Daddy, daddy! Make those bad democrats stop stealing our federal dollars!

Poor, pitiful IB. I wondered how long before you came into this discussion with both guns blazing, pointed right at your toes. I had guessed the over/under should be set at about post 9.5.

New Mexico, Maine, Montana, South Dakota and Arizona are *real bastions of Dixie*, Old-Twerp.
Ah yes. Here is the hero of TP self-focused conservatism showing his true colors: willing to toss the hard core RWWs of Montana, etc., to the wolves because his REAL allegiance is not to the TP or conservative values--no, his REAL alliance is to the Confederacy. Dixie. The Plantation Way. We understand IBMassa, but lets look at that.

Mississippi: 50th, i.e. the MOST fed dependent state in the country (actually tied with NM)

Alabama: 49th
Louisiana: 48th
Tennessee: 45th
Kentucky: 41st
South Carolina: 40th
Florida: 38th
Georgia: 33rd
Texas: 32nd
Virginia: 26th
North Carolina: 24th
Arkansas: 22nd

Is that representative enough of Dixie for you? And please, don't insult us with "Kentucky doesn't count!", you know they are as plantation loving as anywhere.

Oh, and other than Florida, they were all republican wins in the 2012 election. Do you see a trend here?

Just for comparison, let's look at a couple places you love to hate:
Illinois: 2nd
New York: 17th.

Hmmmm......

While we are at it, let's look at the others:
New Mexico: voted Democrat
Maine: voted Democrat
Montana: voted Republican
South Dakota: voted Republican
Arizona: voted Republican
and let's not ignore West Virginia, another red state.

Even an English major can see a very strong correlation here, no?

Plus for some reason, Old-Twerp, the "Bang! Bang! Bang!" noise made by DOD's "Big Bad Guns" make lib-retards in the Yankee states go "Boo! Hoo! Hoo!"

Hence, the lib-retards have for the most part caused DOD -- with its "Big Bad Guns" and associated Federal dollars -- to relocate to Red States.

Some serious stupidity on your part here. Really stupid--even by your low standards. Let us count the ways you are stupid:

1. I never said DoD spending (by the way, the "o" is not capitalized, though in DOE and DOS it is) is evil, nor did I attack any other spending. I never even said the states that get more than they give are evil--I attacked the hypocrites like you, not the states.

2. Almost ANY state likes DoD jobs and $$$. The bulk or DoD presence is in the southern US because of a number of other legitimate reasons: open spaces (most people don't want rockets going BOOM in populated areas), open spaces (land for flight test, armor maneuvers, EM interference etc.), weather (clear skies for flight training, etc.), and others.

3. And let us not forget POLITICS. Ever sit on a BRAC committee? I've been on two. With VERY few exceptions EVERY senator and congressman wants DoD facilities and people in their district. Why are more in the south--because the southern congressmen had seniority on the right committees and fought tooth and nail to keep the money flowing in (as much of this data reflects).

As usual you are a clueless, lying, blabbering fool.

You should know that, considering your vocation, Old-Twerp. Reckon you've never been to Redstone Arsenal in Alabama, have you, Old-Twerp?

Which part of Redstone? The Army? NASA? DIA? GAO? Actually I have worked with and been to all four of those organizations at Redstone--if you mean a different part of Redstone, then no.

Why is it, Old-Twerp, that so many Yankee colleges have no ROTC departments -- and the associated Federal dollars -- on campus?

Can't answer that part. ROTC is not my area of expertise. But what does that have to do with the question? Whatever $$$ they are/are not getting is included in the totals. You are deflecting--nothing more.

BTW, Old-Twerp, do Yankees somehow imagine, as you seem to do, that they don't benefit in any manner from a "common defence" for the "commonweal" because more DOD dollars are spent in Red States per capita than in Blue States?

I never said any such thing, did I? As I have pointed out repeatedly, my comments were not speaking against DoD spending, nor money transferred from North to South via the Feds. Nope, I was speaking out against the hypocracy of RRWs who are vehemently against "wealth redistribution" UNLESS they are on the receiving end.

Finally, Old-Twerp -- in case you are still befuddled -- Montana has more National Park Service employees and BLM employees than Delaware. BLM employees in Delaware or New Jersey are, per capita, probably as rare as intelligent lib-retards. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

So? Again, read my comments above. I understand WHY some states get more $$$ than others, I just pointed out that they do. I DO have an issue with jackasses like you who can't comprehend the issue. I DO have an issue with hypocrites like you who object to $$$ that flows north but defends $$$ that flows south. And I DO have an issue with states like Texas that suck at the federal trough but proudly thump their chest that they don't have a state income tax, as if them paying for their own wants/needs is beneath them when they can get free handouts from the Feds. I thought the Texas Spirit (or substitute your favorite "Dixie" welfare state) kept preaching self-reliance.

PS: I should admit that I specifically through "Dixie" into the original post in part because the evidence says it is appropriate, but also because I knew it would generate a dumb senseless response from you. You did not disappoint.

Poor, pitiful IB. I wondered how long before you came into this discussion with both guns blazing, pointed right at your toes. I had guessed the over/under should be set at about post 9.5.



So? Again, read my comments above. I understand WHY some states get more $$$ than others, I just pointed out that they do. I DO have an issue with jackasses like you who can't comprehend the issue. I DO have an issue with hypocrites like you who object to $$$ that flows north but defends $$$ that flows south. And I DO have an issue with states like Texas that suck at the federal trough but proudly thump their chest that they don't have a state income tax, as if them paying for their own wants/needs is beneath them when they can get free handouts from the Feds. I thought the Texas Spirit (or substitute your favorite "Dixie" welfare state) kept preaching self-reliance.

PS: I should admit that I specifically through "Dixie" into the original post in part because the evidence says it is appropriate, but also because I knew it would generate a dumb senseless response from you. You did not disappoint. Originally Posted by Old-T

Old - T:
Perhaps all the states that currently get more from the Feds than they give could form their own country?
You would benefit from lower expenses!
Plus. I'm pretty sure the average liberal considers conservative states to be run by ignorant Rednecks - it is a win-win proposition!!
Now, if you will pardon me, I have to fire up the Winnebago - there is a race somewhere!! (or at least, a gun show)

New Mexico, Maine, Montana, South Dakota and Arizona
Ah yes. Here is the hero of TP self-focused conservatism showing his true colors: willing to toss the hard core RWWs of Montana, etc., to the wolves because his REAL allegiance is not to the TP or conservative values--no, his REAL alliance is to the Confederacy. Dixie. The Plantation Way. We understand IBMassa, but lets look at that. Notice how your opening remark was contradicted by your own source, Old-Twerp.
Mississippi: 50th, i.e. the MOST fed dependent state in the country (actually tied with NM)

Alabama: 49th
Louisiana: 48th
Tennessee: 45th
Kentucky: 41st
South Carolina: 40th
Florida: 38th
Georgia: 33rd
Texas: 32nd
Virginia: 26th
North Carolina: 24th
Arkansas: 22nd
Is that representative enough of Dixie for you? And please, don't insult us with "Kentucky doesn't count!", you know they are as plantation loving as anywhere. Which in no manner excuses the ignorance in your opening remark and how it was contradicted by your own source, Old-Twerp.

Oh, and other than Florida, they were all republican wins in the 2012 election. Do you see a trend here? The only trend to be seen here is directly related to your gross stupidity, Old-Twerp.

Just for comparison, let's look at a couple places you love to hate:
Illinois: 2nd
New York: 17th.

Hmmmm......

While we are at it, let's look at the others:
New Mexico: voted Democrat
Maine: voted Democrat
Montana: voted Republican
South Dakota: voted Republican
Arizona: voted Republican
and let's not ignore West Virginia, another red state.

Even an English major can see a very strong correlation here, no? Even an English major can see that your opening remark was contradicted by your own source, Old-Twerp.

Some serious stupidity on your part here. Really stupid--even by your low standards. Let us count the ways you are stupid: It's your stupidity that is on display, Old-Twerp.

1. I never said DoD spending (by the way, the "o" is not capitalized, though in DOE and DOS it is) is evil, nor did I attack any other spending. I never even said the states that get more than they give are evil--I attacked the hypocrites like you, not the states. You're the stupid hypocrite who is pretending that money spent for the likes of "common defence" is not for the "commonweal", Old-Twerp.

BTW, Old-Twerp, DOD uses "DOD" on its website, you sanctimonious jackass!

2. Almost ANY state likes DoD jobs and $$$. The bulk or DoD presence is in the southern US because of a number of other legitimate reasons: open spaces (most people don't want rockets going BOOM in populated areas), open spaces (land for flight test, armor maneuvers, EM interference etc.), weather (clear skies for flight training, etc.), and others. You're the stupid hypocrite who is pretending that money spent for likes of "common defence" is not for the "commonweal", Old-Twerp. Money spent for likes of "common defence" is NOT -- as you so ignorantly imply -- for the sole support and benefit of the citizens in the Red States alone, Old-Twerp.

3. And let us not forget POLITICS. Ever sit on a BRAC committee? I've been on two. With VERY few exceptions EVERY senator and congressman wants DoD facilities and people in their district. Why are more in the south--because the southern congressmen had seniority on the right committees and fought tooth and nail to keep the money flowing in (as much of this data reflects). Lib-retards forced many bases to close, Old-Twerp. Ft Ord is now a recreational park for lib-retard hiking, golf and recreation, Old-Twerp. As usual you are a clueless, lying, blabbering fool. That would be describing you, Old-Twerp, and why you ignorantly started this thread.
Which part of Redstone? The Army? NASA? DIA? GAO? Actually I have worked with and been to all four of those organizations at Redstone--if you mean a different part of Redstone, then no. Hence you are caught in the web of your own deceit, Old-Twerp, because now you've again admitted you are a lying hypocrite, because you DO KNOW why Alabama receives so much Federal funding money per capita, Old-Twerp.

Can't answer that part. ROTC is not my area of expertise. But what does that have to do with the question? Whatever $$$ they are/are not getting is included in the totals. You are deflecting--nothing more. You're the one who is deflecting, Old-Twerp. You're the one pretending that Red States are getting more than their fair share while ignoring how Blue State lib-retarded policies and politics often drives big Federal dollars elsewhere, Old-Twerp. Further, Old-Twerp, you're hypocritically pretending that Blue States in no manner benefit from the Federal dollars spent in the Red States. BTW, Old-Twerp, it's obvious you have no area of expertise and that you continue to wallow in your own ignorance.

I never said any such thing, did I? As I have pointed out repeatedly, my comments were not speaking against DoD spending, nor money transferred from North to South via the Feds. Nope, I was speaking out against the hypocracy of RRWs who are vehemently against "wealth redistribution" UNLESS they are on the receiving end. . But in this instance, Old-Twerp, you're the one who is being a hypocrite, because you know that money spent for likes of "common defence" is for the "commonweal" and NOT -- as you so ignorantly imply -- for the support and benefit of the citizens in the Red States alone, Old-Twerp.

So? Again, read my comments above. I understand WHY some states get more $$$ than others, I just pointed out that they do. I DO have an issue with jackasses like you who can't comprehend the issue. You're a liar, Old-Twerp. Your OP and your title are brazen insults and NOT the "mere recitation of facts" you so ignorantly now claim them to be, Old-Twerp, and you state as much in your final comments below, jackass!

I DO have an issue with hypocrites like you who object to $$$ that flows north but defends $$$ that flows south. . Again, Old-Twerp, you're the one who is being a hypocrite, because you know that money spent for likes of "common defence" is for the "commonweal" and NOT -- as you so ignorantly imply -- for the support and benefit of the citizens in the Red States alone, Old-Twerp.
And I DO have an issue with states like Texas that suck at the federal trough but proudly thump their chest that they don't have a state income tax, as if them paying for their own wants/needs is beneath them when they can get free handouts from the Feds. I thought the Texas Spirit (or substitute your favorite "Dixie" welfare state) kept preaching self-reliance.

PS: I should admit that I specifically through "Dixie" into the original post in part because the evidence says it is appropriate, but also because I knew it would generate a dumb senseless response from you. You did not disappoint.
One needn't be an English major to perceive the animus in your ignorant thread or to know that you, Old-Twerp, ignorantly and senselessly started this thread for precisely your own ignorantly malignant purposes. Similarly, one needn't be English major to know that you ignorantly misspelled "threw", Old-Twerp,

Originally Posted by Old-T

through

Another idiotic response, rife with meta-issues; none of which are germane to the discussion or the OP.

You are the Emir of Insignificance, IBIdiot!

Never has one fucking guy jerked off all on everybody else with so little help.

You never answered any of my questions about your illegal and affronting comments about illicit drug use.

Further, you never answered any of my questions regarding the original poll for Dipshit of the Year.

Further more, you never answered any of my questions regarding your ridiculous name-calling on this forum, when you could be presenting intelligent (maybe not) cogent (defnitely not) and relevant (NEVER) comments about the subjects presented in each of these threads.

WHY DO YOU INSIST THAT YOUR BULLSHIT IS WORTH OUR TIME?

Maybe we need to ignore your posts. ALL OF US! I'll bet about 50% of the DIPSHIT RIGHT WINGERS here would ignore your posts if it made this forum more readable...

What do you think, Massa Overseer?

Another idiotic response, rife with meta-issues; none of which are germane to the discussion or the OP.

You are the Emir of Insignificance, IBIdiot!

Never has one fucking guy jerked off all on everybody else with so little help.

You never answered any of my questions about your illegal and affronting comments about illicit drug use.

Further, you never answered any of my questions regarding the original poll for Dipshit of the Year.

Further more, you never answered any of my questions regarding your ridiculous name-calling on this forum, when you could be presenting intelligent (maybe not) cogent (defnitely not) and relevant (NEVER) comments about the subjects presented in each of these threads.

WHY DO YOU INSIST THAT YOUR BULLSHIT IS WORTH OUR TIME?

Maybe we need to ignore your posts. ALL OF US! I'll bet about 50% of the DIPSHIT RIGHT WINGERS here would ignore your posts if it made this forum more readable...

What do you think, Massa Overseer? Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

The perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black.

Similarly, one needn't be English major to know that you ignorantly misspelled "threw", Old-Twerp, Originally Posted by I B Hankering

This .....again?!?

The perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black. Originally Posted by Budman

You might be the dumbest motherfucker on the board. You show up, fling feces, and then run away for 90 days or more.

You're like a loan-sharked loan.

Either play or don't play, Budman.

We can only surmise that your wife (or mother) is on the rag every 90 days. Because that's about as often as you try and join this scrum.

Nay, no, Bosco.

Get the fuck outta here unless you're willing to make an adult contribution.

Asswipe!

This .....again?!?

Originally Posted by JCM800

Sadly, yes. "This again". Read his meltdown rant and that is truly the best he can do.

I'll respond to him later when I am bored, and after I have finished laughing at him.

You might be the dumbest motherfucker on the board. You show up, fling feces, and then run away for 90 days or more.

You're like a loan-sharked loan.

Either play or don't play, Budman.

We can only surmise that your wife (or mother) is on the rag every 90 days. Because that's about as often as you try and join this scrum.

Nay, no, Bosco.

Get the fuck outta here unless you're willing to make an adult contribution.

Asswipe!


Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

I do check in every once in a while and it doesn't change much. The same old fools calling each other names like a bunch of 12 year olds. A few can actually discuss something without being a complete ass. You are not included in that group. You criticize others for making useless post and calling names. Have you looked at your posting history? You criticize others for not answering your questions yet you refuse to answer questions when asked. You throw out accusations and when asked for some backup you change the subject and start the name calling. It is like talking to a 2 year old.

OK, dickhead. which questions didn't I answer?

Scramble hard, dung beetle. Unlike you, I'm not going anywhere.

you're all hot air.

Where is your backup for Dan Patrick treating his employees like shit?

Simply quoting another poster who was familiar with Patrick's behavior as the reasturant owner.

Additionally, that doesn't even mention the fact that Patrick employed illegals at those restaurants.

http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=...4&postcount=17

Nothing cowardly at all. Nothing you say or do is frightening...FAIL

what other LIES are you accusing me of? I think you're just jerking off.

Simply quoting another poster who was familiar with Patrick's behavior as the reasturant owner.

Additionally, that doesn't even mention the fact that Patrick employed illegals at those restaurants.

http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=...4&postcount=17

Nothing cowardly at all. Nothing you say or do is frightening...FAIL

what other LIES are you accusing me of? I think you're just jerking off. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

This is the problem with people like you. Someone else makes a statement with zero backup and you continue to spread the rumor and then take absolutely no responsibility for it. I had asked for some backup. You were the one that accused me of giving him a pass as if you knew it to be true. If you didn't know it to be true you should have kept your fucking mouth shut. This is the typical liberal agenda. Repeat a lie enough times and it becomes fact.

Friday afternoon, work is done, a few hours before I spend the evening with a delightful young lady. Time to let my hair down (what little I have) and have some fun. Time to reply to IB's inane almost incomprehensible melt down.



The joys of replying to IBMeltdown are numerous:
(1) It is good for a Friday afternoon because it isn’t much of a mental challenge
(2) He repeats himself endlessly so if you are distracted by a pretty lady walking past and missed his simplistic point the first time you can get it the second. Or third. Or fourteenth.
(3) He almost always provides comic relief.

So let’s see what he spewed forth this time.

=====================

“Notice how your opening remark was contradicted by your own source, Old-Twerp.”

No, it wasn’t. My opening remark (once past the catchy attention grabbing title) was that more federal support flows into the South, and into Red states, and the article very definitely supports that. Can you not read? Or do you think that being 50th on this ranking is GOOD? You are either illiterate, brain dead, a liar, or some combination of all three. The fact that you retype your wrong statement multiple times does not make it correct.

Just for your memory jogger, here are the rankings:

Mississippi: 50th, i.e. the MOST fed dependent state in the country (actually tied with NM)

Alabama: 49th
Louisiana: 48th
Tennessee: 45th
Kentucky: 41st
South Carolina: 40th
Florida: 38th
Georgia: 33rd
Texas: 32nd
Virginia: 26th
North Carolina: 24th
Arkansas: 22nd


Just for comparison, let's look at a couple places you love to hate:
Illinois: 2nd
New York: 17th.

I noticed you didn’t contradict the facts here, did you? Nope.

Instead you say asinine things like:

“It's your stupidity that is on display, Old-Twerp”

When what you really mean is, “Old-T, how dare you point out facts that are uncomfortable for me and my Confederate sympathizer compatriots!”

And let us delve deeper into the depravity that is IB’s “mind”:

“You're the stupid hypocrite who is pretending that money spent for the likes of "common defence" is not for the "commonweal", Old-Twerp.”

Pray tell, where did I say that? Why, no, you lie again IBLiar. What I DID say was:

“I never even said the states that get more than they give are evil--I attacked the hypocrites like you, not the states.”

Almost exactly the opposite of what you claim I said. But what is truth or lies to the great IBBlowhard? You have a long, long history on here of demonstrating that in your demented, sick world “truth” is whatever you think it should be. Facts don’t matter to you, uncomfortable questions are ignored by you, and you refuse to own the statements you made when someone catches you in a blatant lie (like this most recent post of yours).

But let’s not stop here.

====================

I commented on perfectly sound reasons why many DoD dollars are spent in the south and west. Pure, simple facts and obvious logic. I not once said this was bad, evil, or inappropriate. Only that is was so. You then melt down (again), completely ignore everything I said, and rant on about how I don’t understand defense, and I am denigrating the states that have DoD bases.

“2. Almost ANY state likes DoD jobs and $$$. The bulk or DoD presence is in the southern US because of a number of other legitimate reasons: open spaces (most people don't want rockets going BOOM in populated areas), open spaces (land for flight test, armor maneuvers, EM interference etc.), weather (clear skies for flight training, etc.), and others. You're the stupid hypocrite who is pretending that money spent for likes of "common defence" is not for the "commonweal", Old-Twerp. Money spent for likes of "common defence" is NOT -- as you so ignorantly imply -- for the sole support and benefit of the citizens in the Red States alone, Old-Twerp.”

Poor, pathetic IBMeltdown—I dare you to show where I implied DoD spending only helped defend the locality it was in. I implied it economically helped the locality, but that is a very, very different statement. If you don’t believe me, look at the depositions from San Antonio and Texas when BRAC recommended closing the AF depot in San Antonio. Look at the claimed economic impact to San Antonio—nowhere did it ascribe that the troops in San Antonio were to keep the ghost of Santa Anna away from the Alamo.

===================

But there is more!!!!

“Lib-retards forced many bases to close, Old-Twerp. Ft Ord is now a recreational park for lib-retard hiking, golf and recreation, Old-Twerp.”

Fort Ord was closed primarily because it was too small for its mission, coupled with the fact that the cost/benefit of Ord as a fort did not warrant keeping it open in comparison to other installations. You would have a far better argument about the depot at McClellan in Sacramento—and in that case it was a united coalition of Southern congressmen—Libs and Cons—who argued to close McClellan instead of several other depots in Southern states. The smart move economically and from a capability point of view would have been to keep McClellan open and give it to the Army to essentially replace the Army depot on the south side of Sacramento. It was the Southern bi-partisan caucus that pressured for the closure of McClellan. You are a clueless blow-hard buffoon about the deliberations behind the base closure decisions. You are WAY in over your head on that one.

===========


“Which part of Redstone? The Army? NASA? DIA? GAO? Actually I have worked with and been to all four of those organizations at Redstone--if you mean a different part of Redstone, then no. Hence you are caught in the web of your own deceit, Old-Twerp, because now you've again admitted you are a lying hypocrite, because you DO KNOW why Alabama receives so much Federal funding money per capita, Old-Twerp.

See comments above. Only YOU are trying to make this into an argument about the worthiness of the wealth transfer from north to south. I only brought up that it is a reality, and maybe morons like you should stop and look at the bigger picture before claiming you are violently against wealth transfer. But your small simple mind still doesn’t get it. No wonder people mock and pity you.

===================

BTW, Old-Twerp, it's obvious you have no area of expertise and that you continue to wallow in your own ignorance.

I like to think that my area of expertise is showing the world what a buffoon and liar you are, but since an average ten year old could do that, I can’t take too much credit for that skill. I don’t claim to be an expert on everything, it only seems that way because unlike you I try to keep my comments to topic I actually know. I guarantee you I know far more about DoD base closures than you do.

===============

I have skipped over a number (actually a LARGE number) of your repetitiously repetitious regurgitation of these same lies over and over, but I do feel obliged to point out just a few more stupid IB-isms.

“So? Again, read my comments above. I understand WHY some states get more $$$ than others, I just pointed out that they do. I DO have an issue with jackasses like you who can't comprehend the issue. You're a liar, Old-Twerp. Your OP and your title are brazen insults and NOT the "mere recitation of facts" you so ignorantly now claim them to be, Old-Twerp, and you state as much in your final comments below, jackass! “

So, asshole, what was not a statement of fact? My post listed and referenced numbers. Which numbers were untrue? I did not get subjective until you opened your mouth and attacked me just because you are bothered by the facts. I didn’t get subjective until Good Ol’ IBDixie felt obliged to defend something (military expenditures) that wasn’t attacked. And you were far too dumb to even defend who I WAS attacking (Hint: your beloved Teddy C is a poster child).

===============

“PS: I should admit that I specifically through "Dixie" into the original post in part because the evidence says it is appropriate, but also because I knew it would generate a dumb senseless response from you. You did not disappoint.”

One needn't be an English major to perceive the animus in your ignorant thread or to know that you, Old-Twerp, ignorantly and senselessly started this thread for precisely your own ignorantly malignant purposes. Similarly, one needn't be English major to know that you ignorantly misspelled "threw", Old-Twerp,


Ah yes! Just to show that I am objective and unbiased, I fully admit you are a better speller than I am.

================

To conclude, I feel obliged to mention that through all your melt down you still managed to squeeze in your favorite new word, “sanctimonious”. You really do like that word, though it is difficult to understand why. According to the Oxford Dictionary, it means “Making a show of being morally superior to other people”. I am not making a show of being morally superior to you, I AM morally superior to you. So is almost everyone else on here. Live with it.

Old - T:
Perhaps all the states that currently get more from the Feds than they give could form their own country?
You would benefit from lower expenses!
Plus. I'm pretty sure the average liberal considers conservative states to be run by ignorant Rednecks - it is a win-win proposition!!
Now, if you will pardon me, I have to fire up the Winnebago - there is a race somewhere!! (or at least, a gun show) Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

After dealing with IB I need to get into a more rational frame of mind so I saved responding to your post until after his.

I think that if the country split it would be worse for both "halves". I do believe the US is more than the sum of it's parts. Contrary to some of what I post on here, I am not anti-South, and not every southerner is a Bubba. In fact there are Bubbas and Wackos and downright fools in every state.

I don't even have problems with gun ownership or Winnebagos. Or NASCAR races--just don't force me to sit through one! It is better than watching the fishing channel or the golf channel--but that is faint praise indeed. Had to watch an entire NASCAR race once--long story, essentially strapped into bed the day after surgery. I still have nightmares (of the NASCAR, not the surgery )