklivesmatter” challenge the liberal establishment? Why don’t they see it as such a blatant attempt at getting them worked up?

    For instance, in Ferguson, why didn’t they (instead of rioting) had peaceful mourning protests, sit-ins, and the like? Sure, they were angry, but hate begets hate. Why was there no calls from our country’s leaders for calm?

    By the black community’s reaction in Ferguson, it reinforces the perception that the black community is only a group of unthinking thugs that only know how to destroy. This is further reinforced when the evidence clearly pointed to Brown being proven to be in the wrong, but they still rioted anyway. There are so many different ways it could have ended, but they chose the one that involved massive wanton destruction. Why?

    Don’t get me wrong… there are a LOT of good people of all colors. But what other community in this country destroys their own neighborhood when they get mad and whipped up into a lather? When were there Latino, White, Eskimo, Indian, Natives, or any other groups involved in violent protests?

    Obama should be ashamed of how he has pushed us to the brink with his racially-motivated actions. Instead of saying, “Pick yourselves up, stop expecting others to take the blame for your (insert problem here),” he is creating scapegoats. “Police acted stupidly,” or "If I had a son… "

    He could have done SO much more. And instead he took the petty route. And no-one on the left has the courage to stand up to him and put him to task. And when someone on the right does it, they are labeled as racists or “anti-Obama.” No, they have every right to ask why he hasn’t healed this country!

  2. Wraithkin commented on Glenn McCoy about 20 hours ago

    And the reverse is true about you. How much vitriol have you spewed on these boards about Republicans or conservatives? How many times have you called out conservative thinkers, and insulting people like McCoy for speaking their minds?

    What you are missing is that groupthink is not required to build a country up. Respectful dialogue, peaceful opposition, and introspection are required. But when you have talking bobbleheads (Obama, Jackson, Sharpton) calling out about how racist whites are, you think that builds the country? All that does is sew disunity and discontent.

    I’m not a racist, but because I disagree with Obama, I’m accused of being racist. Because I hate his ideas, and the way he has diminished the Office of the President, I’m a bigot.

    I don’t know enough about Obama, personally, to dislike him as a person. But his actions? His ideas? His pushing of various things? I think he is tearing our country apart. When you have two clear examples of racist hate crimes, and he only chooses to support one, he is doing the entire public a disservice.

    Why hasn’t he come out to speak out about black-on-black crime? Why hasn’t he come out about how the black community needs to stop glorifying “thug life” culture and behavior? Why hasn’t he condemned black child illegitimacy?

    All of these things hurt blacks more than anything a white person could ever do. Those things do nothing but legitimize the stereotypes held by some people.
    “Blacks are lazy,” is one. When the unemployment rate is as high as it is, and there are as many on government assistance, how does one refute that charge?

    “Blacks are criminals,” is another. When they make up a large portion of the prison population, and they have a much higher rate of violent crime, where’s the counter to the stereotype?

    Why doesn’t our “leader” speak out about this? If he did, being of the melanin persuasion that he is, it would have so much more impact than anything a white person (POTUS or not) could ever say. But that doesn’t get votes. It doesn’t whip his base into a lather. And this is the thing that gets me the most: He uses racial disunity to generate votes.

    You want to talk about building the country? How about you go to Obama and ask him about these things? THESE are the reasons why I criticize him. Not because he’s black. Not because he’s a liberal. But because he’s not a leader. He has been the greatest polarizer in this nation’s history. You want to talk about disintegration, look to him, not me.

  3. Wraithkin commented on Glenn McCoy about 23 hours ago

    Hah. That’s rich. I already signed the blank check for this country, spending 7-1/2 years with the Marine Corps. How about you?

    I also have sworn to Protect the Constitution of the United States of America, against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I consider a lot of what Obama and his ilk are doing is damaging the country and the Constitution. I owe fealty to the country, not Obama. And the fact that you see them as one in the same is an example of what is wrong with the liberal mindset.

  4. Wraithkin commented on Glenn McCoy 1 day ago

    Hook, line, and sinker.

    Beau, that was a platitude. He didn’t afford the specific courtesy of mentioning how black racism is alive, how a black man murdered two white people because they were white. Black nutjob murders whites, no press conference. White nutjob murders blacks, “If I had a son, he would look like Trayvon.” The double-standard is palpable.

  5. Wraithkin commented on Glenn McCoy 2 days ago

    I’m an equal-opportunity hater, so I take a different approach: No lives matter. I’m no more or less important than any one of you. If I were to die tomorrow, would any of you suffer a loss? Of course not, just like the reverse is true. On a national scale, no one is important, especially idiots like thugs who are shot when they attack cops.

    My father and I were talking about the major difference between the 60’s and today, and it all boiled down to the concept that people today think they are more important than they really are. In the 60’s, people valued the country more than themselves, the trend today is the opposite.

    People hold themselves in such high regard, and they really aren’t that important. And for our POTUS to get in front of a national audience and pick and choose only black kids who were killed by non-blacks is unpresidential and petty.

  6. Wraithkin commented on Mike Lester 3 days ago

    And who would those groups be? Most firearm owners agree on most things, and there wouldn’t be enough bile and hatred to cause them on each other.

  7. Wraithkin commented on Glenn McCoy 6 days ago

    Thank you for providing that to me. While they are partisan sites, you can’t refute quotes. This is the primary reason I’m not huge into evangelicals, or religion in general.

  8. Wraithkin commented on Mike Lester 6 days ago

    “We left because our people felt like the costs were too high, not because our military wasn’t up to the job.” That’s kind of what I was implying. With 300 million firearms in the hands of hundreds of millions of owners (many of whom are veterans) means we effectively have a standing militia of over 100 million people. Even the combined military forces of the entire world would be foolish to attack a militia of that size. And if they did, the battle of attrition would win out.

    I also agree that we need to do something about teen gangbangers and the mentally unstable, but another poster did bring up a valid point: We already have 20,000 laws on the books to stop gun violence. Adding more isn’t the solution. It’s about proper application and smart enforcement of said laws.

    I also am concerned about the “mentally unstable,” portion of it. One, the mental instability only applies if it’s caught. Two, many in the veteran community with PTSD may be labeled “unstable,” even though they have a mild form of it (like me). Third, that may prevent senior citizens from legal ownership (when was the last time a 75-year-old shot up a school?).

    There is no easy solution, but calling for bans of firearms or their accessories simply isn’t a solution. It’s a knee-jerk punishment that will only hurt a large portion of law-abiding citizens.

    Some possible solutions to minimize gun violence:
    - Seal the border with Mexico, beef up our customs operations, and effectively limit the firearms in this country to those that are actually legally sold in this country. This would sharply inhibit street-level/black market sales.
    - We all know the NSA/FBI monitors facebook and other social media, so they should have people watching said social media so if they start ranting hate speech or other crazy talk, local precincts can be notified and they can come visit and have a chat. They can also identify if this person is just mad, or if they are mentally unstable. These people then should be afforded mental health care through the states’ medicaid systems. After all, preventing these kinds of shootings should be cheaper to care for them than the loss of life.
    - Have the CIA/FBI/NSA be more aggressive with Islamic jihadism, and root it out. Fort Hood and the Boston Marathon are perfect examples that support a stronger enforcement, since these chuckleheads telegraphed their activities to try to get as much attention as possible.
    - Media blackout these mass shootings. Why? Because many of these loons want to go down in history as great manifestations of their cause. They want immortality through name recognition. We will always remember Sandy Hook, in large part because it made national media. The 24/7 news cycle we have is partly why we are seeing an uptick in these mass shootings, because they seek (and receive) the glory they want. This most recent shooting is a prime example… why did he do it on live TV? Because he wanted the attention and he wanted it public. Otherwise, it would have just been another shooting logged at the local precinct.
    - Charge anyone that had any knowledge of the shooting ahead of time as an accessory to that shooting. If you know, and still do nothing, you are just as guilty in my book.
    - Treat every mass shooting as an act of terrorism, and all that it entails. Military tribunals don’t have the same media coverage as public trials, and thus they can’t spew their hate if they survive. And tribunals also support firing squad, not some lethal injection nonsense.

    Sorry if some of these offend you guys. I’m looking for a way to solve the problem, not for a way to protect people’s feelings. And because of political correctness, and fear of feelings being hurt, we can’t have an honest communication to solve the problem. And I think that, ultimately, is the culprit.

  9. Wraithkin commented on Mike Lester 6 days ago

    I won’t ever deny weapons are designed to kill. The Marine Corps didn’t teach me to shoot a target at 500 yards that just happened to be shaped just like dudes in man dresses for no reason; firearms are designed to inflict violence upon others.

    That being said, it’s the responsibility of the individual to ensure that violence is employed only when necessary. Circumstances warranting it may vary, but they include: Home invasion (M4 works great, as do scatterguns), self-defense (concealed pistols work great for this), and defending liberty (any firearm works great for this).

    I want to challenge your logic, however, on one thing: You assume that the American public is powerless in the face of American military might. You would be wrong. A bullet fired from a civilian is just as deadly (just maybe not as accurate) as one fired from a member of the military. As we have witnessed in Iraq and Afghanistan, just having a bigger military might does not mean it is exceptionally effective at guerrilla warfare. It’s the primary reason why we have never even been attempted to be invaded, even during the world wars.

    My original point remains, however. We can’t punish the hundreds of millions of guns owners over the actions of very few. It’s been proven that concealed firearms prevent violent crime. Taking away these concealed firearms removes the uncertainty of criminals being shot. After all, if you look at all the mass-shootings recently, they’ve all been in gun-free zones. Removing firearms (of any kind) in general is not the solution. All it does is disarm and punish the significantly-larger portion of law-abiding citizens.

  10. Wraithkin commented on Dana Summers 6 days ago

    Because she got caught.