Safe at last
When will Tesei et als introduce an ordinance banning private swimming pools? This senseless slaughter must stop.
Filed under Uncategorized
You can have my rubber ducky when you pry it from my cold, dead hand.
Are you trying to be funny? Swimming pools? I give Tesei credit for showing up. The entire state delegation ( Walko Frantz …. ) had other “commitments .”
Walko votes in favor of stricter laws then tells everyone how bad the law is. Walko is the dangerous one.
I’m not “trying to be funny”, I’m suggesting that people use reason instead of hysteria – the people at yesterday’s rally were sporting signs advocating “protect our children”, the implication being that they way to do that was by banning guns. In fact, swimming pools and cars kill far more children than guns, by a factor of 1,000 or more. Want to save a child’s life? Drain that pool. Want to run around and look stupid? Peter Tesei and Drew Marzullo await you at Town Hall.
I agree with Chris, “if it saves one life,” draining all the pools is worth it by the gun control crowd’s rational.
Chris–You should put up a post showing how many are killed/maimed by drunk drivers. Happens every day in every town.
And if you really want to see the libs jumping up and down, include a post asking why there are more African American pregnancies terminated in abortion than live births in just NYC. In another country, this would be called a pogrom not a social service.
Better yet, ask a lib why they support abortion but not the death penalty.
You could have lots of fun with these questions, asking one a day.
There you go again…I knew you were alright!
Calling senator byrd, senator byrd….
PP is by design done covertly
Nothing to see here move along move along
yeah you are
Marzullo of course was there and I actually thought his speech was good. Made sense to me. And even though Tesei looked uncomfortable I credit him for attending. Theis was there hiding in the crowd.
I attended yesterday’s rally and agree with Marzullo that money and resources must be allocated to rid guns away from crazies.
Who decides who is crazy? Anyone with an R on their voter registration will definitely be deemed crazy. “The science is settled” is the way libs handle things these days.
Want to take guns away from the crazies, then take them away from the cops. Here’s a video of one pulling a gun on someone who dares to take a video of him. And how about that kid who answered the door with a remote in his hand, and was shot dead by the cop who already had her gun drawn when she knocked on the door without bothering to identify herself. Or how about when the were after that rogue cop in California, and the cops were shooting up pickup trucks of any color at random because the guy they were after might be driving one.
“The group expects to arrive in Washington on Tuesday, March 11 and US Sen Richard Blumenthal and US Rep. Jim Himes say will be there to meet them, just as they were at stops along the way on Saturday.”
Correction, Blumenthal and Himes will be there to meet the cameras. They are going to squeeze every drop of publicity out of Sandy Hook they possibly can.
Was Sandy Hook a false flag designed to disarm America? School Safety Expert Threatened for Questioning Official Narrative:
Go back to infowars, you’re making the normal RKBA supporters look bad.
That Sandy Hook was such a seminal event in grabbing guns make it a likely false flag. But it’s hard to tell because they’re keeping everything as secret as possible. 9-ll (our Reichstag fire) was the seminal event in bringing about the Patriot Act, Homeland (der fatherland) Security, and the NDAA (disappeared to a gulag).
If you haven’t figured out yet that 9-11 is a false flag — with videos of military planes (not commercial jet liners) flying into the buildings; a barely damaged building#7 collapsing into it’s own footprint; photos of obvious thermite damage to structural beams in the north and south towers; explosions filmed going off and registering on seismographs before the buildings came down; no damage to the pentagon from wings or engines (the heaviest part of the plane); a car sitting on the ground undamaged right next to where the fuselage entered; a fully fueled plane that caused a fire “hot enough to melt steel” in the twin towers, yet didn’t even burn papers sitting on desks adjacent to the hole where the fuselage entered the pentagon, and the fire went right out — then you are either very naïve or a fool.
9-11 was designed to bring about a police state. Sandy Hook was designed to take away the guns.
For all those gun owners who think laws have changed to make gun ownership harder: they haven’t! Anyone can buy a firearm from a private owner with any reporting requirements. Anyone can walk into a gun show and walk out with as many firearms as they can afford – no ID, no reporting required. Please don’t result to retoric or meaningless comparisons to try to make your point.
art: the perfect visual to your statement: I attended a recent show in pennsylvania. the lines of cars to get into the show were miles long from every possible entrance to the venue, so long it extended out into the interstate, snarling traffic for well over an hour, trucks from every nearby state, moms in vans, grandmas in subarus. i went with the intention of buying my dream pistol, an ed brown kobra carry semi-automatic. got ‘er done.
i bet you have never ever been to a gun show in your entire life.
This is incorrect in CT. Private sales for handguns require the buyer to have a permit or certificate of eligibility, two forms to be completed and a call to the DESPP for authorization. And sales of ANY gun instate at a gun show require a NICS auth.
So who is spouting off the rhetoric here?
Alot of things are required, but there is no practical barrier to stop any private individual from selling a hand gun to any other person. Even if this law is followed to the letter in CTl., what about other states? Should we have checkpoints at the border and search all cars coming into the state?
hey, be the like nazis, if it makes you happy.
“…but there is no practical barrier to stop any private individual from selling a hand gun to any other person.” Oh no, something is occurring that you don’t like — stop every car quick! You are precisely the type of individual that defines the phrase “knee jerk”. Why the streets are running red with blood. Meanwhile drunks are running people down who are walking home, but I bet you aren’t trying to outlaw drinking. You and your ilk are busy outlawing pop while the drunk is buying his 96oz beer.
Art – No “practical barrier” for two people to do in private what they want to keep private? And how exactly do you propose we stop that. As The Box points out, even before the passage of SB1160, Connecticut had close to if not, the most stringent background check regime in the USA. Not only a NICS check, but also a run against the State’s own databases. And they there was the 14-day waiting period for those without a pistol permit (before 4/4/2013). So what do you propose Art, the creation of three mutants so Hartford can have its own version of The Minority Report’s precognition? In the war on drugs and prostitution, how effective has law enforcement been in stopping those transactions, none protected by the US and CT Constitutions, from happening? People like you Art live in a fantasy world, like Obama and his “reset” with the Russians.
In other news, My Favorite Place shuts its doors.
I’ve had mixed feelings about this joint for years. Loved the effort with the food (inventive, generally above avg), hated the indifferent and slow service and high prices. After a decent first 5 years, this place seemed to languish the last five. The opening of the Cos Cobber around the corner about 2 years ago seemed to deliver the final death blow.
A lot of challenges troubled this place, but mostly I think it was a service issue with overpricing a close second. For a long – long period, the evening service crew here was awful. Their attitude sucked, their priorities totally backwards as they would often spend a full 5-7 mins cleaning something or tending to some other task around the little shop before they would be willing to take your order (so eating here took forever). Sometimes the indifference felt like maybe they just didn’t want you at their little establishment which would be near empty to begin with. There was one occasion where after waiting 5 mins I just took my kids and walked out. I remember hearing the cook in the back yell at the counter person that their dilly-dallying caused us to leave and he was right. No lie, stood there 5 mins and the counter person just refuse to stop whatever menial task they had to take our order. Approx 1/2 the we ate there, there would be some sort of fumble. Either soft rudeness at the counter or food coming out in 15 min gaps (hey -we’re already done eating and now the kids side of broccoli comes out?). They were never apologetic about anything to boot. Why did we bother? For about 5 years we didn’t go, then starting last year when we notice some of the night crew was no longer there we tried it again with better results – the staff was friendlier. Plus, they do make some killer salads and my kids did enjoy the food too. One more plus, I live so close…
So what’s next? Its a great location, but I think it needs more seating to work as a restaurant. Prediction: another perhaps we see another taco joint enter the fray. Stamford’s Ole Mole would be great.
Perhaps time for Taco Joe’s to reappear in Cos Cob?
The owners have always been difficult.
Had serious attitude issues long before they were in the biz,
I never went in bc I knew what to expect.
No surprises here. NEXT!
I vote Ole Mole!!
Why wont they pass background checks?
If you are actually interested in the answer and not being rhetorical, here’s my crack at it.
Practically speaking, because it’s an additional burden of dubious worth put on (a minority of) lawful transactions. NICS is severely flawed as it is – yet even so a majority of firearm purchases already go through it since they are retail or dealer sales. Most guns used in crimes are stolen or come from straw purchases. To see what law enforcement thinks of the usefulness of background checks (and many other gun control initiatives) I recommend reading this survey from last year of over 15,000 officers: http://ddq74coujkv1i.cloudfront.net/p1_gunsurveysummary_2013.pdf
On a more ideological level – I think gun owners oppose it for two reasons. First, as stated they view it as another ineffective feel-good measure that again puts to onus of resolving gun crime on the average gun owner while ignoring the more fundamental issues that accounts for by far the largest percentage of violence (inner city youth and gangs and lax enforcement of gun violations in those areas). Secondly, they are distrustful of the motives for and the people behind the initiative. We have witnessed again and again that “common sense” reforms and “compromise” actually means “we’ll let you keep some now and come back for the rest later.” Take SB1160 – it was billed as a bipartisan compromise. What, exactly, did gun owners get out of the “compromise.” That, I believe, is fundamentally why gun owners and the NRA now oppose pretty much every new gun control initiative and instead demand more vigorous enforcement of the thousands of existing firearm laws.
I personally am ambivalent about background checks – I even see some value there – but I have come around to the ‘never give an inch’ philosophy. Based on the legislation and rhetoric that continues to target lawful gun owners while ignoring the real problems I have come to the conclusion that a majority of gun control supporters and organizations have little interest in actually reducing gun crime while preserving the right to keep and bear arms – their main long term goal is a complete or near complete ban on individual firearm ownership. Therefore, I believe there is no longer any room for compromise: there is no up side, only a slow erosion of rights.
And that is my very long, rambling answer to your question of why people oppose background checks.
The Box, do I know you? Chris, do I know this Box fellow? Seems like I should….
Who’s funnier: Walt or AJ?
AJ thinks 9-11 was false-flag????!!!
AJ thinks Sandy Hook was a “likely false flag.” Believing this silliness requires one to believe that two dozen children were murdered (by whom, AJ?) with the intent of taking away people’s guns! So let’s follow your logic, (if it can be called logic). Let’s find out who took away the guns, because they had the motivation for the murder, according to your silly theory. Why it was the Malloy governor administration with democrat majorities in the CT Assembly and Senate! Are you saying these are the murderers, AJ?
It must be fun, to sit at your computer in your pajamas, reading conspiracy theories and believing that you ALONE possess the judgment, the perspicacity, the courage, the brilliance to uncover the inner working of events that everyone else can’t see….
AJ, when the jibberish comes out of your head, do us a favor and don’t write it down. Count to 20 and talk to an adult.
You’re funny, but Walt is funnier.
WTF is jibberish?
Thanks for calling balderdash on me: I spelled it wrong.
Gibberish or gobbledygook refer to speech or other use of language that is nonsense, or that appears to be nonsense. It may include speech sounds that are not actual words. (Wiki)
Most of AJ’s posts are gibberish. They may sound like thought, but include little actual thinking.
“…may include speech sounds that are not actual words …”; so now your hearing voices are you? Well, now that you’ve explained the meaning of the word gibberish to all the laypeople out there, perhaps you’d like to offer your explanations to the questions posed in my 10:20 PM post. Perhaps you’d also like to explain how a 757 made the hole in the Pentagon as shown at 1:34 through 1:49 of the clip shown in my 3:44 AM post. What happened to the wings and engines, eh?
In your 8:35 PM post, you ask who would murder children? Why, the US government, of course, and by the truckload in places such as Pakistan via Predator Drone. They have repeatedly shown that they absolutely have no problem killing children.
While I don’t agree with everything AJ has been posting, I would like to ask a question. How many servicemen were allowed to die at Pearl Harbor in order to guarantee our involvement in WWII?
And over 1900 died in the sinking of the Lusitania, a false flag designed to bring the US into World War One to save JP Morgan from financial ruin. When I was in grade school there wasn’t a student that didn’t know that the passengers were warned by ads placed in the paper by Germany not to sail because the ship would be sunk. What very few people know is that, with the exception of a single paper in Des Moines, those ads were not printed because they were ordered held back until after the ship had sailed by order of the State Department — the idea was to get America into the war, and you couldn’t very well do that if there were no Americans on board.
The ship’s destroyer escort was called off by the Admiralty, and she was ordered, also by the Admiralty, to reduce speed to three quarters throttle; all in waters where a ship had been torpedoed just a day or two before. It did the trick and those nearly 2000 lives lost were just the beginning of hundreds of thousands more to be lost, and all thanks to a very successful false flag operation. And JP did not go broke, but instead made a killing.
I can’t resist, here’s another question for you: Why was our ambassador to Benghazi and several courageous servicemen allowed to be slaughtered with no one lifting a finger to save them? The only answer we got was: I wasn’t aware and what difference does it make. The killing of a country’s ambassador is usually regarded as an act of war, but all the US did was shrug its shoulders.
The point is, our government sends the lambs to slaughter whenever it wants. I’m sure there were AJs back during WWII trying to prove that something stunk at Pearl Harbor and they were also laughed at. Truth is sometimes stranger than fiction.
‘BENGHAZI-GATE: Did two heroic SEALs ruin Obama’s October Surprise? [UPDATED!]’
“Please see critical updates below
It’s a conspiracy theory, to be sure, but “Kozy” asserts the Benghazi attack was an “October Surprise” gone awry thanks to two SEALs who weren’t even supposed to be in Benghazi.
The scenario is both simple and plausible:
• In June, Egyptian President Morsi pledged to secure the release of ‘The Blind Sheikh’, the extremist cleric responsible for the first World Trade Center attack.
• Eager to accommodate Morsi and strengthen the U.S. relationship with Egypt, Obama’s henchmen formulate a two-step cover story. The first step is a video that no one has seen, which was released in July.
• Next, strip security from the Libyan Ambassador, despite pleas from a variety of quarters for more security, not less. In essence, remove any barriers to using the Ambassador as a hostage.
• Back-channel communications between the White House and the Imam’s legal representatives confirm that a swap can be achieved with a high-level hostage exchange. The Imam’s cronies are informed that Ambassador Stevens has no security in Benghazi. So the Imam can be secured through a trade after capturing Stevens who doesn’t even have a single bodyguard.
• Had all gone according to plan, Stevens would be released just before the election; Obama would take credit for that and a newly strengthened relationship with Egypt and Morsi.
• But what wasn’t planned: two ex-SEALs named Doherty and Woods. They only happened to be in Benghazi because they were on a separate intel mission to locate surface-to-air missiles.
So the terrorists launch their attack believing that there is no security whatsoever. And they are surprised to find that two SEALs are not only fighting back, but killing them left and right. The resulting firefight transforms the terrorists’ assault from a simple kidnapping into a murderous onslaught that cost all four Americans their lives.
Sure, it’s a crazy, right-wing conspiracy theory. But add in the following observations:
• Repeated denials for more security in Benghazi, despite requests from multiple quarters. No credible explanation has been offered for the removal of security by the White House or the State Department.
• Leading up to 9/11 — of all dates — there was no special security posture ordered in diplomatic installations around the Middle East.
• After the attack, a series of conflicting and morphing stories were offered by, among others, Ambassador Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Jay Carney, David Axelrod, Joe Biden, etc.
• Not only did the president go to sleep after getting word of the attack, but it appears he also refused security briefings in the aftermath of the attack, instead simply departing for a fundraiser in Las Vegas.
The theory being: the President didn’t need to stay awake after hearing of the attack. He didn’t need any briefings. He knew exactly what had happened.
Update 10/17/12: An alert commenter reminds of this bit of evidence, translated from Arabic by Walid Shoebat:
Video from Libya: ‘Don’t Shoot us! We were sent by Mursi’
Fast forward to the 1:15 mark in this video (if you don’t understand Arabic). Watch as the raw footage of a firefight in Benghazi is taking place. The news report loops the relevant portion of an exchange between gunmen, in which one can be heard, saying, ‘Don’t Shoot us! We were sent by Mursi’!
But, no. This is just some kind of crazy, whacked-out conspiracy theory. There’s got to be a much better explanation for the Obama administration’s removal of all of Ambassador Stevens’ security, despite multiple pleas for more security. We just don’t know what it is yet.
Update 10/26/12: Jennifer Griffin of Fox News reports that the SEAL operators were ordered to “Stand down” during the attack!
EXCLUSIVE: CIA operators were denied request for help during Benghazi attack, sources say
Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during …”
In the following Fox News video clip, new information suggests that those who attacked the US Embassy in Benghazi were anything but amateurs, firing 5 rounds in less than a minute, three of which were dead on target hitting the roof of the annex.
So , Balzac, take a look at the bellies of the planes that flew into the towers and explain what type of plane those are: they are not airliners. Explain how Building Seven damaged by only a few small fires collapsed into it’s own footprint — something that is possible only by controlled demolition. Explain to me how a couple of towelheads with a couple of flying lessons were able to keep a fully loaded 757 flying level and steady at over six hundred MPH just a few feet above the ground and crash it into the Pentagon. Explain why the wings left no marks left no marks on the Pentagon and how the engines just simply disappeared. Explain to me how the offices surrounding the hole where the fuselage penetrated the Pentagon show no signs of fire, how desks and papers are sitting out in the open without even the slightest scorch marks.
I AWAIT YOUR EXPLANATION, Mr. Believer in the voice of authority. IF YOU DON’T HAVE ANY, then I believe you are fool enough to jump out a window thinking you can flap your arms and fly if the government told you that it was possible.
As far as Sandy Hook goes, they are keeping a tight lid on any information, so it’s impossible to know much. Watch the video: that guy is a former school principal, former state trooper, and a school safety expert, so what does he know?
In the following tape of local Oklahoma newscasts, starting at 8:12 the Oklahoma City bomb squad is seen removing bombs that had been wired into the building — not part of the “official” story — and it’s reported that no Federal employees showed up for work on that day. The fact that people died, doesn’t mean it wasn’t a staged event. 50,000 Americans died because of the Gulf of Tonkin, another staged event.
I’m starting to think AJ is a parody account. A really good one at that.
Problem remains that we can still go and buy illegal guns without the benefit of background checks, etc given that it is a cash transaction. Filling out paperwork, that’s for law abiding citizens – not us!
The Beagle Boys
Here’s leaked footage of a cruise missile hitting the Pentagon at 1:10 of the clip. People like Balzac would have you believe that this is a subsonic commercial airliner the size of several school busses being piloted by a couple of Arab boys with no more than a few flying lessons under their belt.
And just to help Balzac peel a few layers of foil off that thick skull of his is a video of a number of much smaller fighter jets doing low level flybys at supersonic speed. Unlike the commercial airliner which is lumbering by at such a high subsonic speed that it can only be seen as a streak of light, these much smaller jets, traveling above the speed of sound, can easily be identified as the planes that they are.
AJ may be onto to something. It has been reported that Flight 77 actually flew directly to New Mexico, and the 59 passengers and crew are being held at “Area 51”. The guvmint rigged the DNA found at the Pentagon site so dummies like Balzac would think a plane hit it. What a stooge!
Good point. Don’t believe your lying eyes: the government says they’ve got DNA and the slides under the microscope to prove it.
Except that they also recovered the flight recorders, the nose cone, the landing gear,,an airplane tire and an intact cockpit seat. The references are in this wikipedia article:
So under the cruise missile theory, what did happen to American Flight 77?
C’mon Richard, you’re smarter than that. Just because they hold up photos of some DNA means nothing; just because they show off some flight recorders means nothing: they could have come from anywhere. And the thin aluminum nose of the plane survived? The first thing to hit the reinforced concrete wall? And a cockpit seat, sitting in the nose of that plane, but no other seats nor the engines survived?
What happened to flight 77 and its passengers? Who knows? What happens to the characters at the end of a movie? The facts that are not known does not negate the facts that are known. Take a look at this video with some expert opinion, and ask yourself if the story the government is telling you adds up.
If you read the eye witness accounts that were linked in the wikipedia article, they saw pieces of the nose cone and landing gear, not intact parts. The whole “there was no plane” theory has been debunked.
In an earlier comment I said you were smarter than that; guess not. You point to a Snopes article that “debunks” the 9-11 Pentagon Conspiracy theory; there are no shortage of such articles on the internet. So let’s take a look at this one.
From the Snopes article: “…When the plane hit at 350 miles an hour, the limestone layer shattered…” So the plane was only traveling at 350 mph, only 150 mph faster than cars do at NASCAR. That must be why it appears as a superfast moving streak on all available footage: I mean just a few extra miles per hour faster, and all those Chevys zipping around the track would also appear to be just a streak of light.
But the best one is what happened to the wings and why you see no marks from the wings or engines on the 12 foot in diameter hole where the fuselage penetrated the outside of the building:
“5) Can you explain what happened to the wings and why they caused no damage?
As the front of the Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon, the outer portions of the wings likely snapped during initial impact, then were pushed inwards towards the fuselage [if they were no longer attached to the plane there would be no reason for them to fold nor be pushed inwards] and carried into the building’s interior … Nonetheless, damage to the building caused by the plane’s wings is plainly visible [no it’s not] in photographs, such as the [small] one below (note the blackened sections on both sides of the impact site).”
Check out the hole where the plane entered at 1:42 on the video clip of my 3:44 AM post: there is no damage to the building caused by the swept back wings which would not have sheared or folded until the leading edge of those wings made impact, the furthest point forward of those wings being where they join the fuselage, which according to the Snopes “the wings and engines folded into the plane on impact” theory would have had to have left marks on both sides of the penetration hole because they would not have begun to fold until making impact, in which event they would have sheared anyway, and only folded had the wings been of a swept forward design where the outer tips of the wings would have been the first part of the wings to make contact with the building. But even so, the law of inertia would not have allowed the wings to fold.
Guess you must have slept through high school physics — Newton’s first law of motion is often stated as: An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.
So, according to your Snopes article when the fuselage penetrated the outer wall of the building it caused the wings to fold and pulled the wings and engine into the fuselage. But those wings and engines would have no reason to fold until they hit the wall and that would have left a mark. But it’s almost 100% percent certain that in such a case the wings and engines wouldn’t have folded into the plane to enter the hole (like a ship in a bottle?), but just sheared off as they hit the wall: prior to that moment they would have no reason to shear or fold, and would have to penetrate the outer wall to some degree before doing either, leaving marks. But there is no reason the wings would have folded into the fuselage: they would have just sheared off as a wing did on Gol Transportes Aéreos Flight 1907, a Boeing 737 on flight from Manaus, Brazil, to Rio de Janeiro on the 29th of September, 2006 when it was hit by a corporate jet flying in the opposite direction. The bent up tip of the outer wing of the corporate get sliced cleanly through the 737’s wing as if it were butter.
But back to the law of inertia. Keeping that in mind, along with what happened to flight 1907, the wings would have sheared when the leading edge of those swept back wings made contact with the outer wall and the nearly ten thousand pounds each engines would have continued going straight into and through that outer wall.
But here’s my favorite part of the Snopes (if it’s on Snopes, it must be so) article:
“… Moreover, since the airliner was full of jet fuel and was flown into thick, reinforced concrete walls at high speed, exploding in a fireball, any pieces of wreckage large enough to be identifiable in after-the-fact photographs taken from a few hundred feet away burned up in the intense fire that followed the crash (just as the planes flown into the World Trade Center towers burned up, and the intensity of their jet-fuel fires caused both towers to collapse).”
Here’s a photo of offices in the Pentagon adjacent to the hole where the plane penetrated after the collapse where fires raged that were so intense that they consumed all the large pieces of an entire plane yet somehow left office furniture and loose papers unscorched. Look, see for yourself: here’s a photo of the collapsed hole exposing the adjacent offices.
And let us not forget that they found the passport of one of the hijackers lying on the street at the WTC in NYC that had somehow miraculously survived the fiery impact and floated out of the building and down to the ground after the plane had crashed into one of the towers. You guys will believe anything.
Since we all know how well more laws work, all they need to do is pass 2 more:
1. Legislate Sanity. Now the law of the land says everyone must be sane. It is now against the law to be insane, henceforth there will be no more crazy people. It’s against the law.
2. Legislate Common Sense. Now the law of the land says everyone must have common sense and poof all the libs disappear overnight. Problem solved.
Bingo – sheer genius.
How about a law that says that all legislators must read and pass a test on the legislation they are about to vote on — scofflaws will be expelled!
Well, we all know that you have to pass it before you can find out what’s in it. Update: what’s in it is a big dog turd. Of course, conservatives knew that years before any of the clueless libs (even though nothing gets past their keen powers of observation).
On a side note: Will we all be getting a refund for our Barry health taxes when this absurd monstrosity comes crashing down?
No, because the whole idea behind BarryKare is that it will fail and we will then move into a single payer system. Not only no tax refunds, but every dime of your income will be redirected to D.C. to pay for the new system.
CF–I was kind of hoping that Barry would run out of time or that the American people would rebel before it came to a single payer system (seeing how popular BarryKare is–I see they’ve hit their sign-up quotas).
I love it when AJ writes “YOU GUYS will believe anything” without a trace of irony or self-awareness……
RSS - Posts
RSS - Comments
Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 274 other followers