Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Yes Sir....Well put!
College fees are a racket......no joke.......the college book adoption plan is a joke and full professors work less than my two dachshunds .....they don't work much!
Pandering to small groups......both parties have turned into the Knesset!
It does.... Badly!
Which party is more antiwar - Democrats or Republicans - From the year 2000 until now...Examples would be nice...
Tough Question!
Wow I'm a little surprised at this statement.
Al Qaeda is not a fly by night operation......they have billions of dollars for training. Don't be a sap!
Here you go
Operation Vengeance was the name given by the Americans to the military operation to kill Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto on April 18, 1943, during the Solomon Islands campaign in the Pacific Theater of World War II and exactly one year following the United States' most direct previous blow to Japan with the Doolittle Raid. Isoroku Yamamoto, commander of the Combined Fleet of the Imperial Japanese Navy, was killed on Bougainville Island when his transport bomber aircraft was shot down by U.S. Army fighter aircraft operating from Henderson Field on Guadalcanal.
The mission of the U.S. aircraft was specifically to kill Yamamoto and was based on United States Navy intelligence on Yamamoto's itinerary in the Solomon Islands area. The death of Yamamoto reportedly damaged the morale of Japanese naval personnel (described by Samuel Eliot Morison as being considered the equivalent of a major defeat in battle), raised the morale of the Allied forces, and was intended as revenge by U.S. leaders who blamed Yamamoto for the Pearl Harbor attack which initiated the formal state of war between Imperial Japan and the U.S. After the war, more controversy surrounded the legacy of the mission, as several of the U.S. fighter pilots involved debated for years over who should have received the credit for downing Yamamoto's aircraft.
I don't think you realize that killing these guys .....reduces them to nothing.......as WWII progressed Germany and Japan could not replace their combat losses of experienced officers and pilots. Same here!
I think Sprint HAS to buy this.
I was totally wrong letting you go as a Mod. I'm sorry! I was hoping you would post again.
Could be a sleeper here.
Interesting!
The original Tea Party members were Independents ...till the Repubs joined .. Sad to say!
So what happened?
They overruled Lincoln on suspending the writ of Habeus Corpus during the Civil War for U.S. citizens.
They overruled FDR on the Detainment of second generation U.S. Citizens of Japanese descent during WWII.
So little used...not a factor.
I despise racism......married to a black woman......however, the Tea Party Started over the Debt.....as usual it morphed into something nasty!
No shit...I asked that....their insurance is like 800 dollars a month.
Good solid post! How true!
I respectfully disagree.... I thought they had a point at first.....then it morphed into a BS crybaby convention.
Interesting Article
http://www.ndsu.edu/pubweb/~rcollins/scholarship/guns.html
The Tea Party started out honorable......then became corrupt.... same ole same ole!
Those Towns knew the damage having everybody running around with a gun.... Great post by the way.
One of your better posts....IMHO! The river thing........quite true.
I personally think people should be interested in Polotics....it's a civic duty.
Along with a declaring martial law, President Abraham Lincoln ordered the suspension of the constitutionally protected right to writs of habeas corpus in 1861, shortly after the start of the American Civil War. At the time, the suspension applied only in Maryland and parts of the Midwestern states.
In response to the arrest of Maryland secessionist John Merryman by Union troops, then Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Roger B. Taney defied Lincoln's order and issued a writ of habeas corpus demanding that the U.S. Military bring Merryman before the Supreme Court. When Lincoln and the military refused to honor the writ, Chief Justice Taney in Ex-parte MERRYMAN declared Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus unconstitutional. Lincoln and the military ignored Taney's ruling.
On Sept. 24, 1862, President Lincoln issued the following proclamation suspending the right to writs of habeas corpus nationwide.[color=red]
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A PROCLAMATION
Whereas, it has become necessary to call into service not only volunteers but also portions of the militia of the States by draft in order to suppress the insurrection existing in the United States, and disloyal persons are not adequately restrained by the ordinary processes of law from hindering this measure and from giving aid and comfort in various ways to the insurrection;
Now, therefore, be it ordered, first, that during the existing insurrection and as a necessary measure for suppressing the same, all Rebels and Insurgents, their aiders and abettors within the United States, and all persons discouraging volunteer enlistments, resisting militia drafts, or guilty of any disloyal practice, affording aid and comfort to Rebels against the authority of United States, shall be subject to martial law and liable to trial and punishment by Courts Martial or Military Commission:
Second. That the Writ of Habeas Corpus is suspended in respect to all persons arrested, or who are now, or hereafter during the rebellion shall be, imprisoned in any fort, camp, arsenal, military prison, or other place of confinement by any military authority of by the sentence of any Court Martial or Military Commission.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.
Done at the City of Washington this twenty fourth day of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two, and of the Independence of the United States the 87th.
ABRAHAM LINCOLN
By the President:[/color]
WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State.
What is a Writ of Habeas Corpus?
A writ of habeas corpus is a judicially enforceable order issued by a court of law to a prison official ordering that a prisoner be brought to the court so it can be determined whether or not that prisoner had been lawfully imprisoned and, if not, whether he or she should be released from custody. A habeas corpus petition is a petition filed with a court by a person who objects to his own or another's detention or imprisonment. The petition must show that the court ordering the detention or imprisonment made a legal or factual error. The right of habeas corpus is the constitutionally bestowed right of a person to present evidence before a court that he or she has been wrongly imprisoned.
Where Our Right of Habeas Corpus Comes From
The right of writs of habeas corpus are granted in Article I, Section 9, clause 2 of the Constitution, which states, "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."
Point well taken.....but my point is in War.....the rights of people come second. Welcome to the board.
Here you go
[color=red]
Article I, Section. 2 [Slaves count as 3/5 persons]
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons [i.e., slaves]. [/color]
Article I, Section. 9, clause 1. [No power to ban slavery until 1808]
The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.
Article IV, Section. 2. [Free states cannot protect slaves]
No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.
Article V [No Constitutional Amendment to Ban Slavery Until 1808]
...No Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article.
The Thirteenth Amendment
Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.
Section 1.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
The Constitution is amendable.......it's not written in stone....so we go old school.....Slavery anyone?
I disagree.... I don't think the Gov would hurt it's own soldiers.......not cost effective.
Agent Orange...245-T ......use to use it on the farm......we'll dad did......I don't think they understood what it would do....their cover up was shameful.
Sorry....National Security has always trumped the Constition ...... that goes back to the Revolutionary War.
Who is dismantling the Constitution? Get real!
Lol ...I'm a guy....Chloe is my Dachshund.......I work....my mental disability is PTSD from Combat....you serve? I bet not.......so I did the deed and you talk shit to me on IHUB.......lol what a great country.
That's a damn shame!
As generally understood, the person accusing (the "pot") is understood to share some quality with the target of their accusation (the "kettle"). The pot is mocking the kettle for a little soot when the pot itself is thoroughly covered in the same. An alternative interpretation, recognised by some,[1][2] but not all,[3] sources is that the pot is sooty (being placed on a fire), while the kettle is clean and shiny (being placed on coals only), and hence when the pot accuses the kettle of being black, it is the pot’s own sooty reflection that it sees: the pot accuses the kettle of a fault that only the pot has, rather than one that they share. See also projection.
The following poem is found in the school book "Maxwell's Elementary Grammar", copyright 1904.
"Oho!" said the pot to the kettle;
"You are dirty and ugly and black!
Sure no one would think you were metal,
Except when you're given a crack."
"Not so! not so!" kettle said to the pot;
"'Tis your own dirty image you see;
For I am so clean – without blemish or blot –
That your blackness is mirrored in me."
In public parks.......I hate to sound heartless but many homeless are there due to bad decisions......not one but like many. Why should average people who take their families to the park have to wade thru people when there are feeding stations in other areas.
Point made
“Armor-piercing bullets, why do you need that?” Granholm interrupted.
“Why do you need to protect Hollywood?” Santorum shot back.
“You’re deflecting,” Granholm observed. “Deer don’t wear armor. Why do you need an armor-piercing bullet?”
“But criminals could,” Santorum quipped.
“And police officers certainly do,” Granholm noted.
“Having the ability to defend yourself is something that is a right in our country,” Santorum asserted.
Watch this video from ABC’s The Week, broadcast Jan. 20, 2013.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/20/santorum-armor-piercing-bullets-are-a-right-in-our-country/
Idiots
However, Neil says, they will face charges related to drinking alcohol while handling the weapons and for failing to operate the guns safely. They did not use a proper backstop, Sgt. Neil says.
Why people leave guns in a house with kids is beyond me.