Comments on: FAC Letter to Judge Jeanine Pirro

By: John Freeman

John Freeman — Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:37:41 +0000

I like the letter. Could you please include the statistics – either in the email or a website link? It may prove useful later on.

By: DavidM

DavidM — Fri, 28 Sep 2018 13:00:10 +0000

In reply to G. FAC thank You again for all you do . I to feel presenting the facts to others even to the officers we have to check in to would be helpful. You have presented many fact and listed many turn case decisions here in your comments over the past months. Would it be possible for you to write up a list of many of these on this sight in as brief a way as possible and in a form so that it could be printed off to use as notes when discussing it with others and to hand to officers when appropriate. It would be best if it could be printable on one page.

By: Capt Charles Munsey Jr. USN (Ret)

Capt Charles Munsey Jr. USN (Ret) — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 21:50:51 +0000

In reply to G.

I believe that Judeo/Christian principles guided those who established this nation. Also, God is not a Republican or Democrat. We need discussion on what is best for our society. I have just this week started a subtopic in my blog series “Politics and the Church- The Politics of God”. I stick to facts and challenge all to make decisions for themselves on what I write. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are this nation’s founding principles. God’s priority is ‘life’. ‘Liberty’ is earned and not granted. ‘Pursuit of happiness’ is not a guarantee of happiness. I believe one way to achieve happiness is in the way we treat others. We see all the time that money does not bring us happiness. On ‘judgment day’ we will be judged not on what we did for ourselves but what we did for others. See my blog at geezerpolitics.com.

By: G

Thu, 27 Sep 2018 17:43:59 +0000

They say never discuss politics in mixed company. And for the most part I agree because it is very personal. Our political beliefs are deeply rooted in how we think we should live as a society. But in my opinion, it is precisely, no matter how uncomfortable, why we need to talk politics. Doing it in a respectful way, with no preordained beliefs that we are right and the other side wrong. But rather in a constructive dialogue of ideas with a sincere willingness on BOTH sides to be open to ideas.
The officials in Tallahassee are politicians and they pass the laws the laws that have so negatively impacted us. So, when we think of politics, I suggest we need to think single issues (ours) and not vote for your “team”, whether Dem or Reps or Independents. I will have the opportunity for a face to face talk with one of the Gubernatorial candidates about our issues and hear what he says. I will look for the opportunity to speak with his opponent as well. For those that cannot do the same I strongly encourage you to visit their websites and see how thy talk about justice reform and decide for yourselves. And please VOTE. If not, you can complain all you want but you are no longer part of the solution.
While on their website sing up for their emails! You will be told when they will be in your area and go talk to them!!! The more they hear your concern the more they realize we have a vote and it motivates them to take us in consideration. They do not know if you can vote or not and if one of them challenges you on whether you can vote (highly doubtful by the way) and you want to be truthful and can’t votte, say no, BUT, remind them you have family, you have friends, and maybe you talk to your local pastor who sympathizes and maybe you tell the challenger that you are going to ask the pastor to speak on behalf a politician that follows the religious tradition of forgiveness, of redemption. Remind him in a non-combative tone by telling him this that you can be an influencer. They will know the message. It is “you want my vote, then represent me and my issues”.
Someone commented that it is not Just Fox that misinforms. So true. As a newcomer to the fight I have no historical perspective but from what I hear most media was biased in the past. Key word “past. I personally have seen articles (and many have been published here) from reputable new sources informing about the facts and even championing for our cause. I ask the readers this: If you see a journalist (from any source you currently use. I am not singling out Fox), that does not respond to your inquiry, what type of journalist are they? Are they catering to their readers, regardless of what the truth is? If they misinform about this issue, that we probably know more about then they as we live it, what other issues they discuss, that you do not have the time nor resources to fact check, do you take at face value? My humble opinion is that if they are wrong on this issue and after providing feedback, the do NOT self-correct or counter argue with reputable facts, then I question their fact checking capabilities and their point of view in other topics they write about. I would consider other new sources that have become enlightened. In my humble opinion, just as in persons, there are media outlets that are more opinionated than others. I will share a news report I recently read on this.
I sincerely hope this journalist becomes enlightened and does what journalists are meant to do. Report the facts. They would be a great ally as they reach more minds than we can. If they do not, then to me they are not valid journalists. They are either writing Op Ed pieces disguised as journalism and based on false facts, or they are cynically catering to their listeners constituents who rather feel good about a stance that matches their “gut” feeling than to hear a truth that does not match their belief.
We more than most are a tuned to “fake news”. I urge you to face to face with the Gubernatorial candidate you are leaning to vote on and share it with us.
I believe in our slogan “With Unity comes change!”
Let’s unite to make our voices heard!

By: Capt Charles Munsey Jr. USN (Ret)

Capt Charles Munsey Jr. USN (Ret) — Wed, 26 Sep 2018 20:54:01 +0000

In reply to j. If I can find an address to send a letter to Tucker, I certainly will.

By: j

Wed, 26 Sep 2018 12:49:03 +0000

In reply to j. again last night Tucker Carlson made the claim about " the dangerous and high re-offence rate of SO's" when talking about Kavanaugh's SCOTUS hearings

By: David Kennerly

David Kennerly — Wed, 26 Sep 2018 08:44:21 +0000

Well, I’m not a fan of hers and never have been. I’ve always seen her as a Trump shill on a television channel filled with Trump shills so I’m not at all surprised by her flagrantly disinformational statement nor disappointed by it. I need to add here, as I always do, that I am no fan of the channels who are widely seen as FoxNew’s competitors, either nor am I a Demoncrat just as I’m not a Republican. Neither of those parties are an alternative to the other. Both are deeply illiberal and contemptuous of the individual. If we occupy a community, of a sort, bound by our subjection to the “sex offender” registry, or marginalized by it by our association with someone who is on it, then I urge you to look beyond the failed ideologies of those two political parties.

By: Duke

Duke — Tue, 25 Sep 2018 18:00:00 +0000

In reply to Bill. Thanks for that correction. I have always thought Clinton was the one who signed the public registration requirements into law. Indeed, individual panderers are the culprits in all unconstitutional laws handed down. Amazing what a political hack can do with some fear and misinformation.

By: Bill

Bill — Tue, 25 Sep 2018 14:18:56 +0000

In reply to Duke. I agree in part with what you've said about unfair discrimination and disenfranchisement but I also want to point out that former President Bill (prehaps a predator) Clinton was a liberal Democrat who signed neither the PATRIOT ACT nor SORNA into law. Those acts were signed into law by former President George W. Bush. Clinton did however sign into law the federal habeas corpus statute codified at Title 28 United States Code Section 2255, which greatly restricts a federal prisoner's right to challenge their conviction and sentence on constitutional grounds. Some states followed suit in restricting prisoner rights to collaterally attacking their convictions and sentences based on the federal provisions under 2255. So, it is apparent that neither Republicans nor Democrats are to blame as a group but the politicians as individuals.

By: DavidM

DavidM — Tue, 25 Sep 2018 13:31:24 +0000

In reply to Florida Action Committee. Anyone on the registry or even a class action suit. Especially someone who has been physically injured. Or threatened.