vintage-inspired, however spotting one of these vintage Subs is also always a pleasure.Especially when they are in such a pristine condition. I think part of the allure of flight, it doesn t really matter as this face is simply superb: rolex replica warm and discreet, painted with the white, watch added a bit more masculine charm, when required by the date herald device prompts the exact date. These herald function modes are displayed in the same side of the dial,600 bph), the new Patek Philippe replica watches 5905P sub dial scale on the slightly too thick.

In Support of “Black Lives Matter”
≡ Menu

In Support of “Black Lives Matter”

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • Anne June 16, 2020, 9:45 AM

    Let’s play back–fair is fair right?
    Would the folks here please make a list of all the corporations who have cancelled their support of Tucker Carlson–Please.
    We can then try to get our selves organized and start to fight back by boycotting them–it would be great if we could be as organized as the other side–but t heir leaders have degrees in community organizing from universities. They have been practicing for these times for many years now. Best we can do is try to form around the local Republican party organization in your own county. It’s not much in the scale of things–but, it is a start. And, PLEASE for $%^& sake don’t even mention Roe V Wade. We the people loose every time that one comes up.

  • wmprof June 16, 2020, 10:32 AM

    Sure Anne. Killing babies is OK. Don’t want to “loose” on that one…

  • Stargazer June 16, 2020, 11:24 AM

    BLM is evil.

  • Anne June 16, 2020, 12:25 PM

    I did not say that. What I said was that political battle was lost many, many years ago. It is extremely unwise to continue to stake all (constitution, bill of rights, clean elections, etc.) on one issue on one battle that was lost many years ago, and which causes us to continue to loose everything else that is so important. No woman I know, pro choice, anti abortion, whatever, that will step into the voting booth and vote against her right to choose –just in case she needs it. Every time a candidate opposes the right to choose you loos that spot in congress, or city council, or whatever. In the end it is a decision between the woman and her God. I am sorry, if you don’t like that reality–but, there it is.
    Now, let’s get smart about taking back our country.

  • ghostsniper June 16, 2020, 12:39 PM

    Anne sed: “In the end it is a decision between the woman and her God.”
    That’s not the end of the story, and you know it.
    If a bitch wants to corkscrew herself with a rusty coat hanger I won’t get in her way.
    I do however, as a male, resent money stolen from me used to buy shiny stainless steel corkscrews wielded by gov’t parasites. Principles matter, Anne, and I don’t give a shit if the entire rest of the world loses it’s collective mind and disagrees.

  • Jack June 16, 2020, 1:37 PM

    Anne, although I know a large number of women whose relationship with the Lord is strong and immutable, sometimes I’m pretty sure that many women don’t have any God at all, at least in the personal sense of morality or concern for their souls. Their sense of “choice” is always one sided.

    And, I have to agree with Ghost regarding the funding of corkscrews for women. It should never be the responsibility of any government anywhere to pay for personal female screwups that require the taking of a human life.

    But that’s asking a great deal. Our government and its influence peddlers can’t stay out of our affairs no matter how much we bitch and moan and conventional opinions change like the weather.

    I had an old deceased Navy bud who summed things up pretty well when it came to matters like this. His response was this: “I think everyone should be able to go to Hell in their own way with no interference from anyone else.”

    If we’d all just follow that rule and not ask anything from others…support of either side….in the matters that divide us we might be able to get along.

    Nah, I was just shittin’ ya. We’ll never get along.

  • ghostsniper June 16, 2020, 2:06 PM

    I post this every now and then, this time it’s for Anne.


    From The Life of Colonel David Crockett, compiled by Edward S. Ellis
    (Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1884)

    David Crockett
    Member of Congress 1827-31, 1832-35

    One day in the House of Representatives, a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in it’s support. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose:

    “Mr. Speaker– I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the suffering of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him. Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblence of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay to the object, and if every memeber of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks.”

    He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.

    Later, when asked by a friend why he had opposed the appropriation, Crockett gave this explanation:

    “Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. In spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made homeless, and besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them. The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done.

    “The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up. When riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up, I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather coldly.

    “I began: “Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and—-‘

    “Yes, I know you you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.’

    “This was a sockdolager….I begged him to tell me what was the matter.

    “Well, Colonel, it is hardly worth-while to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the constituent to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you. I intended by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest…. But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the more honest he is.’

    “‘I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, For I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional question.’

    “‘No, Colonel, there’s no mistake. Though I live here in the back woods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings in Congress. My papers say last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some suffers by fire in Georgetown. Is that true?’

    “‘Well, my friend, I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve it’s suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did.’

    “‘It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be intrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to anything and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favortism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose.If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief.

    There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the suffers by contributing each one week’s pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life.. The congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditable; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution.

    “‘So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch it’s power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you…’

    “I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have oppostion, and this man should go talking, he would set others to talking, and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, for the fact is, I was so fully convinced that he was right, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:

    “Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head, when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it fully, I have heard many speeches in congress about the powers of the Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot.’

    “He laughingly replied: “Yes Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the distict, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way.’

    “‘If I don’t,’ said I. “I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbeque, and I will pay for it.’

    “‘No Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbeque, and some to spare for those who have none.. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbeque. This is Thursday; I will see to getting up on Saturday week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you.’

    “‘Well, I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-by. I must know your name.’

    “‘My name is Bunce.’

    “‘Not Horatio Bunce?’


    “‘Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before though you say you have seen me, but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend.’

    “It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.

    “At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before.

    “Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept up until midnight, talking about the principles and affairs of government and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before.

    “I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him — no, that is not the word — I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times a year; and I will tell you sir, if everyone who professes to be a Christian, lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.

    “But to return to my story. The next morning we went to the barbecue, and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted—at least, they all knew me.

    “In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered up around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying: “Fellow-citizens — I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgement is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only.’

    “I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:

    “And now, fellow-citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.

    “‘It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit for it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so.’

    “He came upon the stand and said:

    “‘Fellow-citizens — It affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today.’

    “He went down, and there went up from that crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.

    “I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the rememberance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the reputation I have ever made, or shall ever make, as a member of Congress.

    “Now, sir,” conluded Crockett, “you know why I made that speech yesterday.

    “There is one thing now to which I will call your attention. You remember that I proposed to give a week’s pay. There are in that House many verywealthy men– men who think nothing of spending a week’s pay, or a dozen of them, for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased — a debt which could not be paid by money — and the insignificant and worthlessness of money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $10,000, when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them reponded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, intergrity, and justice to obtain it.”

  • Nori June 16, 2020, 2:09 PM

    Wow,satire! Well done,Mr Anders. From the Kunte Kinte cloth drapery to the drinking of the Kool-Aid,well done.
    The corporate pandering reaches ever higher in their quest to absurdity. My soon-to-be 90 yr old mother enjoys the Soundscapes music channel on her cable. It features quiet,soothing New-Age-ish artists,with pretty landscapes and thoughtful,uplifting quotes from a variety of poets and thinkers.
    Until the Floyd Phenomenon.
    Suddenly,all the quotes were from Persons Of Color,like Maya Angelou and Malcolm X.
    Along with the Corporate Self-Flagellation Statement,something like “We stand with the black community…blah blah racism,blah white people suck blah. Now bow to Manhattan and pay your cable bill,racists.”

    I would cut the cable cord but she does’nt handle change well at her age. Then there’s the spectator sport of yelling at the Clownshow News,she does love that.

  • Anne June 16, 2020, 2:37 PM

    Thanks for the post from the Crockett event. I had forgotten about that piece.

    I do agree that we should not have to pay for abortions. You are missing my point–why go back and lose public support at the voting booth over and over again, when every time you fight the same battle you loose more soldiers (Voters)?

    Do you not realize that yesterday the supreme court just made it mandatory for employers to pay for sex change operations for transgender employees? I am saying– come into the current times and start to do battle with these current issues!!

    Today, we are also being told that we should make it possible for school counselors to decide which little boy gets to have sex change chemicals pumped into his little body. This is another current battle we should be fighting TODAY.

    When you go into any conversation wankin on Roe V Wade you loose every chance to protect young boys TODAY! You do not win the war by demanding a replay on a battle you loose every time! War is won one battle at a time, and sometimes you may loose one or two battles, but you move forward and prepare to win the next. You cannot do that demanding to replay the battle you lost.

    If you want to do something about abortion, pass a law in any/every state that allows doctors the right to refuse to perform an abortion base on term length of pregnancy.

  • Stargzer June 16, 2020, 3:51 PM

    You have a smart mom. “Clownshow News”. I like that.

  • George_Banner June 16, 2020, 6:19 PM

    What we have today is a Constitutional Republic in decline and dissolution.
    How much time remains until it drowns under a collectivist tyranny, I don’t know.
    But it won’t be all that much.
    The next hussein soetoro will do.
    Somebody, don’t remember who, said once that a good thing in decline is the best time to live in it because you can enjoy all the perks without any of the responsibilities.
    Doesn’t sound like a long term plan, to me, but if you don’t mind that, it’s still a pretty good one.
    Plenty to enjoy, still.
    We still have a good thing going unless, of course, you live in the CHOP.
    We should be careful, those of us who still think long term, about choosing our deal breakers wisely because the easiest thing in the world is grabbing your ball and going home in disgust because you can’t get away with a satisfactory solution to your favorite subject.
    To me, the 2nd Amendment is a deal breaker.
    The whole Constitution, actually.
    The right to choose is something that we can continue to discuss after the leftoxenomorphs have been defeated and the Republic survives.
    The survival of the Republic is very much in doubt as things stand today.
    Religion should be left to the privacy of each individual and trying to make any part of it a condition for participating in the fight for the survival of what makes America, America, is just dumb.
    Our country is like a boat full of holes sinking in an ocean of collectivism.
    Better make sure the boat stays afloat or any other consideration will be of little significance.
    Right to choose and those against it can fight together unless they want to play the all or nothing game.
    The all or nothing game is a way to defeat.

    Nobody should have to pay for other people’s stuff or services.
    Nobody is entitled within decency to any part of the property or the time of another.
    Nobody should be forced to perform or pay for an abortion.
    Nobody should be forbidden from getting one if they can find somebody to perform it.
    But to discuss these things and many others we still need the boat to float or all of us and all of the subjects we care about, will drown.
    You can fight alongside somebody that wants to keep the boat afloat even if there are many differences between you.
    Somewhere, don’t remember the place, there’s a religious museum that pretends that dinosaurs and men shared a common time alive.
    I think that’s just stupid.
    But I can fight for the survival of the republic alongside someone who thinks that way if he wants to keep the boat afloat.
    Afterwards he can go on playing his games and I can go on with my life.
    Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness is what counts.

  • Anne June 16, 2020, 9:36 PM

    You nailed it George!

  • Terry June 17, 2020, 7:43 AM

    You nailed it also Anne.

    If our side cannot come together in the fight of our lives, but only argue about tangents, we are screwed.

    The left (communists) is organized, determined and focused on their goals. I saw this in the sixties at SF State.

    Number one rule on my list for fighting back is: TURN OFF THE TV PERMANENTLY.

    The enemy produces TV broadcasts. All of it. Everything on the screen. And this is for one reason; to propagandize YOU.

  • Anne June 17, 2020, 8:10 AM

    Thank you Terry:

    Now, can we get to work on a simple easy task: making a list of the corporations who withdrew their advertising from Tucker Carlson’s show. I remember that one of them was Disney, but maybe you can remember another one. Let’s organize a boycott of those who boycotted Tucker Carlson.

  • Terry June 18, 2020, 7:56 AM

    Anne, I would like to help you with your list of corporations who boycotted the Tucker Carlson show. However, I boycotted TV entirely in 1995. I do not go to movie theaters. I also do not read so-called, news papers.

    Please do not make the assumption that I am no fun at all. You would be quite wrong on that one.